1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:03,640 We are in a unique point in time where people have an opinion on 2 00:00:03,640 --> 00:00:05,960 people's personal productivity. When it comes to software 3 00:00:05,960 --> 00:00:09,160 engineers, they have quite a valuable skill set and there's 4 00:00:09,160 --> 00:00:11,440 no alternative. Now there is an alternative. 5 00:00:11,440 --> 00:00:14,640 It works now because you have senior developers, they lift the 6 00:00:14,640 --> 00:00:17,040 pain of developing. They know object, object 7 00:00:17,040 --> 00:00:19,480 orientated programming, they know functional programming. 8 00:00:19,880 --> 00:00:22,840 Now if you Fast forward to 20 years and we freeze in 9 00:00:22,920 --> 00:00:26,200 technology and you do exactly the same, the person driving 10 00:00:26,200 --> 00:00:29,920 that large language model doesn't understand the lower 11 00:00:30,040 --> 00:00:32,759 level concepts of object orientated programming because 12 00:00:32,759 --> 00:00:34,800 he never had to do that in the past. 13 00:00:35,320 --> 00:00:38,800 Are you a programmer who writes code or are you a software 14 00:00:38,800 --> 00:00:43,080 engineer that you design software architectures and that 15 00:00:43,080 --> 00:00:47,600 you write applications? You are the author of the 16 00:00:47,600 --> 00:00:49,880 application. You're only using a tool to 17 00:00:49,880 --> 00:00:52,920 build it for you. Joining me today is my friend 18 00:00:52,920 --> 00:00:57,720 and colleague Joris Konang, AWSCTO over here at CBR and we 19 00:00:57,720 --> 00:01:02,080 talk about automation, agentic workflows and the impact on the 20 00:01:02,080 --> 00:01:05,640 software development life cycle. Really fun conversation and 21 00:01:05,640 --> 00:01:08,080 it'll definitely make you think. So enjoy. 22 00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:14,000 I looked at your LinkedIn and you've done a lot. 23 00:01:14,120 --> 00:01:16,920 I saw sys admin, I saw software engineer, cloud engineer, 24 00:01:16,920 --> 00:01:20,640 trainer, and now CTO. I'm wondering what nowadays 25 00:01:20,640 --> 00:01:23,600 still gives you energy that might be different from how it 26 00:01:23,600 --> 00:01:26,160 used to be. Still the same things. 27 00:01:26,200 --> 00:01:30,720 Yeah, yeah, yeah. So next to be the CTO, I'm still 28 00:01:30,720 --> 00:01:33,720 doing consultancy work. So I'm still engaged with, with 29 00:01:33,720 --> 00:01:37,320 an engagement at a client. And then when you have that 30 00:01:37,520 --> 00:01:40,440 particular heart problem that you're actually trying to solve, 31 00:01:40,480 --> 00:01:43,800 and the moment when you actually solve it, that that moment, that 32 00:01:43,800 --> 00:01:46,880 spark is like, yes. And it doesn't matter what that 33 00:01:46,880 --> 00:01:49,120 problem is. Well, the bigger the problem, 34 00:01:49,120 --> 00:01:52,080 the bigger it impacted, the nicer the yes is. 35 00:01:52,320 --> 00:01:54,560 But. Yeah. 36 00:01:54,720 --> 00:01:57,960 And then does it matter if they are long term problems that you 37 00:01:57,960 --> 00:02:00,720 solve bit by bit or they're more the shorter kind of instant 38 00:02:00,720 --> 00:02:02,960 satisfactory ones? Well, it could be both. 39 00:02:03,400 --> 00:02:04,840 Yeah, yeah. That's nice. 40 00:02:05,440 --> 00:02:07,920 But it needs to be stay fun, right? 41 00:02:08,120 --> 00:02:11,320 You need to enjoy your work. You need to go back to your work 42 00:02:11,320 --> 00:02:15,560 and say, yes, I'm excited to go and I feel like it and I want to 43 00:02:15,560 --> 00:02:18,560 make a difference. If you do that, then you're in 44 00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:20,200 the right job. How do you keep it fun? 45 00:02:21,000 --> 00:02:26,000 Well, you have to make it fun. So also within CBO, we also 46 00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:29,320 shape our own assignments sometimes and that's gives you 47 00:02:29,520 --> 00:02:31,720 the opportunity to make it fun for yourself. 