Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Steven Johnston's Extra Life: A Short History of Living Longer observes that in addition to breakthroughs, and incremental progress, there is a class of innovation that lagged, that could have happened sooner but didn't. In this week's Twitter Space, we talk about technologies that could have happened sooner, but failed to.
Show Notes
Oxide and Friends Twitter Space: February 14th, 2022
Breakthroughs Delayed
We’ve been holding a Twitter Space weekly on Mondays at 5p for about an hour. Even though it’s not (yet?) a feature of Twitter Spaces, we have been recording them all; here is the recording for our Twitter Space for February 14th, 2022
In addition to Bryan Cantrill and Adam Leventhal, speakers on February 14th included Chris DiBona, Tom Lyon, Ian, MattSci, Jeff Nickoloff, Ahmed, Tim Burnham and vint serp. (Did we miss your name and/or get it wrong? Drop a PR!)
Some of the topics we hit on, in the order that we hit them:
- Adam’s tweet
- Steven Johnson (2021) Extra Life: A Short History of Living Longer book
- [@6:00](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=360) Pasteurization
- 1850’s swill milk scandal wiki
- [@10:25](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=625) Automotive safety
- [@16:25](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=985) Bryan proposes a rubric, are multiple teams racing?
- [@24:32](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=1472) DTrace
- Compact C Type Format CTF
- [@27:25](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=1645) Docker
- [@37:22](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=2242) The Greate Stirrup Controversy wiki
- Steve Kemper (2005) Reinventing the Wheel: A Story of Genius, Innovation, and Grand Ambition book
- Jevons paradox wiki
- [@47:51](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=2871) Wikipedia
- [@1:01:03](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=3663) JSON
- [@1:02:22](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=3742) Chris on HBO Silicon Valley
- [@1:07:05](https://youtu.be/MyGgkBxz-mg?t=4025) Antikythera mechanism wiki
If we got something wrong or missed something, please file a PR! Our next Twitter space will likely be on Monday at 5p Pacific Time; stay tuned to our Twitter feeds for details. We’d love to have you join us, as we always love to hear from new speakers!
Creators & Guests
What is Oxide and Friends?
Oxide hosts a weekly Discord show where we discuss a wide range of topics: computer history, startups, Oxide hardware bringup, and other topics du jour. These are the recordings in podcast form.
Join us live (usually Mondays at 5pm PT) https://discord.gg/gcQxNHAKCB
Subscribe to our calendar: https://sesh.fyi/api/calendar/v2/iMdFbuFRupMwuTiwvXswNU.ics
This is this is very sophisticated banter here. I think what I will do is I think I can now do this maybe even from the desktop. I can actually, like, tweet out that we're live, which is great.
Speaker 2:You can do what from the desktop?
Speaker 1:I will I because now we've got a scheduled space. I've got, like, a static link for it. So I can do the the the tweet saying, hey, we're live. Join us. I can tweet that out from the desktop app.
Speaker 1:I don't have to.
Speaker 2:What a world.
Speaker 1:I'm I really I can feel the wind in my hair right now. Yeah. Okay. So the this are we recording, first of all?
Speaker 3:Is it
Speaker 1:recording good?
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. Recording is
Speaker 1:very simple. Yeah. Okay. So, I first of all, I wanna know, like, this this is based on a tweet that that you had had, over the weekend that, you are reading a book that, well, you do actually go ahead and read your tweet.
Speaker 2:Oh, okay. Hold on. Right. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Hold on. I can I can get there? I swear. I swear.
Speaker 2:I did my homework here. I said I'm reading a book that observes that in addition to technological advances that were incremental and those that were breakthroughs, ahead of their time, there are those that could have happened far earlier but didn't. And I I was I'll just finish it off. And I said, what are good examples of that last card category in computing? And so I I said I was reading a book and I I feel like I have to bear my my soul on this one because I was I was actually listening on Audible.
Speaker 2:And I and I kind of hate it when people are like, oh, I listened to 200 books last year. I mean, I I read 200 books last year. I'm like, when you read 200 books
Speaker 1:Oh, like, well, I actually listened to all of them.
Speaker 2:Yeah. It's like, well
Speaker 1:I mean
Speaker 2:I mean and and I and I I I mean, I like listening to books on Audible, but I do feel like I get I'm less I don't know. I'm I'm obviously less focused. Like, I'm washing the dishes or I'm commuting or I'm, you know, doing a million other things. So in full disclosure, I was I was washing the dishes listening, but I but I actually, like, put down the dish I was washing washing, sat down, and, like, replayed it because it it was it was such a insight. I I don't know.
Speaker 2:Like, I had I had not thought about it through that lens before where, you know, we talk about progress and we talk about incremental progress. We talk about breakthroughs and breakthroughs that weren't. And we talked about our hype cycle, whatever it was, 2, 3, weeks ago. And this thought and also those things that were under hyped, but there's other category of innovation where it was kind of just sitting there, and, and waiting for someone to, to walk up to it. And there was no kind of infrastructure that needed to be created to get there.
Speaker 2:And it, and it struck me as a really interesting, thought experiment. So I was delighted to see folks, throwing out some interesting answers.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And so did did you know, what's the larger context in which first of all, what's the book?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. So this is Extra Life by Steven Johnson. So this is looking at, the changes in life expectancy of humans over the last several centuries. And I found it to be really interesting.
Speaker 2:You know, lots of stuff, both about how life expectancy is measured and, and this doubling of life expectancy that we've experienced in the last century. And also how that's unlikely to happen again. Because a lot of the advances in life expectancy happen through reductions in infant mortality. Where you see this, like there's the biggest bang for the buck there, right? Like, you know, a person who dies in childhood.
Speaker 2:Obviously that's just incredibly tragic and it denies them their longevity and denies them the ability to have their own children. Yeah.
Speaker 1:I understand.
Speaker 2:So, so has, has, you know, wide ranging consequences. And so the book, you know, categorizes advances into those that saved, you know, tens of millions of lives and 100 of millions of lives and billions and tens of billions of lives.
Speaker 1:And presumably they talk about the Centurion number. Which seems to be in some regards a more interesting number. The number of people that live to be a 100, which it I think it has that has increased but very, very slowly. Is that right? I'm not
Speaker 2:You know, he the the, he has not mentioned that at all. In fact, there's been a much more talk about, like deaths in childhood because because they impact things more. Right. The difference between a non Aryan and a centurion like doesn't really move the needle in terms of life expectancy as certainly as much as the difference between you know a 20 year old and a 7 year old.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Interesting. And I mean I've got a lot of follow-up questions. What I mean, you're enjoying the book. You recommend the
Speaker 2:book? I'm yeah. I'm I'm loving reading it. I'm listening
Speaker 3:to it.
Speaker 2:Yes. I'm loving it. I it's been terrific.
Speaker 1:I've read. Okay. And I kind of, like, am delighting in your what is obviously shame over listening to this rather than reading it because you you basically have volunteered this every turn. Even you and our decision. Like, okay.
Speaker 1:I wanna clarify that I'm listening to it. I'm like, you it's a like, no judgment. I you know, it's okay.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I I I don't know. I feel like there's I I I I feel I, like, different depth and accomplishment when I finish books. Maybe this is just because I'm kind of a slow reader, so I feel like it's it's a short
Speaker 1:But but I like, listening. But I'm like, dying, you know, is it is it like James Hall Jones that's reading it? I mean,
Speaker 2:it's like in terms of, like, who's No. It's the author. It's the author. It's Steven Johnson himself. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Does that make it better or worse? Is it the
Speaker 2:you know what? It's it's it's interesting. It it, better in some places is worse than others. Where and I imagine the temptation as the author, you know, as he stumbles through, like, an you know, there it's it's basically well written. But there's some kind of awkward moments.
Speaker 2:I do wonder if he's reading it aloud. He's like, geez, can I
Speaker 1:edit this? Oh gosh. Where's my editor? It's on the fly.
Speaker 2:Exactly. Where could you can I read it a little differently than it was in the text?
Speaker 1:Is it a bridged or is it under bridged?
Speaker 2:I assume it is under bridged.
Speaker 1:Really? Wow.