48 00:02:32,240 --> 00:02:35,680 So of course you can go to a client and ask them their 49 00:02:35,680 --> 00:02:39,360 problems and then let them drive the assignment that you they 50 00:02:39,360 --> 00:02:42,880 want you to be doing. But if you as a consultant say 51 00:02:42,880 --> 00:02:47,560 hey, but I think I will excel in this area, can I help you with 52 00:02:47,560 --> 00:02:51,280 that, then you're shaping it more towards you to make sure 53 00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:54,200 it's fun for you as a person. Do you have an example of that? 54 00:02:54,200 --> 00:02:56,800 Something that you came in to solve and then turned out there 55 00:02:56,800 --> 00:02:58,800 was a different problem that needed solving. 56 00:02:58,800 --> 00:03:02,960 You actually fixed that. Well, if you, if you talk a 57 00:03:02,960 --> 00:03:07,840 little bit earlier about when landing zones were hot and 58 00:03:07,840 --> 00:03:12,120 happening, I would say there the governance. 59 00:03:12,960 --> 00:03:15,440 Well, I, I don't really like governance, but I do like 60 00:03:15,440 --> 00:03:18,480 security. And I do know that it's, it's 61 00:03:18,480 --> 00:03:21,200 goes hand in hand. So it, it's, it is important to 62 00:03:21,200 --> 00:03:22,840 have that together with each other. 63 00:03:23,600 --> 00:03:28,320 But I really like figuring security challenges. 64 00:03:29,840 --> 00:03:34,040 Don't be the department of no, but make sure that you say no, 65 00:03:34,040 --> 00:03:37,760 you cannot do this this way. But let me help you figure out a 66 00:03:37,760 --> 00:03:43,080 way how I, how you can do this. And in in that sense, I was more 67 00:03:43,080 --> 00:03:48,720 or less like, OK, put me in that position where I can not block 68 00:03:48,720 --> 00:03:52,880 people, but actually help them unlock themselves and then see 69 00:03:52,880 --> 00:03:54,840 what the impact on the organization is. 70 00:03:55,040 --> 00:03:57,520 That's nice. Yeah, I got a new kind of 71 00:03:57,520 --> 00:04:03,080 viewpoint on things like risk, privacy, security specifically, 72 00:04:03,280 --> 00:04:05,200 and it was mainly because I was talking to a person that's quite 73 00:04:05,200 --> 00:04:07,920 senior at Databricks. They also worked at Google and 74 00:04:07,920 --> 00:04:11,200 they said it's like you're engineering but at a different 75 00:04:11,200 --> 00:04:15,200 level, on a higher level because the margin for error is a lot 76 00:04:15,200 --> 00:04:18,279 smaller, right? If you're at risk security wise, 77 00:04:18,600 --> 00:04:22,720 then when something big actually hits, then could be detrimental. 78 00:04:22,880 --> 00:04:25,240 So you have to make sure you got all your bases covered. 79 00:04:25,520 --> 00:04:27,680 Same with risk, right? If you get sued, you're kind of 80 00:04:27,680 --> 00:04:29,360 screwed. So if you're responsible as an 81 00:04:29,360 --> 00:04:31,200 engineer, you're playing on a different level. 82 00:04:31,200 --> 00:04:34,080 It's like you're playing Champions League instead of like 83 00:04:34,520 --> 00:04:36,720 smaller league. Definitely, yeah. 84 00:04:37,080 --> 00:04:39,120 And with security, it's also fun, but I've never been 85 00:04:39,120 --> 00:04:41,640 responsible for I think those bigger topics. 86 00:04:41,960 --> 00:04:46,000 I do feel like when things are quite risky, those topics go to 87 00:04:46,000 --> 00:04:49,440 the people that the organization trusts the most to actually make 88 00:04:49,440 --> 00:04:51,760 sure that this works well. Yeah. 89 00:04:51,760 --> 00:04:55,000 And more and more people are involved making that decision 90 00:04:55,000 --> 00:05:00,640 and they're, it becomes slow and bureaucratic and nobody wants to 91 00:05:00,840 --> 00:05:04,000 bear the the risk of going wrong. 92 00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:07,400 And then they postpone. And then you get the typical 93 00:05:07,560 --> 00:05:11,240 enterprise behaviour that you would see in organisations. 94 00:05:11,240 --> 00:05:11,680 Yeah. Yeah. 95 00:05:11,680 --> 00:05:14,000 Have you found yourself in a position like that and how do 96 00:05:14,000 --> 00:05:18,440 you handle that? Well, usually finding the person 97 00:05:18,440 --> 00:05:21,760 who is responsible in the end and just confront him with what 98 00:05:21,760 --> 00:05:29,280 the well, what the the downside is of not tackling this is for 99 00:05:29,280 --> 00:05:33,040 instance, you can deny people from using AI because you're 100 00:05:33,040 --> 00:05:35,080 afraid for the risk what it brings. 101 00:05:35,080 --> 00:05:37,920 So you don't allow AI within your company. 102 00:05:38,280 --> 00:05:42,080 But what people will then do is they will use ChatGPT on their 103 00:05:42,080 --> 00:05:45,480 personal accounts for a free version and they will use it 104 00:05:45,520 --> 00:05:49,360 where it was intended for. And you can upload excel sheets 105 00:05:49,360 --> 00:05:53,880 there as well. And then you're then you have a 106 00:05:53,880 --> 00:05:58,400 bigger risk of losing data into places that you don't want your 107 00:05:58,400 --> 00:06:01,880 data to be be app. Yeah, I've seen two types of 108 00:06:01,880 --> 00:06:03,240 people. Then the people that really try 109 00:06:03,240 --> 00:06:06,320 and prevent that from happening, people going shadow IT personal 110 00:06:06,320 --> 00:06:10,160 stuff or people that then say indeed, let's fix this because 111 00:06:10,160 --> 00:06:13,200 this is an ask, so let's make sure it's in a mature way and we 112 00:06:13,200 --> 00:06:15,760 can actually accommodate. People will find a way, Yeah, 113 00:06:15,760 --> 00:06:18,320 right. So and either it's through the 114 00:06:18,320 --> 00:06:22,560 way that you pay for them or you they will find a way that works 115 00:06:22,560 --> 00:06:26,000 for them. It's interesting because I, I 116 00:06:26,000 --> 00:06:29,000 only know this industry, which is the tech industry, but I do 117 00:06:29,000 --> 00:06:32,680 feel like the engineers are quite influential, right? 118 00:06:32,880 --> 00:06:36,520 Within a product team, A-Team can just say we're not going to 119 00:06:36,680 --> 00:06:38,720 work on this feature. I believe we should not work on 120 00:06:38,720 --> 00:06:40,080 this feature. We need to work on tech depth 121 00:06:40,080 --> 00:06:42,720 for at least two weeks. And then a product person can be 122 00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:45,240 like, oh, what am I like, what can I do? 123 00:06:45,240 --> 00:06:46,480 My engineers are not going to work. 124 00:06:46,480 --> 00:06:48,840 They're like, and on a strike, it's like a mini strike. 125 00:06:49,240 --> 00:06:52,000 Sometimes they can even hold an organization completely, like in 126 00:06:52,000 --> 00:06:54,200 a in a stranglehold when they say I want to work with this 127 00:06:54,200 --> 00:06:56,880 certain technology, even though it might not be the best for the 128 00:06:56,880 --> 00:06:59,640 organization, but there's quite some power in there, which I 129 00:06:59,640 --> 00:07:01,240 think is fascinating. Yeah. 130 00:07:01,240 --> 00:07:03,680 The interesting thing with those kind of things, especially if 131 00:07:03,680 --> 00:07:08,360 you're trying out new things, is, well, I think the fundament 132 00:07:08,360 --> 00:07:12,240 below that is already wrong if you're in a situation like that. 133 00:07:12,600 --> 00:07:17,360 Because in the end, it's a lack of trust there already. 134 00:07:17,680 --> 00:07:20,600 Because typically when that happens, you say to your 135 00:07:20,600 --> 00:07:23,560 developers like, no, you have to work on this feature, that 136 00:07:23,560 --> 00:07:25,840 feature, and no, we don't have time for technical debt. 137 00:07:26,240 --> 00:07:29,480 And you just make it happen. And then at one point your 138 00:07:29,920 --> 00:07:31,720 developers will go on a strike because. 139 00:07:32,760 --> 00:07:34,600 It's too much. It's too much and they're 140 00:07:34,600 --> 00:07:36,680 postponing and postponing and postponing. 141 00:07:37,000 --> 00:07:40,200 That's why I always say you should embed the technical depth 142 00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:42,800 that you want to solve into the features that you're developing. 143 00:07:43,560 --> 00:07:47,440 So for instance, if you want to change the logo, but you need 144 00:07:47,440 --> 00:07:51,200 to, well, you know that it touches some areas, where is 145 00:07:51,200 --> 00:07:53,520 some technical depth, then you say, yes, we can change that 146 00:07:53,520 --> 00:07:55,280 logo, but first we need to fix this. 147 00:07:56,120 --> 00:07:59,480 And if we fix this, then I can change your logo more 148 00:07:59,480 --> 00:08:04,760 efficiently and that will help the team grow and excel in their 149 00:08:04,760 --> 00:08:06,600 job. Yeah, I think it's fun to zoom 150 00:08:06,600 --> 00:08:09,600 in on that because the trend that I've seen now, especially 151 00:08:09,600 --> 00:08:12,760 with agentic tooling, is that people all of a sudden have a 152 00:08:12,760 --> 00:08:14,680 tool that will magically fix this for you. 153 00:08:14,680 --> 00:08:16,280 You want to change the logo? I can do that. 154 00:08:16,560 --> 00:08:19,000 So when you as an engineer say it's going to take me a couple 155 00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:21,360 days because I'm, we're going to work on the stick there, someone 156 00:08:21,360 --> 00:08:23,480 else might say, well, why, right? 