Speaker 2:I mean, I'm I'm like 6 hours in or whatever and and so I assume so. But I but I don't know.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Interesting. Okay. So this is good. So the book you recommend and then is he what's the context in which they're talking he's talking about the technological advances that were Yeah.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. I mean, is he is he is he and maybe this is gonna get to my own sensitivity. Is he, like, asking judgment on those innovations being like, hey, where the where the hell were you? You could have been here 20 years ago.
Speaker 2:Like a little bit. I mean, I guess I guess because, you know, the the the absence of these innovation is literally measured in people's lives. And so, so in particular, he he's talking about, this section was about pasteurization.
Speaker 1:Oh, interesting.
Speaker 2:And, and how how long it took to to become to, like, proliferate and be well known and be and certainly to be well applied in an industrial fashion. Mhmm. And one of the things that I certainly did not know, one fascinating area of the book was that, you know, in addition to childhood mortality, much of it was caused by tainted milk. You know, this this sign of of virtue and purity that we hold, was like a killer, like a real killer with, like, bacteria that would affect the young as bacteria do, much, much more. And also, like, if you want to go down a terrible rabbit hole, I really don't want to talk about it now, but Google Swill Milk And that's like a horrible chunk of a story that, definitely don't Google that before, after or during a meal.
Speaker 1:Okay, that is really saying something
Speaker 2:for you. Okay. I'm just gonna I'm gonna give you the short version which is that, New York City, you know, early days, there were lots of, pastures around and you could have fresh milk. And then as it became economically totally unviable to have pastures, they had smaller and smaller and horrible enclosures for cows. And then it became too expensive to get grass imported.
Speaker 2:And of course, you couldn't import milk because there was no refrigeration. So, it would spoil on its way from New Jersey or upstate New York. So, they started feeding these cows the byproduct of distilleries called mash versus will. Oh. And and it's like unsanitary conditions, terrible situations.
Speaker 1:What year are we talking about?
Speaker 2:Mistreated cows. This is like,
Speaker 1:this is like early 20th century fast food dishes.
Speaker 2:I I I think that's right. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1:That's right.
Speaker 2:I, I have less details because I was listening to it, but I think that's right. And, yeah, just, you know, terrible conditions and, and the the, like, pasteurization was a part of it. Actually, the swill milk was just kind of problematic on its face, and there's no amount of treating it that would that would solve the problem.
Speaker 1:You really handed to the food industry for having these really unappetizing terms. It reminds me of 5050. The the the when you're so Adam was reading, Fast Food Nation at a time that he and I were commuting together on on Southside. And, yeah, I mean, you may be the only person in human history purchase the case. Showing the only person that I know for whom fast food nation made you hungry.
Speaker 1:You can't deny it.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I think there was a section about, like, In N Out in particular. I'm like, oh, let's go.
Speaker 1:I need I need I need a burger right now. And I'm like, I know people who are, like, vegans for life after that book, and you are just like, I could go for gotta go go for a burger. Stop mentioning burgers, you book. So the fact that the swill milk left you nauseous, but 5050 is, like, the stuff that, like, basically gets slopped off off the floor of a slaughterhouse, and that that gets turned into your your burger or whatever?
Speaker 2:Yeah. The delicious burgers. Right? Yes.
Speaker 1:Okay. So so pasteurization is something that should have happened or could have happened
Speaker 2:early. Yeah. He appliance could have happened much earlier. And also he has a very, kind of moderate view of innovation. You know, it talks a lot about kind of the network effects of innovation.
Speaker 2:Not so much that it's like the lone heroic inventor who, you know, discovered say penicillin and made it happen, but, but rather that it was discovery. It was the, you know, the, you know, the war effort really brought that to bear. And, and then, you know, teams of scientists and industrial partners. And so, does a great job. I think of, of describing the, the fullness that goes into to some of these even revolutionary inventions.
Speaker 2:But kind of hangs out. Pasteurization is a place where we humanity, let lots of, life expectancy go untapped forever.
Speaker 1:Well, and you do have these things that kind of and you hate to say this because you know it's clearly not obvious at the time. But there do seem to be things like, wait. Was this really not obvious earlier? One example that I would actually have of that is, in automotive safety. I was watching a great show in the history of automotive safety.
Speaker 1:And they were talking about, in the 1920s, there was finally the breakthrough that saved thousands of lives. And I'm thinking, like, oh, they figured out to, like, rope people onto the seat? And it's like, nope. Seat belts do you know when seat belts are invented?
Speaker 2:I I you know, this actually comes up later in the book. Oh, totally. I know that they weren't, I don't think they were really, like the 3 point seat belt, I think, was invented by Saab in, like, the 60 It's
Speaker 1:like it's I think it's the fifties. I think it might Okay. It
Speaker 2:I mean, it's alarmingly late.
Speaker 1:It's alarming late. I think it's Volvo. I mean, is this is this, like are we being, like, kind of racist to conflate Swedish companies? I don't know. It's like sorry.
Speaker 1:I mean, there's some but the I believe it's Volvo, but the Okay. It's hey, look. It's the Swedes. But they, it is remarkably late. It is remark we we've been there have been horrific deaths.
Speaker 1:And so do you know what the invention was in the twenties that saved thousands of lives? No. Safety glass.
Speaker 2:Oh. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I remember you talking about this years ago about people going through the glass.
Speaker 2:Like, their heads going through the glass.
Speaker 1:Yes. And without safety glass, your head pokes a hole in the glass. And then when your body recoils, you basically slice your neck. It's really it's it's and wash that down with some swell milk, and there you go.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Welcome to the
Speaker 1:swells like a Yeah. Exactly. But that's I mean, it definitely feels like seat belts don't feel subtle. I I it just feels like in the absence of seat belts and, like, everyone is when we try to, like but I guess, you know so that feels like one to me that could have been done earlier than the fifties or sixties from Saab or Volvo or some other or whoever it is.
Speaker 2:Right. Certainly not America. We know that much.
Speaker 4:Yeah. It was definitely Volvo who did the 3 point seat belt. And they also made the pay patent open at the time because they were like, this is too good, and we save too many lines. We can't, in good conscience, keep it to just 4 words. We need the whole industry to adopt the 3 points.
Speaker 1:That's interesting. And it you know, I'd be interested surely, there's a a book or something written on this, on the history of seat belts. That I one, that's really fascinating. But, like, can someone explain to me why this was a hard problem and why this was this was subtle or more subtle than it looked.
Speaker 4:Well, they they had they had the lap belts. They had lap belts since, like, the thirties. I mean, my parents had a 38, as a as a, kind of project car. And that had lap belts. But it was the 3 point belt, which is the real innovation from from Volvo in the fifties where they realized, oh, just keeping people in in by the waist is not sufficient.
Speaker 4:You really need to stop the the momentum of the front of the body slamming the person forward into the dash or whatever. So, yeah, I mean, they probably could have worked that out 20 years earlier, but I don't think they really got into crash testing until a lot later.
Speaker 2:Well, you know, there's a there's an interesting point here, Brian, which is that, part of the reason they didn't was that they didn't see, surviving collisions as a problem that could be solved.
Speaker 1:So customers aren't asking for it.
Speaker 2:No, no, no, no. To, to a degree that the, that, you know, the feeling was that these, the forces are too strong, the human body is too fragile, and like, of course, like if you collide at 60 miles an hour, like, everybody's gonna die.
Speaker 1:That's God. Talk about the perfect baby out
Speaker 4:of me. Yeah.
Speaker 5:I mean, hey, hang on. Also, the seat belt as we know it today with a 3 point harness does require a lot more technology behind it than just say, like, a lap belt.
Speaker 1:Okay. But technology that was invented between the between, say, the the twenties and the fifties? I mean, I don't know. Exactly. I don't
Speaker 6:I don't know, man.
Speaker 5:I mean, part of that's, like, the pretensioning. I don't know if that is what was holding it back. Right? Because, like, when you get into accident, they fire pyrotechnics on these things to actually, like, make sure they're tight and stop you from flying forward. Right?