157 00:08:23,480 --> 00:08:26,600 Because I can do this with a snap of my fingertips basically. 158 00:08:26,600 --> 00:08:28,920 And it's fixed. Which all of a sudden now people 159 00:08:28,920 --> 00:08:33,000 have an opinion on how engineers solve problems and they really 160 00:08:33,000 --> 00:08:35,840 want the problems to be solved with agentic tooling, which has 161 00:08:35,840 --> 00:08:38,039 pros. I love it from a usage 162 00:08:38,039 --> 00:08:41,080 perspective, but it can also definitely have cons. 163 00:08:41,640 --> 00:08:44,360 Yeah. I would say in the end, as a 164 00:08:44,360 --> 00:08:47,640 developer, you're responsible for the work that you do for the 165 00:08:47,640 --> 00:08:51,480 product that you're delivering, regardless on how you built the 166 00:08:51,480 --> 00:08:53,880 software. Either you do that through a 167 00:08:53,880 --> 00:08:58,240 terminal with FI or you do that with the nice and shiny Kieros 168 00:08:58,240 --> 00:09:02,040 or cursors or cloud code, for instance. 169 00:09:03,120 --> 00:09:08,520 It's, it's still tools. So whatever the tool produced, 170 00:09:08,560 --> 00:09:10,560 you're responsible for that as a developer. 171 00:09:10,920 --> 00:09:14,640 So yes, you can change the logo, but you have no idea what else 172 00:09:14,640 --> 00:09:18,520 it does and what kind of impact it has on the rest of the the 173 00:09:18,520 --> 00:09:20,280 application that you do potentially. 174 00:09:21,080 --> 00:09:23,400 And that becomes a very interesting dialogue then, 175 00:09:23,400 --> 00:09:25,640 because yes, you can change this. 176 00:09:25,640 --> 00:09:28,160 And of course we can do that over and over and over again. 177 00:09:28,160 --> 00:09:33,360 But that will cascade into a world where you no longer 178 00:09:33,360 --> 00:09:36,240 understand your code base. You don't understand what the 179 00:09:36,640 --> 00:09:39,960 implications are of changing this one property. 180 00:09:40,000 --> 00:09:43,360 For instance, Yeah. And then it becomes troublesome 181 00:09:43,360 --> 00:09:45,920 I would say. Yeah, I, I think we're going to 182 00:09:45,920 --> 00:09:48,840 learn a lot and hopefully this year, because there's two trains 183 00:09:48,840 --> 00:09:52,880 of thoughts, right that I have either teams still have that 184 00:09:52,880 --> 00:09:56,360 ownership, but they lose some form of instant, oh, I know this 185 00:09:56,360 --> 00:10:00,360 or I know that and they have to rely on agentic exploration to 186 00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:03,400 actually figure things out. And there are pros, pros and 187 00:10:03,400 --> 00:10:05,680 cons there. Or they go a little bit slower, 188 00:10:05,680 --> 00:10:09,840 a little bit more, I think consciously trying to understand 189 00:10:09,840 --> 00:10:11,640 their code base. And they might still very much 190 00:10:11,640 --> 00:10:15,200 be hands on, not fully reliant on agentic tooling. 191 00:10:15,760 --> 00:10:17,920 And I think they have pros and cons. 192 00:10:18,040 --> 00:10:20,160 It's quite interesting how things are going to accelerate 193 00:10:20,160 --> 00:10:22,200 and evolve. I see some people are all on the 194 00:10:22,200 --> 00:10:26,160 bandwagon that say, OK, does not make sense to write code by hand 195 00:10:26,160 --> 00:10:29,360 anymore already, like not even in the future, but already, 196 00:10:29,360 --> 00:10:30,640 yeah, yeah, yeah. And I think that's quite 197 00:10:30,640 --> 00:10:32,600 interesting. It's interesting, but also, 198 00:10:33,960 --> 00:10:37,760 well, a risk I would say, because why does that work 199 00:10:38,120 --> 00:10:42,160 nowadays? I would say it works now because 200 00:10:42,160 --> 00:10:45,800 you have senior developers, but actually know they, they lift 201 00:10:45,800 --> 00:10:48,320 the pain of developing. They know object, object 202 00:10:48,320 --> 00:10:50,760 orientated programming, they know functional programming. 203 00:10:51,040 --> 00:10:54,560 They know what the changes are. So if a large language model 204 00:10:54,560 --> 00:10:57,840 proposes some changes to the code base, they understand it. 205 00:10:58,320 --> 00:11:01,520 Now if you Fast forward to 20 years and we freeze in 206 00:11:01,520 --> 00:11:05,240 technology and you do exactly the same, the person driving 207 00:11:05,240 --> 00:11:09,320 that large language model doesn't understand the lower 208 00:11:09,320 --> 00:11:12,120 level concepts of object orientated programming because 209 00:11:12,120 --> 00:11:14,200 he never had to do that in the past. 210 00:11:15,320 --> 00:11:19,600 So how can that person make an objective choice whether that is 211 00:11:19,600 --> 00:11:23,880 a good or a bad chance in the context of the code base, which 212 00:11:23,880 --> 00:11:26,800 you probably don't know because the majority is generated 213 00:11:26,800 --> 00:11:30,440 anyway. Yeah, this is where like the 214 00:11:30,440 --> 00:11:32,560 lines of code is, is kind of a challenge, right? 215 00:11:32,560 --> 00:11:35,760 Because if I pick up a new programming language, I don't do 216 00:11:35,760 --> 00:11:37,720 that often. And now I don't think it makes 217 00:11:37,720 --> 00:11:41,400 sense anymore because I can orchestrate in a specification 218 00:11:41,600 --> 00:11:43,520 feature wise what I think we should do. 219 00:11:43,920 --> 00:11:45,960 And I can look at the architecture flow and be like, 220 00:11:45,960 --> 00:11:47,920 OK, this is the entry point for an API. 221 00:11:48,200 --> 00:11:49,640 This is where it goes in the database. 222 00:11:49,640 --> 00:11:52,560 Oh, it actually is decoupled through an event at a queue 223 00:11:52,560 --> 00:11:54,560 there. So I can see that even though 224 00:11:54,560 --> 00:11:56,800 it's not a language I'm comfortable in, that's from a 225 00:11:56,800 --> 00:11:59,920 readability perspective. If I don't know any of that, my 226 00:11:59,920 --> 00:12:03,320 assumption is that whatever gets generated you should try and 227 00:12:03,320 --> 00:12:05,800 understand. And I feel like, but this is a 228 00:12:05,800 --> 00:12:09,000 hunch, you can get quite far through pattern recognition 229 00:12:09,440 --> 00:12:12,160 where you can read a lot of code and if you don't understand you 230 00:12:12,160 --> 00:12:14,680 have to consciously make it a learning opportunity. 231 00:12:14,800 --> 00:12:16,040 If you don't do that, then you're lost. 232 00:12:16,040 --> 00:12:18,320 Then you're the same as the people that copy paste from 233 00:12:18,320 --> 00:12:20,760 stack overflow. But I do feel like this can 234 00:12:20,760 --> 00:12:22,960 really accelerate your learning if you use it wisely. 235 00:12:23,320 --> 00:12:26,040 Yeah, definitely. And not only that, let's take it 236 00:12:26,040 --> 00:12:29,560 one step further. So the question is, does it 237 00:12:29,560 --> 00:12:32,720 still matter that you fully understand the code that is 238 00:12:32,720 --> 00:12:36,760 being generated when you, I think that is important when you 239 00:12:36,760 --> 00:12:39,400 have in, in this hybrid situation where you have an 240 00:12:39,400 --> 00:12:43,600 existing code base written by humans and then you introduce an 241 00:12:43,640 --> 00:12:46,760 AI coding assistant, then it becomes very important that you 242 00:12:46,760 --> 00:12:50,800 actually know from each other what you're doing to, to have a 243 00:12:50,800 --> 00:12:53,520 good confidence that you're building the right thing. 244 00:12:54,400 --> 00:12:57,480 Well, if you start with a Greenfield application, does it 245 00:12:57,480 --> 00:13:00,600 really matter that you really understand the full code base? 246 00:13:01,480 --> 00:13:06,000 Still, as long as all the specs are in the correct format and 247 00:13:06,080 --> 00:13:09,800 has the right requirements and and all those things are right, 248 00:13:10,680 --> 00:13:14,240 then a large language model is probably the better developer to 249 00:13:14,240 --> 00:13:16,120 actually implement that in such a way. 250 00:13:17,800 --> 00:13:21,320 So what is the added value of a human in that that regard? 251 00:13:21,640 --> 00:13:23,960 Yeah, I think it's the the orchestration, right? 252 00:13:23,960 --> 00:13:26,600 Because this is this is treating it like a black box. 253 00:13:26,840 --> 00:13:28,800 We say on the edge, these are the requirements. 