Speaker 4:Yeah. But the original ones didn't have that. They just had a pretty simple latch system and a a, spring to be able to build tension into the into the seat belt. So, I mean, if you've ridden in anything pre 1990, you would have experienced that kind of seat belt. I mean, the the big book in this area is unsafe at any speed, I think.
Speaker 4:Yeah.
Speaker 1:The classic. The raptor. The classic. Yeah. Interesting.
Speaker 1:I just so and then, the Adam, what were some of the other things that that were there other examples that Johnson cited or was obviously, that got your mind going?
Speaker 2:Vaccination, you know, for smallpox in particular, but but vaccination writ large being another one that's, that saved 1,000,000,000 or tens of 1,000,000,000 of lives. And, you know, we, we talked about heroic medicine last week or the week before, whenever, I also got that from Extra Life, where in fact access at various points, access to medical care was inversely correlated with life inspect. Meaning, like, the more you had access to your doctors, like, the more the sooner you would
Speaker 1:You know, I am trying to make us not talk about James Garfield in back to back weeks, but you're making it extremely difficult. I I you're you're just trying to what really tempting me. You're really tempting me. You're just trying to walk me right past it. No.
Speaker 1:Exactly. That the literal opposite of help. Yeah. Interesting. So what are what yeah.
Speaker 1:What what were some of the other ones? The the I mean, outside of medicine, I think you were asking the question of, like, I actually, I've got a I've got a proposed rubric for you on how we can determine it if a technology could have been invented earlier. I I wanna wanna wanna run one by so I you and I both recently read a book. Walter Isaacson's Cracking the Code.
Speaker 3:Mhmm.
Speaker 1:They actually now I've gotta ask, did you actually read that or did you listen to it?
Speaker 2:No. I I actually
Speaker 1:read that. Did you actually read that? I I Oh. Got Why
Speaker 2:why am I so Right.
Speaker 1:Exactly. We wonder who gave you the complex. I obviously gave you the complex. I'm so sorry. No.
Speaker 1:Did you read it with your ears or read it with your eyes? I don't know.
Speaker 2:I did some did some eye reading.
Speaker 7:Yeah. I did eye reading.
Speaker 1:Did you do eye reading on that one?
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. That was all I read.
Speaker 1:So you obviously read it in hardcover because it just came out.
Speaker 2:I read it on Kindle.
Speaker 1:Oh, god. You know?
Speaker 2:I know I know that you're like
Speaker 1:I do actually have the actual, like, hardcover. And maybe there's a Kindle maximalist that is behind the publishing of that book because there's there's an odor. I swear there's an odor as I've been.
Speaker 2:And it's like an odor that
Speaker 1:I cannot place. That it it it feels so, yes, I think that book is actually trying to kill me. The, it it's actually interesting. They've they've interwoven color photos through that. And you talked me off the roof a little bit on that book.
Speaker 1:Isaac that Isaacson, you know, can go a bit Gladwell esque for me. And that, like, well, this is interesting but, like, how on a scale of, like, really true to not very true, How about where is this fact in it? And in particular, I have to say, I thought a lot less about Isaacson after having read Steve Jobs' The Next Big Thing.
Speaker 3:I don't
Speaker 1:know if you felt the same
Speaker 2:way. I so I did not read the Steve his Steve Jobs, biography. So, so I, I didn't, I know the color, but I did in, in Codebreakers, he does sort of refer to his buddy, Steve Jobs a few times. And I certainly had a, a diminished, view of Steve Jobs after, after reading Steve Jobs' The Next Big Thing. So, so I had the same sort of like, yeah.
Speaker 2:I mean, sure, your buddy Steve Jobs says that, but is that true? Like, that's
Speaker 1:Yeah. And he definitely injects himself a lot in the narrative. Like, he injects himself personally. It doesn't feel like reportage. It feels like more of like a weird kind of like half memoir.
Speaker 2:It it it does get there, especially towards the second half. He becomes a character in the story much more, so in some places warranted where, like, he's part of the Pfizer drug trial and other places I could have done.
Speaker 1:Less warranted. Clearly, he's also his editor also just clearly just fucking gave up at some point. Just like, you know what? It actually reminds me of maybe a comment that you might have me once or twice in the past. I'm like, well, you're just gonna do what you're gonna do anyway, so why am I even giving
Speaker 3:you this feedback? So just
Speaker 2:That's fair. I think that that sounds wise.
Speaker 1:That's right. So all that aside, the the story it tells is really interesting, the discovery of CRISPR. And getting up to my rubric, CRISPR is discovered basically in parallel by at least 2, if not 3 or even more teams. And because that is discovered in parallel, we can it is safe to conclude that the time for CRISPR had come had arrived.
Speaker 2:That's right. It's it's just sort of like the the next maybe not obvious logical step, but it is the next step that clearly many people are are seeking to take simultaneously.
Speaker 1:That's right. And there are steps that have led up to it, and now this is the next step. Not obvious, but also something that it that needed some surround to arrive. And in that case, it was in previous food research and then, you know, a bunch of things that were kind of happening at the same time. And so I think if you've got this kind of race, you've got this kind of like and we talked in previous episodes about, you know, who is first, and you had this kind of disputed first, which you certainly do in the history of computing and the Antioch, which is very, very disputed.
Speaker 1:To me, I think that you can say, like, okay. From that, like, doesn't matter for the moment who's first. The the time for the stored program computer had arrived, and that the time was right for that versus if you have something like, say, the seat belt or I was gonna throw out PCR as another example. We're just like, wow. This is what the hell is this over here?
Speaker 1:Or the or discovery of the of the smallpox vaccine by Jenner, where you have something that that that happens does happen more at a clear blue sky. It's not a race. The the origins are not disputed because it's basically one person on their own. Well, maybe that is something that it maybe that indicates coulda happened earlier. It was just kinda waiting for 1 person to stumble across it.
Speaker 1:What do you think?
Speaker 2:That's interesting because because I I guess it's sort of like it's an interesting metric because clearly if multiple people are getting there at the same time, it's sort of of the time, right? It's, it's not, not early, not late. It's right there. On the other hand, you know, it's things that are not in that category sort of feel like they necessarily are too early or too late, but like, it's hard to distinguish some of those things. Like, I guess on one hand, you know, maybe the smallpox vaccine could have been discovered at any point, but, but I think that may also not have been true in that, some of the technologies like, like certain, you know, needles or, or understanding of science more broadly about germ theory of science, you know, like, so there, I think it's, I I'm definitely with you on the, like on, on time, but it seems like there's some insights that maybe they could they were just waiting around the ground for someone to collect at any moment.
Speaker 2:But I think there are some that feel like they may have been hanging around on the ground for longer than
Speaker 1:others. And so now we've got to, yeah, sort of back, go ahead.
Speaker 5:Like, especially in the case of the vaccine, I think it's less about that is the time when it was discovered versus that is the time when you could convince people that you weren't a complete lunatic for injecting a kid with cowpox.
Speaker 1:Was he a lunatic though?
Speaker 2:He he was a 100% a lunatic. Like, did it on his servant's son. Yeah. Totally. He was kind of unauthorized.
Speaker 2:So, I mean, I don't know. Like
Speaker 5:Which, like, I mean, I'm not saying he wasn't. I'm just saying that, like, they also accepted the idea that this was a vaccine in addition to all of the numerous other questions this raises.
Speaker 1:Well, and I think you you got an important point in terms of, like, the the the success of an innovation at a given time is not merely its ability to innovate. It did one's ability to develop it. It's also how receptive is the world for it? How ready is the world for it? And, I mean, Adam, I think we gotta get close to home because when I first read your tweet, I thought to myself, DTrace is in that category.
Speaker 1:DTrace could be Yeah.
Speaker 2:I I I I was kinda thinking the same thing in you know, actually, it's interesting, Brian, you say that because I was thinking about it through 2 different lenses. 1, you know, this has been something, you know, DTrace was something you conceived of effectively as an undergraduate or at least some of the core mechanisms in, you know, 1935 or whenever it was you graduated. And, conversely, a bunch of the technology that allowed the DTrace project to really start in earnest was all kind of like foundation that, that you guys were laying in Solaris in like the late nineties for, for kind of a while. Oh Brian's telling me that Twitter died so he didn't get to hear me slandering him.