254 00:13:28,800 --> 00:13:32,520 We can have edge cases or we have all those edges actually 255 00:13:32,520 --> 00:13:36,240 also validated in integration tests, smoke tests, unit tests, 256 00:13:36,240 --> 00:13:39,400 all of that which we can read as another specification and be 257 00:13:39,400 --> 00:13:42,840 like, does this make sense? I know what happens in between. 258 00:13:42,880 --> 00:13:46,480 You can actually kind of blindly trust it if you make sure that 259 00:13:46,760 --> 00:13:49,440 that process is in order. And we've, and we've done this 260 00:13:49,440 --> 00:13:52,160 in the past. So if you look at object 261 00:13:52,160 --> 00:13:54,920 orientated programming where you have a clause where you say, 262 00:13:54,920 --> 00:13:58,520 hey, I threw in an apple in this parameter and I expect a banana 263 00:13:58,520 --> 00:14:01,520 out of it, then you don't care how that happens within the 264 00:14:01,520 --> 00:14:03,800 clause. Because if you do, then you're 265 00:14:03,800 --> 00:14:07,000 creating a test that actually understands the inner workings 266 00:14:07,000 --> 00:14:10,360 of the class, which you shouldn't do because then when 267 00:14:10,360 --> 00:14:12,800 you change the clause or you or you refactor it, then all your 268 00:14:12,800 --> 00:14:17,040 tests are broken. So in a way that is exactly what 269 00:14:17,040 --> 00:14:21,000 we're already learned to do from object orientated programming, 270 00:14:21,880 --> 00:14:24,600 but now we apply it more on a higher level, more on an 271 00:14:24,600 --> 00:14:28,920 application level. So having good end to end test, 272 00:14:28,920 --> 00:14:32,080 having good integration tests and having the ability what, 273 00:14:32,160 --> 00:14:36,120 what kind of what kind of patterns really need to work 274 00:14:36,120 --> 00:14:39,080 well before we can say, hey, this application is actually 275 00:14:39,160 --> 00:14:42,520 working as intended. That becomes way more important 276 00:14:42,520 --> 00:14:44,600 now than ever. Yeah, it's interesting because 277 00:14:46,040 --> 00:14:50,080 just due to working in a lot of teams, I know that the logic is 278 00:14:50,080 --> 00:14:52,440 abstracted away and you test around and you don't change it 279 00:14:52,440 --> 00:14:53,640 because otherwise your test fail. 280 00:14:54,240 --> 00:14:55,960 It's just comparing it to this situation. 281 00:14:55,960 --> 00:14:59,400 This situation is like on a next level scale, which is pretty 282 00:14:59,400 --> 00:15:02,120 cool to be honest, But it also brings opportunities. 283 00:15:02,120 --> 00:15:05,160 Like I've had recent conversations of technologies 284 00:15:05,440 --> 00:15:08,480 where we have quite heavy license fees in certain 285 00:15:08,480 --> 00:15:11,400 organizations with certain technologies and those companies 286 00:15:11,400 --> 00:15:14,920 might have quite a stranglehold on certain organizations, right. 287 00:15:14,920 --> 00:15:17,440 If you're all in on a certain technology and it's very hard to 288 00:15:17,440 --> 00:15:20,240 migrate away. And yeah, you're kind of, if the 289 00:15:20,240 --> 00:15:22,960 vendor then says, well, the license fees are up 20% this 290 00:15:22,960 --> 00:15:25,840 year, just you have to deal with it basically you can't easily 291 00:15:26,320 --> 00:15:29,800 migrate, but maybe now you can, which is quite interesting, 292 00:15:30,120 --> 00:15:32,720 except then the ownership becomes quite a challenge, I 293 00:15:32,760 --> 00:15:34,440 would say. Yeah. 294 00:15:34,440 --> 00:15:38,920 If you move away and build something on your own using AI, 295 00:15:39,200 --> 00:15:40,760 then you need to own that as well. 296 00:15:40,760 --> 00:15:43,920 It comes with responsibility of owning and hosting the the 297 00:15:44,160 --> 00:15:46,840 application, the security implications of that. 298 00:15:47,040 --> 00:15:50,600 So it is a little bit more than just saying, OK, let's build it 299 00:15:50,600 --> 00:15:52,640 ourselves. There is more to it. 300 00:15:54,040 --> 00:15:57,560 But if the license fee are high enough and you have a 301 00:15:57,680 --> 00:16:00,520 organization that can actually run these implications 302 00:16:00,520 --> 00:16:04,400 yourselves, then it becomes easier and easier to start doing 303 00:16:04,400 --> 00:16:06,480 that you. Have quite a business case on 304 00:16:06,480 --> 00:16:07,920 your hand? Yes, yeah, yeah. 305 00:16:08,400 --> 00:16:12,160 I, I hope that we get some, some good examples of where that is a 306 00:16:12,160 --> 00:16:14,720 success and then also kind of learning from how they do that 307 00:16:14,960 --> 00:16:17,560 because right now I have a lot of assumptions and I can't wait 308 00:16:17,560 --> 00:16:19,440 to test those and validate those assumptions. 309 00:16:19,440 --> 00:16:22,560 But they're still assumptions. Like we're kind of on the on the 310 00:16:22,560 --> 00:16:24,120 front end of this, which is quite cool. 311 00:16:25,240 --> 00:16:27,200 I know you're a fan of automation in general. 312 00:16:27,440 --> 00:16:30,320 And for me, this is like automation, the automation on 313 00:16:30,320 --> 00:16:32,960 the side of writing code. But if I look at the software 314 00:16:32,960 --> 00:16:35,480 development life cycle, anything from researching, planning, 315 00:16:35,480 --> 00:16:38,920 refining, actually building, reviewing, testing, running, 316 00:16:38,920 --> 00:16:42,040 deploying, documenting, for me that's kind of the whole life 317 00:16:42,040 --> 00:16:44,200 cycle. There are a lot of aspects with 318 00:16:44,200 --> 00:16:47,280 the genetic tooling that we can now play around with automation 319 00:16:48,000 --> 00:16:50,560 and it's a scary amount to be honest. 320 00:16:51,120 --> 00:16:53,360 You might be able to do a whole lot there. 321 00:16:53,880 --> 00:16:54,960 What have you done so far? What? 322 00:16:54,960 --> 00:16:56,920 What have you experimented with that you'd like to share? 323 00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:00,760 Oh yeah. So actually ACBIA has a platform 324 00:17:00,760 --> 00:17:03,600 which is called Cbas, and that's actually doing that. 325 00:17:03,600 --> 00:17:06,720 So it's brings a holistic view to the software development life 326 00:17:06,720 --> 00:17:08,839 cycle, which is quite a cool tool. 327 00:17:10,160 --> 00:17:15,440 So in essence, what it does, for instance, if you want to develop 328 00:17:15,440 --> 00:17:17,960 a new feature, usually it happens between two people 329 00:17:17,960 --> 00:17:20,079 having a conversation, maybe 3, maybe 4. 330 00:17:20,079 --> 00:17:21,680 Like we need to add this feature. 331 00:17:22,400 --> 00:17:26,599 What if you record that session that you have, usually on Teams, 332 00:17:26,960 --> 00:17:30,280 it will give you a transcribe. So how cool would it be if you 333 00:17:30,280 --> 00:17:35,760 can feed that transcription into a system and then extract all 334 00:17:35,760 --> 00:17:39,600 the requirements from that? And then from the requirements, 335 00:17:39,600 --> 00:17:41,920 you can actually validate that with the right people. 336 00:17:42,240 --> 00:17:46,120 Are these the requirements that we've set and then use that as a 337 00:17:46,200 --> 00:17:49,800 process to guide it towards a software development life cycle? 338 00:17:50,720 --> 00:17:54,120 Because when you have the requirements, you can, well, a 339 00:17:54,120 --> 00:17:56,720 human used to create user stories out of that. 340 00:17:57,560 --> 00:18:02,440 Well, you can use AI for that. So having the requirements, you 341 00:18:02,440 --> 00:18:05,560 can generate your user stories. When you have user stories, you 342 00:18:05,560 --> 00:18:07,880 need to plan that. So you can do Sprint planning. 343 00:18:08,360 --> 00:18:14,360 All that stuff can be automated. And to be honest, that's the 344 00:18:14,360 --> 00:18:17,520 most boring part of, of doing software development. 345 00:18:17,960 --> 00:18:21,680 So I really, I'm, I'm really pleased to see this development, 346 00:18:21,680 --> 00:18:25,800 especially in that area as well, that you can actually focus more 347 00:18:25,800 --> 00:18:29,200 on the creative side on having the discussion with each other. 348 00:18:29,480 --> 00:18:32,880 What does the application needs to do and how do we ensure that 349 00:18:32,880 --> 00:18:36,920 it works for our business instead of doing administrative 350 00:18:36,920 --> 00:18:40,040 tasks like creating stories and that kind of stuff or writing 351 00:18:40,040 --> 00:18:42,200 Confluence pages? So. 352 00:18:42,840 --> 00:18:46,040 That really excites me at least. Yeah, it's, it's funny, I 353 00:18:46,040 --> 00:18:49,560 actually had a conversation in this morning actually prior to 354 00:18:49,560 --> 00:18:52,240 our recording. And there I shared that I know 355 00:18:52,240 --> 00:18:55,360 at Veed, which is this online video editing browser tool, they 356 00:18:55,360 --> 00:18:57,160 do a lot with regards to customer interviews. 