Speaker 1:Oh, god. Twitter literally died. Twitter just completely croaks out of it just shoots itself in the head. Then when I restart the app, Twitter's like, hey, remember to start your space. Like, hey, Twitter.
Speaker 1:Remember not to blow your brains out when I'm running this space. Sorry.
Speaker 2:So no. No. Not at all. All all I was saying was that, DTracer was something you were first thinking about in college. So I was thinking like, so it took, you know, it was, it was kind of sitting there on the ground at least for a while, but I was also thinking about all of the, the work that you and Mike and others did in the Solaris group and sellers kernel and, and user space writ large for, you know, like for at least 5 years, if not more to build the foundation that we could then build these trace on top of.
Speaker 1:I, the more I thought about my reply, the more I thought it wasn't correct, actually.
Speaker 2:Well, I but there is something about, like, dynamic tracing was there, like, what was available for folks to to consider.
Speaker 1:I I I mean but so, actually, no. To get, like, really, like, dirty and gritty, there is a very important implementation detail that many folks are unaware of of DTrace called CTF. And CTF is a the the compact c type format, so compact that that only has one c. That's a Mike joke. But CTF is what allows DTrace to be able to instrument a production system and have its type information.
Speaker 1:And that's actually really and you and I obviously both know how essential and load bearing that is. And I think, honestly, people that I mean, if you use today, if you use BPF trace or BPF, and you're struggling to get the symbols for your for the the actual thing you're instrumenting, it's because you don't have the symbols on board, and you don't have the symbols on board because there is not a CTF equivalent for the Linux kernel. And it would actually kinda did it out of order, and it is it's painful to use as a result. So I actually think that there were a lot of little implementation details like that that were essential. I don't know.
Speaker 1:What do you think?
Speaker 2:Yeah. No. I I I, like, I could see it either way, but I I think you're right. I think that, like, in fact, maybe dating DTrace to when we actually, you know, first were talking about publicly in 2000 3 doesn't give service to all of the work that, you know, the 8 years of work you did to to make that possible.
Speaker 1:Oh, god. You bring back that memories of I, yeah. I I well, let's just say that I, was asked to do, like, what is your next detrace? And I'm like, what is my next detrace? What what are you talking about?
Speaker 1:And they're like, well, you know, how about and and and when will it be done, the next detrace? And I think, like, you know, I had to kinda walk folks through the full history of, like, no. No. Like, this is, like, first ideation 1996, completely done in 2 1,006. The only active development is really from 2,001 to 2,003.
Speaker 1:Most active development is 2,001, 2003. But that's just a bit of the iceberg that happens to be above the waterline. There's a whole bunch of the iceberg that is below the waterline, and I think CTF is definitely in that that category. There's a lot of other stuff that's in that category of the iceberg that's below the waterline. And I you know, you'd be interested and for seatbelts, I'm sure there's a lot of iceberg below the waterline too.
Speaker 3:Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah. The thing that came to mind for me as I, as I was like sitting there in the kitchen, pausing, doing the dishes was something in the, in the zeitgeist of like Zock Docker and containers, just because, you know, V VMs and containers had, and, and for Solaris zones and jails and BSD, all of those things had been around and deeply under utilized in a way that Docker just wrapped it all up for us in a way, in a package that was so consumable and proliferated so quickly. So, I mean, it's, it's tough, you know, of course it feels obvious in hindsight, but that felt like something that could have happened a lot sooner.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So there's Isn't isn't
Speaker 5:the revolution of Docker really mostly marketing? I mean, at the
Speaker 6:No. They they they they addressed
Speaker 8:a really deep they addressed a really deep
Speaker 1:Yes.
Speaker 8:Strategic problem with that space around user experience. Right? Like, containers were something that a lot of engineers knew about, but they didn't know deeply enough or or it was just too painful to do in any practical sense. And so it was one of those things we all felt guilty about. It's like by solving that that that key user experience issue, like, it really exposed the capability to a lot of people, like, to a lot of people who knew about it that were enthusiastic to be able to do it at scale.
Speaker 8:But then it exposed an entire new generation of people to the capability as well. I
Speaker 9:and that sort of tying that into the container world.
Speaker 2:Ahmed, you were trying to get in.
Speaker 7:Oh, no. I was just, hi. Hi, Ryan. Hi, Adam. No.
Speaker 7:It was, just, exactly. Tom literally, to, beat me to the punch line. I was about to say the same thing that by tying it together with the overlay file system and providing that user experience where all of the c group stuff, as well as the interface between the host space. We're unifying all of that. It that's what made, like, containers so consumable by by, like, folks who are not that deeply technical in, in the their understandings of the c groups and all of and what power that could provide.
Speaker 7:Sorry, Tom. So
Speaker 1:as Yeah.
Speaker 7:You were you were right on the money there.
Speaker 1:Well, and I yeah. Exactly. And I would expand on both what you and Tom were saying. I think that that what Docker did is it targeted containers to the developer versus the operator. And containers as a core technology had existed earlier at them, and I totally agree with that.
Speaker 1:But but completely focused on the operator. And it's kind of interesting. It's like, so could it have happened earlier? Like, if there had been if one had wanted to go build Docker in, I don't know, like, 2,004? Right?
Speaker 1:How how far are the way back that are gonna turn it?
Speaker 7:I mean, there was
Speaker 2:CST jails or zones or yeah. Great. Sorry. Go ahead.
Speaker 7:Yeah. So I was just like, Docker and containers always reminded me of exokernels that came out of MIT's, like, back in the late nineties. Right? I think they published in 98 and something like that.
Speaker 3:No. They're probably earlier
Speaker 1:than that because I know where I was when I read that paper. Now they Yeah. So exactly.
Speaker 7:So, I mean, that kind of hearkened towards that too in some ways. And and it there was an overlap between and they mentioned, the ability of HP UX and and I believe Solaris to to do, like, the jailed environments, etcetera, and and were contrasting themselves to those. But I think that there were there was enough there to start down that path. Anyways, the just random
Speaker 1:Yeah. And I I
Speaker 2:old memories.
Speaker 6:Well, so I
Speaker 1:do think it's interesting that you get this kind of linked history where you have one innovation that then kind of inspires a next innovation that expands on it in a different dimension. Certainly, I feel that way about BSD Jails inspiring swaras containers, which were expanded on it. And jails I mean, jails were really designed for as a better. I mean, jail I mean, it's right there on
Speaker 2:the tin.
Speaker 1:Right? It's a jail. Clearly not a marketing term. The and containers were kind of expanded on that and made it a true OS virtual environment. And then I think Docker kind of expanded on that.
Speaker 1:And it's like I mean, so here's another question. Adam, the flip it around. Did Docker need to have zones and jails before it?
Speaker 2:That's interesting. That's interesting. Yeah. I don't know. I don't think so, because I mean, unless maybe LXC needed to have those technologies to inspire it.
Speaker 2:And and I could see it either way. I mean, it certainly didn't need both of them. Like, it it could have drawn inspiration from no. It could have drawn inspiration from jails or it could have drawn inspiration from, you know, some of this, like, you know, IBM in the sixties, seventies kind of research. It's an interesting thought.
Speaker 2:I think certain certainly, it needed LXC before it to for it to exist at
Speaker 1:all. I've been What's your what's your take? My take well, I think at some level, all of this stuff is unknowable because it is the present influences the future in so many subtle ways that it is really hard to go replay it. And it's also, like, you get these things, especially as, like, as as time fades into the rear view mirror. It is really hard to differentiate different times.
Speaker 1:The I mean, remember Back to the Future when, we actually, a movie that actually it's great. You know, that age as well. The the the children watch Back to the Future, which is
Speaker 2:Absolutely. We got our flying cars in 2018 or whatever. Yes.
Speaker 1:Right. So I remember watching Back to the Future as a kid and being really confused when Marty McFly is playing the electric guitar. And he's gone back to the year 1955, But he's playing a bunch of Chuck Berry. That, to me, is like the difference when I saw that movie, I didn't know that it the musical difference between 1950 5 and 1965. They they were like the I don't know.
Speaker 1:The same period, which they're not. And the people who made the movie obviously know the difference, and they have a, you know, very, you know, kind of in joke where, you know, his cousin, Marvin, listens to this guy play where he basically brings about Chuck Berry, by having this guy listen to Marty McFly playing Chuck Berry. But I didn't understand why it would be disorienting in 1955 to hear music that was only that was only a couple years ahead. So I think it's very hard to go back and think, like, alright. So what is the the difference between when we look at history, the difference between jails and zones and Docker, those are all gonna be smooshed together into a very short period of time.
Speaker 1:And it's gonna be very hard to disentangle them in terms of not one not influencing the other, not influencing the next.
Speaker 9:And then you gotta wrap in virtual machines, which have a much, much longer history.
Speaker 1:Virtual machines, a a much longer history. And
Speaker 9:And I I I claim it kind of predates operating systems.
Speaker 1:It does. Do you, Tom, do you know so, actually, I I should what I believe to be the first act of hardware based virtualization, I believe is the Honeywell h two hundred. So the Honeywell h two hundred was they built in emulation. This is when there was a non the the 1401, IBM 1401 was non transistorized. So the h two hundred actually virtualized the the 1401, and it will it required IBM to effectively virtualize the 1401 in the 360.
Speaker 9:Well, that that's more emulation than virtualization. Right?
Speaker 1:It is sorry. It is emulation the for the the h two hundred was definitely in the 1401. The but the the the I believe it was fully virtualized in the in the 360. But, yeah, I'd love to know your perspective on the history there.
Speaker 9:Well, even even CTSS, right, which is really the first time sharing system. They they added the base bounds registers to the
Speaker 7:Honeywell Honeywell 200 was a computer. Honeywell H200 is a vacuum cleaner.
Speaker 1:I think the the the the the the so the, is it the Vax? That's right. I've actually got an h two hundred manual. So they definitely called it the h two hundred, but maybe, I guess, the the h is just the abbreviation for Honeywell. I love that because, the the h two hundred, again, trying to basically allow you to run 1401 software.
Speaker 1:To to me, what's amazing about that is, like, software is, like, nanoseconds old. We are, you know, just after the big bang of software, and the software itself already has more inertia than the hardware. And you've got hardware that is now sculpting itself to run the software. And I love the I I don't know if I ever showed you the ad that I've got for the h 200 because it was called it was called the Liberator, which is like isn't that the name of, like, a bomber or an ICBM? That's hilarious.
Speaker 1:But so, Ben, you've had your hands up for hand up for a while. What what what are your thoughts?
Speaker 3:Oh, yeah. Hey. I think when I first saw this, I thought y'all would be talking about something different potentially, and it was, something I just learned about. So pardon me if you've already brought it up, but there's a big, big historical debate around, the stirrup and how much that changed society, basically. And it's like a if if you're interested in sort of a parallel, shape of a conversation, I suppose, that's not computer oriented.
Speaker 3:Go out and try to find some of the papers about historians arguing about whether the strip could have been invented earlier and whether it had a big as big an impact as it did because there are some historians who are out there saying that, like, the Mongols and Genghis Khan couldn't have been the Mongols and Genghis Khan without the stirrup. Right? Oh,
Speaker 1:wow. Interesting.
Speaker 3:It's, like, I think it's called the great stirrup debate or something.
Speaker 2:Oh, this is awesome.
Speaker 1:This is terrific. This is the subject of the space, by the way, is the great stirrup debate. We have this is the the subject of the space has just been working up the great stirrup debate. Okay. But Wow.
Speaker 1:The great stirrup controversy actually is the is. Is the academic debate about the stirrup thesis. Oh my god. Oh god. What what a delightful rock to move.
Speaker 1:Look at all this this life teeming under here. Wow.
Speaker 3:So it's there's a You can
Speaker 9:really stir up trouble with that.
Speaker 2:Oh, boo.
Speaker 3:Because I guess there's, like, like, in this, I don't know. I listen to a lot of history podcasts, and one of the things that they bring up a lot is, like, you know, do you think the French revolution is over yet yet or not? And it's, like, well, some people don't, some people do. Like, we're not quite done with some of the stuff they brought up. So it's it's one of those things where it's, like, oh, are are we done with the technological breakthroughs?
Speaker 3:Can we even say what it meant? Some people argue that you can. And I think I'm more in the in that vein at this point of just like, yeah, that's there's a lot there's a lot going on there and I'm just one guy and it's hard to say, you know.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So what do you elaborate on that. What do you mean in terms of it? Hard to hard to disentangle or hard to
Speaker 3:It's I think you you kinda got it, but it's like it's it's there's a part of me that's, like, in 10 years, is anybody gonna remember Docker? Right? Like, we we focus on Docker. It's like, oh, is this big deal? And then, like, you know, it is a big deal.
Speaker 3:But is it gonna be a big deal in retrospect? Right?
Speaker 1:Yeah. You know, I was listening to a, a podcast, from 2,009 this morning, very strangely. We were meeting with potential investors, and we always try to do our homework. And this particular investor has not been on very much, but he's on a podcast 2 1009, so we were listening to him. And, it was a very weird time capsule.
Speaker 1:Like, 2,009 doesn't feel like it was that long ago, but it was the early, early days of cloud. And in particular, he was talking about RightScale.
Speaker 2:Do you
Speaker 1:remember them? Like, it it fit
Speaker 3:That is no. 2009 is before my, time in the industry. So that's also the perspective I have here is, like, technical technological break throughs. I learned how to use Git a couple years ago. It was great.
Speaker 1:So Right Scale, like, the docker of its day, Niro. Like, Right Scale was a really big deal.
Speaker 6:Did you
Speaker 1:ever use RightScale, Adam?
Speaker 2:Never. I don't even know what it is.
Speaker 1:Okay. So right this was, like, at at at site and RightScale claimed that they were responsible for something like 60% of all AWS provisions. So this would be, like, in, like, 2,010. 2009, 2010, 2011. And they I mean, this is, like, one of these classic things just became basically a feature of AWS in terms of, like, that being able to dynamically scale up.
Speaker 1:And they absolutely just disappeared. So they went from, like, just totally dominant to yeah. That like, you come in at, like, a couple years later. Like, I I've never even heard of this company. So, yeah, I think you you do have these things that feel very, very current and then are completely forgotten.
Speaker 1:And I gotta say because I've been looking for an excuse I'm reading in a mesmerizing book right now on the history of the segue. I know we talked on talked about this about couple weeks ago, but I got a hold of this book. Oh, god. It is so good. I so this is it it is, Reinventing the Wheel is the name of the book.
Speaker 1:And talk about, like, a, in we I know we talked about this a couple weeks, so I don't wanna belabor that that kind of the stuff we already talked about in terms of of how popular the or or the all the hype around the segue. But another one of these where the so the segue is a you know, Dean Kamen is convinced. The guy is so paranoid. He is convinced that everyone else is gonna copy his invention. It turns out no one really did.
Speaker 1:And to me, that going back to our earlier rubric, Adam, that's an example of an idea who's like, yeah. Like, maybe it could've been done earlier or later, but it didn't really matter because it wasn't like, the the the world was not ready for it or is not ready for it.
Speaker 2:Or or may never be ready for it.
Speaker 1:Or may just be a bad idea. Right.
Speaker 2:It turns out.
Speaker 1:That's the that we would you know, we always we always like to make ourselves feel better by saying the world isn't ready for it. Like, what if the world is just, like, just your ideas kinda kinda stinks?
Speaker 9:It's the, it's the product market fit problem.
Speaker 1:It is the product market fit problem, which is the hardest part.
Speaker 3:There's another I'll just I'll reference another way to look at the article, then I gotta jet actually. But, because I feel like I'm want to do in these spaces. But, when I heard this, what I the other thing I thought about when I heard this thing and sort of what y'all are referencing now, I didn't know this. It's something also I've been learning about, like, recently is something called induced demand where if you increase the supply of something, the demand for it actually goes up. And
Speaker 1:it's, like,
Speaker 3:very it's it's like when I when I was hearing about Docker, it's like, oh, yeah. See groups were kind of a pain in the ass to use and then Docker made it easier and suddenly, like, there's so many more containers than there were before.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And
Speaker 3:I feel like that's that's just the constant story of, like,
Speaker 1:So this is the, Scottish economist, Jevons, who observed that as coal prices went as coal prices went down, the aggregate consumption of coal went up, which I think is is very related to this this concept That because as the as the supply is going up, the price is going down, and the demand is going up because it's finding you are finding new uses for things. And why do they have strangely, the Wikipedia article for induced demand features the Embarcadero freeway. Not sure. I'm really not sure.
Speaker 2:That's ridiculous. The isn't that
Speaker 5:the one that they made wider and the traffic got way worse on it?
Speaker 2:Oh, that's interesting.
Speaker 1:That makes sense. Yeah. Right. There you go.
Speaker 3:Every time you widen a freeway, traffic gets worse. It's sadistic.
Speaker 1:But Yeah. Interesting. Well, these are between this and the the the great stirrup controversy, I I am still, like, mesmerized by the great stirrup controversy. And I I'm I now, how did you find out about the great stirrup controversy,
Speaker 3:But I I I gotta go. But the only other thing that I want to say is I'm gonna do a victory lap on the NVIDIA thing because it did fall apart.
Speaker 1:You should do a victory lap on the NVIDIA thing. I thought of you when that thing fell apart. I was like And I was goddamn. That was in our predictions podcast.
Speaker 3:I know. I I'm glad it was recorded because I forgot to put a pull request up for with my predictions.
Speaker 1:There you go. So, no, you could go you should go capture that out and and put it in a PR. No. I was thinking that's funny you just asked that. I was thinking of you when it fell apart.
Speaker 1:And you said that it would take a I mean, you wouldn't you commented it fall apart. Take it would take
Speaker 6:a while.
Speaker 3:Yeah. I thought it was gonna be, like I thought they're gonna try to drag it out and that they would, like like, really try to do it. But then I forgot that soft was involved and that they're just bouncing off everything. And, like, if it was any other company like, if IBM owned Arm or something, then, like, different story. But SoftBank is just, like, a mess right now.
Speaker 3:Like, I don't know. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Just so it is really hard to hold a any acquisition in limbo for that long, especially an acquisition of that size. I'm not surprised at all that it fell apart. The I'm a little I'm surprised that it fell apart as quickly as it did. But I'm not surprised that given it was going to fall apart, that they just wanna, like, just be able
Speaker 9:I think I think SoftBank must have thought it was gonna fall apart from the beginning because because the essentially, a $2,000,000,000 breakup fee. Breakup fee. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Well, and that makes total sense. Yeah. That makes total sense. So that that kind of be that huge breakup fee. Because when you are if you've ever been a company that's being acquired by another company, it is absolutely brutal to run your business and at the same time perform due diligence.
Speaker 1:I am very pro breakup fee. I I I think that they I'm glad that whoever negotiated that deal should have priced in a galactic breakup fee. That makes a lot of sense. And because it is so debilitating to the company that's been acquired.
Speaker 5:Hang on. A $2,000,000,000 breakup fee paid to Arm? Yes.
Speaker 3:That's right.
Speaker 5:Does that compare to Arm's annual revenue?
Speaker 1:Oh, I'm sure it's much greater. But the Yeah. Actually I don't know. But but I I don't think it's fair, but I think that the but, no, I think it's the honestly, the larger the
Speaker 5:I'm not saying that it's unfair in any way. It makes total sense given the shit show that is corporate acquisitions. I would just be amused if that was, like, the biggest top line source of revenue.
Speaker 4:Yeah. Yeah. For the company.
Speaker 9:Well, actually, it goes to SoftBank instead of Arm. So you won't really see it.
Speaker 1:Well, listen. Someone's gotta plug the hole that that that we were created, you know. Might as well be break up these, that's gonna get out of the ground for a break up phase.
Speaker 2:So there are a couple of other interesting that came across the wire. One that someone mentioned was Wikipedia. They thought that Wikipedia in fact, they said that the the founders when they created Wikipedia said, like, this could have existed, you know, 10 years earlier. I thought that was a really interesting one, that we were kind of plotting along with, online encyclopedias, like, long before Wikipedia became a
Speaker 1:thing. What when did Wikipedia become a thing? Just
Speaker 2:now, I should've done my research.
Speaker 1:I mean, what did we do? There is this, like, period of time when we did not have encyclopedias in our houses. This is roughly the time in which I ruined the dinner party. A story I'm sure I've burdened
Speaker 2:you with. No. I don't think I mean, which dinner party?
Speaker 1:Okay. Thanks. Good. Thank you. That's all.
Speaker 1:Is that the right answer?
Speaker 3:Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1:That's the right answer. No. I was at a dinner party. This would've been, like, maybe, like, 1997. And, you know, there was a very, a Cliff Clavin type as a Cheers reference.
Speaker 1:Children definitely won't get that one because cheers is not I don't think cheers is left the chasm. My kids don't want cheers. My kids wouldn't No. It's cheers. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Cheers would be insufferable to the children for good reason. But kind of a cliffhling type. Cliffhling is a postman who who is constantly, spouting out facts that, in fact, are not true, but seem quite tantalizing. Actually, Cliff Clavin does Cliff Clavin could not exist in a post Wikipedia world. See, this is the the the the true advantage of having good Internet access in a bar is that you can fact check the jackass next to you.
Speaker 1:So somehow the the the either the Titanic or the Lusitania came up. Not sure how in conversation. And this guy volunteers that the Titanic and the Lusitania are sister ships. And it was like, interesting. And I'm like, wrong.
Speaker 1:No. That's not right. I was like, that that is definitely not right. And okay. Look.
Speaker 1:It was a younger me. I definitely could have presented my opinion differently and in a way that would have been more compelling to people. But you know, like, when I'm, like, losing the room even though I'm right? I mean, you might have seen this.
Speaker 2:I've never been experienced that latter part. I've definitely seen this. Yes. For sure.
Speaker 1:And I'm becoming, like I'm getting into the situation that I know is just, like, the worst situation for me to be in, which is when I feel like I've ingested a lethal dosage of crazy pills. And people are like, why are you so worked up about this? I'm like, what do you mean why am I why am I so worked up about the fact that they're not sisterships? Like, does that and in particular, I couldn't the the the Lusitanian sister ship is the Mauretania, and the Titanic's censorship was the Britannic and the Olympic. And it's like Hello?
Speaker 1:No. I literally dropped all this, and that was, like, unconvincing. And this is when I, like, went nonlinear because I'm like, first of all, like, look. I'm we we can judge my childhood. Yeah.
Speaker 1:I spent too much time with World Book, I happen to know the sister ships about these things. But, like, we and we can judge that if we want. But then it it the and he was all big. Like, he's, like, he's like a nice guy and he's so like, and vibes. Like, I just don't know what your problem is, man.
Speaker 1:They're just like sister ships. It's fine. I'm like, no. It's not fine. It's not fine.
Speaker 9:Brian, I regret to inform you that someone is wrong on the Internet.
Speaker 1:That that well, exactly. And I'm like and I am just not handling it well. I'm not handling the whole situation well. And this is before the Internet more or less, certainly before, like, one had Internet access at home. And I'm like, give me a dictionary.
Speaker 1:Do you have a dictionary? I I I'm, like, so confident that a dictionary will tell me that these are not sisterships. And people are like, why are you so worked up about this? Like, at this point, like, people are just being, like, I'm just turning everybody off. People are leaving.
Speaker 1:It's just like me. And then now I'm, like, berating the host for not having a dictionary. It's just like but it's it's all of
Speaker 7:all. Oh, no.
Speaker 2:Have a dictionary.
Speaker 1:Right. Exactly. It's just like the the the wheels are coming off of this thing. And it's just like you know, the purpose of this dinner party is actually not to fact check this person. Is the
Speaker 2:So so it sounds like you're in violent agreement that Wikipedia should have happened much sooner.
Speaker 1:Oh, so, like, Wikipedia I mean, thank God.
Speaker 2:It was 2001, by the way. 2001.
Speaker 1:2001. Yeah. So and I mean, before mobile devices and Wikipedia, I mean, it's like the Youngs don't know how good they have it. It's like you can end like, you never have to be in this kind of a situation. You can immediately fact check every like, Wikipedia is the death of abortion artists.
Speaker 1:It's so right.
Speaker 5:Is is Google or some other search engine really a necessary condition for the emergence of Wikipedia?
Speaker 2:Is it I mean, some other search engine keep keep in mind, like, do we I mean, there were plenty of search engines that were, like, lousy before Google.
Speaker 5:But, like, actually a good one kinda helps. I'm I'm not saying that's a requirement. AltaVista probably, I don't know, maybe.
Speaker 2:I don't know. In some ways, I think the opposite may be true that a a, like a Wikipedia obviates some of the need for search engines.
Speaker 9:Yeah. I'm with Adam. I'm like, hey, because I go to Wikipedia directly just to get away from the search noise.
Speaker 1:Alright. So, Chris, I Chris, do you have a I've said that Chris is is a a legitimate celebrity among us. Chris has been on HBO's Silicon Valley. Should I have this, Adam?
Speaker 2:I did not. Hello, Chris.
Speaker 1:Yeah. This this makes him a an enormous celebrity.
Speaker 6:Well, that's really generous of you. So there's 2 things I wanted to say. First of all, if you look at Wikipedia's rise, at the same time as Everything, Everything 2 and a couple of the other sort of approaches for online encyclopedias and the rest. Like, you had Encarta before that, and Encarta actually had way that you could add stuff to it, but it was really obtuse and freaking weird. So what Wikipedia did is, they did something that everything 2 didn't do, which is they allowed off-site links.
Speaker 6:And some of the previous ones, like everything in the rest, they refused to allow that. Right? So it was it so they became, like, you you would go into these circles almost instantly inside the everything twos, and Wikipedia would get you off of Wikipedia to go look at some of the citations and and links and the rest. So it was it it was really an interesting approach. You know?
Speaker 1:I'm not very embarrassed to ask this. What is it? Is it everything too? What is that So
Speaker 6:the slash dot gods. Alright. So slash dot you remember the website from 1 Margo. Yes. They had
Speaker 2:There's still a website. I follow them on Twitter.
Speaker 6:So so Rob implemented moderation meta moderation, all kinds of collaborative editing tools and then They created, with, a couple of the fellows, there in in Michigan, a site that was basically, it was inspired by Twikki, which was the precursor for the Wikipedia's new routes. And Right. And it was basically a way for people to create, you know, entries online and then link to each other in a very wiki fashion. Right? So they ended up having lots of writing, lots of really fun entries.
Speaker 6:And people started putting in encyclopedia entries. They started with the same I think it was the 1944 or 34 World Book dataset, that Wikipedia started with. But they didn't allow outside links. So it basically languished and lived for a while. And I think you can still get on it, but it's like a lot of, you know, the people, explore their online sexuality and stuff.
Speaker 6:So, you know, it went in a certain direction. You
Speaker 1:know? Right. Right. Right. Went to a little more of a niche.
Speaker 1:Correct?
Speaker 6:More niche. And, yeah. So Wow.
Speaker 3:I'm And then Wikipedia had a rose,
Speaker 6:and it was just you know you know, if you talk to Jimmy from that time and the rest, it's like, it was it was so well executed. And and and they did the thing that you're supposed to do. They said, Listen, our users want to edit this thing. Let's optimize for that. And they did, and and they got big very, very quickly, and they kept up on a software side,
Speaker 3:and it was cool. That's all.
Speaker 1:And the, Wikipedia, because anyone could edit it, the I mean, I was all of a sudden, like, speaking personally, like, I had a Wikipedia page that other people were just editing kind of free form. Adam, I'm so convinced that you did this and you, I think, deny it. That Wikipedia said that I I was a long snapper for the college for a college book called me.
Speaker 2:I I continue to deny that, and I am, like, really sad that I didn't do that.
Speaker 1:Can you prove that you didn't I mean, is it possible that you did it and forgot it?
Speaker 2:Yes. It is a 100% possible. And if that's the case, it is the greatest long con on myself that I have ever done. And I just need to like hang up my spurs if that's the case
Speaker 1:because my kids are like somewhat convinced that that my story of this is actually false. And the truth is I was a long snapper for the book of the week. And and and that I am which I mean, it's like What's going on?
Speaker 2:Oh, I like the idea in, like, 2003 maybe of me thinking, Brian, someday you will have children.
Speaker 4:Yes.
Speaker 2:Like, it's not that far off, and I will troll them.
Speaker 1:And I mean, it's landing on fertile ground. I mean, my kids, I I'd absolutely love to to to to troll me. I or either just in general. Like, I've got a 14 year old.
Speaker 2:Like, friends come over. You're like, dad, show them again how you used to long snap?
Speaker 1:Well, I I I know you play, Wordle. So, Wordle and we talked about this a little bit last week. And and sorry. This is gonna be a a Wordle spoiler for those of you not for today's wordle. But for a couple of days ago, the word was was ulcer.
Speaker 1:And, it it's possible that Bridget may have missed may have not gotten it for the first time ever.
Speaker 2:And you're saying this on Valentine's Day? Oh,
Speaker 1:god. Don't sharpen it. Don't sharpen it. Well, it's
Speaker 9:it's being resounded too. K.
Speaker 2:Well, I can I can always edit it out?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Yeah. Would you mind editing that one out? And happy Valentine's Day to Bridget. Well, no.
Speaker 1:But so the the the and I and honestly, like, I didn't I wasn't even quoting. I mean, yes, it's fine. Yes. You You were
Speaker 2:deemed to be quoting. Yes.
Speaker 1:Yes. I might have gotten it. Right. Right. And then, the and so I was the the with a 14 year old, and we were bringing this up.
Speaker 1:And he's like, oh, he's like, yeah. Mom missed the words. Like, you've gotta tell me what the word is. And so I described it to him. He then gets to school and texts her, hey, mom.
Speaker 1:I'm really worried about the this ulcer that I've got on my knee. Like, it really hurts. And she texts him back, like, oh my god. Like, let's get you to the doctor. He's like, no, mom.
Speaker 1:I'm just I'm just kidding. I just wanted to use that word in a sentence. And she's like, what what have I given birth to? Like, this is, like, this is anyway.
Speaker 2:She knows she was getting into.
Speaker 1:Yeah. That apple did not fall far from the trace. But then it's like the I did you know did you know about everything too? You tell me there's some No. No.
Speaker 2:I'm on the Wikipedia page now. It's it's fascinating, I guess.
Speaker 1:It is fascinating. And so, Chris, how did we miss that? I I get I just don't know how I missed this. I feel like I was around at that time. I would have cared about it.
Speaker 1:I don't know.
Speaker 6:You know, you were deeply focused on DTrace and that whole world. I mean, I remember in the late nineties. I don't think I was the one who said that the Lusitania just for the record. I've always known who the sister ships and the mechanics were. And let's be clear.
Speaker 6:This is not Right. This is not a debatable item, for God.
Speaker 1:Right. Right.
Speaker 6:But, no. But you were at that time, that would be like 97, 98 Yeah. When they came out with everything. And you know, Wikipedia came out I think it was like 97, 96. I mean, they all sort of happened at the same time.
Speaker 6:And then there was that fight between Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales. So I think you were focused on DTrace and the sort of technologies around that at that point in your career. You know? I mean, you and I wouldn't run into each other until the q dinner is in the late nineties is what I wanna say.
Speaker 1:Yeah. For sure. But I also like I definitely was the kid that read the I like I still like reading the encyclopedia. And Yeah. I just like, I am dying to know what I did for I mean, I I don't think I did anything because I was trying to fact check this jackass at dinner, and I couldn't I didn't know how to do it.
Speaker 1:So I think I just, like, put the I'm kind of amazed I didn't, like, have my mom ship my world books to me.
Speaker 2:The
Speaker 1:and then so so Wikipedia takes off then so I'm not sure that Wikipedia could have been much earlier than, Adam, because Wikipedia did happen pretty early.
Speaker 6:Well well so, you know, it's worth pointing out the records are still there. So you could go back in your entry, see what IP address, you know, trace route that sucker, and see if it's truly Adam or what.
Speaker 2:Right. Well yeah. And then figure out where, you know, where my cable modem was in 2,001 or whatever it was. Yeah.
Speaker 6:I mean, they they were only really starting tracking and having user accounts in Wikipedia around then, so it would just be an IP address. So
Speaker 4:What what was
Speaker 6:I think, Adam, you're gonna get away with this one.
Speaker 1:Perfect crime. Right. Exactly.
Speaker 5:Anybody remember Sun's IP range back then?
Speaker 1:That that's right. Exactly.
Speaker 2:That's right. So another interesting one that came up, interesting response I see Dan was here earlier, but he mentioned JSON. And, and, and by that he meant like a generic and universally accepted way of describing, like type information and serializing things. I thought that was a pretty interesting one. It also made me grateful that the answer has not been XML.
Speaker 1:But it kind of is. Right? And that, like, XML is it I mean, JSON is is a reaction to XML.
Speaker 2:That that's fair, but it also, like, has pervaded. And, I mean, maybe maybe it's a recent thing and maybe it feels permanent, but isn't. But, but it's it's certainly proliferated.
Speaker 9:Yes. The predecessor of XML with the the OSI protocol stuff, it got baked into SNMP. I forget what it was called.
Speaker 5:Where does the YAML fall in the family tree?
Speaker 1:I think YAML, to me, postdates all of that. But I I I mean, I first run across YAML, I wanna say, in in, like, by the mid 2000. But, when does YAML begin to when is the first version? Yeah. Initial release in 2001.
Speaker 1:And Chris, you had this I I I do wanna cut off. You had a second point as well. I'm sorry, Chris.
Speaker 6:Oh, gosh. I don't remember who this thing. And I'm I'm cooking, so I'm just mostly listening.
Speaker 1:No. That sounds good. So the, Adam, the, Chris is in the funeral scene, for when Peter Gregory for Peter Gregory's funeral at HBO HBO Silicon Valley.
Speaker 6:Weren't you a technical consultant on that too, Brian?
Speaker 1:I was not. No. I oh oh, god. No. I I was not.
Speaker 1:I no. No. No. I Jess was. So,
Speaker 6:it just That's right. Jessy was there around, like, season 3 or 4.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And and she's also making sure that they were very adamant that all the go compiled. And I know that Cliff Moon did some some technical consulting. And I I've been watching so, Chris, I've been watching a lot of HBO Silicon Valley, and I've been watching it and rewatching it and rewatching it with with my kids. My my, my 14 year old, the same one that trolled my wife, got me an Aviato shirt for Christmas.
Speaker 1:I thought that was was great. So we've been anyway, so, Chris, you are famous in my house. We've had the kids like to the the kids can go right to the scene.
Speaker 6:I'm on frame if you have a widescreen TV.
Speaker 1:It gets right exactly.
Speaker 6:A tenth
Speaker 1:of a second. That's exact yes. That's exactly what we did. We pause it, like, the 1, 2, 3, 4 there we go. That's Chris.
Speaker 1:You can see Chris. Among the mourners, among the Peter Gregory mourners.
Speaker 6:Yeah. So, you know, Parisa Tabriz? She was in Chrome Security. Now she's a VP in Chrome. They actually gave her one of the signature edition, edition, boxes.
Speaker 6:The Gavin Belson signature edition boxes, I think. So I mean, I'm super jealous of this.
Speaker 1:Absolutely. What an heirloom. I mean, that is that is terrific. Oh my god. It it I think it's just it it it's so good.
Speaker 1:It's just so good. It it's and the the older it gets, the better it gets, I have to say. I don't know the last time
Speaker 3:you guys did watch.
Speaker 6:Your second or 3rd, 4th startup, Brian? I mean, this isn't it painful more than fun
Speaker 1:to you? No. No. No. No.
Speaker 1:No. No. No. And I reject. I think that, like, that there's this kinda, like, Silicon Valley kind of a zeitgeist that, like, I can't watch Silicon the HBO Silicon Valley because it's too painful.
Speaker 1:It's, like, that's brilliant satire. And, yes, I know Adam and I both at different startups reported to a chair. So I know, like, that scene, I know is very hard for people to watch where the CEO is fired and a bunch of people reported to the chair. Like, look, I reported to the chair, but, like, you know, I can laugh about it. I think it no.
Speaker 1:I think it's speakers.
Speaker 2:No, Chris. Thank you so much. Because I I stopped watching Silicon Valley at one point when they were arguing I mean, this is like season 2 when they're arguing about a hardware appliance versus software only. And this was literally the fight I was in at work, like just, just like fingers bleeding on on this. My wife was laughing, and I was like, I can't watch this anymore.
Speaker 2:And literally, that is the last half of an episode I have ever seen. Basically, it just it cut me to it it it it just, like, it hurt me so much.
Speaker 1:Oh my god. Oh, you've got it's so good. It is so good. You would and and there you you appreciate it. You gotta I'll go back.
Speaker 1:I'll go back for sure. You get you gotta go back. So, like, you gotta, like, Laurie Breen there. And I'm here though. Laurie Breen spin off would be Oh, Laurie Breen.
Speaker 1:It's amazing. I've got a lot a lot of Laurie great Laurie Breen quotes. Anyway, not to take us down the Silicon Valley rabbit hole, but this is what Chris, this is what makes you a celebrity. And I'm sure you get this all
Speaker 3:the time
Speaker 1:all the time on the screen. Oh, sure.
Speaker 6:Yeah. Gosh.
Speaker 1:You're always recognized. No one no one recognized. You barely can make go out to dinner without being,
Speaker 3:harassed
Speaker 1:by the the the dungeons of of HBO's.
Speaker 6:The paparazzi that hang out outside of her dog and tell them, well, that wouldn't
Speaker 3:be more.
Speaker 1:Exactly. That's right. That's right. Right, I know it is despite the fact that I have, revealed my my wife's portal challenges. It is Valentine's Day.
Speaker 1:And, Adam, I know we had promised Melissa that we were gonna get done roughly speaking on time.
Speaker 2:Right on. Well, there's other good stuff, in the on that Twitter thread. So some of that stuff felt, like, possible to me, like, FFTs. Some of it felt, like, very much not ahead of its time, like, like computers, like, didn't feel like they were just hanging around, waiting to be invented. Felt like 18, 20 for the, you know, difference engine felt like a pretty good head start on on computers.
Speaker 2:So there's other stuff in there if folks wanna add their thoughts or or comment.
Speaker 1:Yeah. And I would love to give the get the thoughts on whether we can look at Teams Racing as an indicator that a time had actually arrived and maybe some other and, Adam, you've gotta read the segue book. It is so good.
Speaker 6:Have you guys gone down the anthecarra mechanism hole yet?
Speaker 1:No. We haven't. That would be another great one to go to. Oh my god. That thing is sorry, Chris.
Speaker 1:Go ahead.
Speaker 6:No. No. I was just gonna say it's like so how many, you know, sort of abortive inventions, you know, happen throughout the the middle ages and the rest.
Speaker 1:Totally. And I think that that is the I mean, do you know much about the mechanism, Adam?
Speaker 2:No. Nothing. I've never heard
Speaker 1:of it. Oh my god. This is this this is on a Greek ship. Right, Chris? That they, and what is the year on this?
Speaker 1:But this is basically a I mean, it's a it's a sophisticated analog computer effectively, and they're still figuring out what all this thing can go do. Just remarkable, in terms and and from a time that we would not have associated this kind of, like, technological breakthrough.
Speaker 6:Yeah. I think the last time I read up on it, they they thought it was maybe an oratory that was used to predict where the planets and stars were, you know, for early worship, you know. But I I don't know. I just don't know because this Valentine's Day, I'm gonna go back to my my Valentine's Day.
Speaker 1:That's great. Chris, great seeing you. Thank you so much. It's Antikythera, it's a n t I k y t h e r
Speaker 2:a. Yeah. Cool. I'll check it out.
Speaker 6:Take care, everybody. Thank you.
Speaker 2:Yeah. You too. Thanks, Chris.
Speaker 1:And the good Oh. Good note to end on. And happy Valentine's Day to our our poor spouses, and to everyone else. And we'll, we'll see you next week.