357 00:18:57,480 --> 00:18:59,680 And there they capture the transcript. 358 00:18:59,680 --> 00:19:02,240 It all goes on a drive. A lot of people within that 359 00:19:02,240 --> 00:19:04,640 team, all within product have to do 1 conversation like that 360 00:19:04,640 --> 00:19:07,880 weekly talking to end users. And they have this very rich 361 00:19:08,040 --> 00:19:11,120 database in the end of transcripts, which are all 362 00:19:11,120 --> 00:19:14,280 interviews and discovery talks. And there they look for 363 00:19:14,280 --> 00:19:17,480 commonalities through AI and they look for patterns of 364 00:19:17,480 --> 00:19:20,040 features or problems or symptoms that they want to solve in their 365 00:19:20,040 --> 00:19:21,920 tooling. And I felt like that 366 00:19:21,920 --> 00:19:23,760 conversation that I had this morning was about developer 367 00:19:23,760 --> 00:19:26,520 experience. I am now in a position where I 368 00:19:26,520 --> 00:19:28,520 can do something similar. And I really want to experiment 369 00:19:28,520 --> 00:19:30,720 with that. But this is very interesting as 370 00:19:30,720 --> 00:19:32,320 well. When you're talking to 371 00:19:32,360 --> 00:19:34,640 stakeholders or when you're aligning with your team, when 372 00:19:34,640 --> 00:19:37,960 you're doing refinement. I, I pride myself in being able 373 00:19:37,960 --> 00:19:39,920 to type fast. But yeah, I'm kind of out of it. 374 00:19:40,120 --> 00:19:41,880 We have to have a lot of sessions, a lot of back and 375 00:19:41,880 --> 00:19:45,520 forth, a lot of, didn't we actually discuss this already or 376 00:19:45,520 --> 00:19:48,600 what was said again. And yeah, if you can capture all 377 00:19:48,600 --> 00:19:51,320 of that in transcript, it just makes sense that we can use that 378 00:19:51,320 --> 00:19:55,120 and then leverage that and go even beyond with regards to kind 379 00:19:55,120 --> 00:19:57,440 of refining and figuring out what to do. 380 00:19:57,840 --> 00:20:00,960 Yeah, not only that. So I don't know if you ever 381 00:20:00,960 --> 00:20:04,120 looked at the transcription and then looked at the meeting 382 00:20:04,880 --> 00:20:08,200 meeting report that's getting generated by an AI tool. 383 00:20:08,240 --> 00:20:09,480 Yeah, I want that as well. It's. 384 00:20:09,520 --> 00:20:15,640 It fills in the blanks as well. So it's, I always see a large 385 00:20:15,640 --> 00:20:19,760 language model as a, a, a child that learned a lot of things 386 00:20:20,080 --> 00:20:23,440 along his way. And now you, you could think 387 00:20:23,440 --> 00:20:27,240 about it as a human being, a mind of a human being. 388 00:20:27,240 --> 00:20:30,240 But it's primed. Well, we, we have control over 389 00:20:30,240 --> 00:20:34,360 how the mind was primed. So it has a way of thinking on 390 00:20:34,360 --> 00:20:37,320 its own a little bit based on the knowledge that it was 391 00:20:37,320 --> 00:20:41,360 trained on. So reading the transcription and 392 00:20:41,360 --> 00:20:45,640 then writing a meeting report out of that, it fills in blanks 393 00:20:45,640 --> 00:20:49,000 based on assumptions and those assumptions come from the way 394 00:20:49,000 --> 00:20:52,080 how it was trained. So if you do that with all the 395 00:20:52,080 --> 00:20:54,520 meeting reports automatically it fills in the blanks. 396 00:20:54,520 --> 00:20:59,000 And then if you as a team review that that meeting report, you 397 00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:02,880 will actually see I didn't look looked at it from that angle. 398 00:21:03,720 --> 00:21:07,920 And especially when you generate requirements out of that, then 399 00:21:07,920 --> 00:21:12,240 it is an assumption of the model that you meant at the time when 400 00:21:12,240 --> 00:21:14,160 you in the context that you were discussing it. 401 00:21:15,120 --> 00:21:21,800 So either that is spot on or it's, yeah, maybe we need to add 402 00:21:21,800 --> 00:21:24,560 another requirement based on this answer. 403 00:21:24,560 --> 00:21:28,440 So it also helps you develop and strengthen the requirements on 404 00:21:28,440 --> 00:21:32,000 its own as well, which I found very interesting as well. 405 00:21:32,200 --> 00:21:34,160 That is also a skill that people have. 406 00:21:34,160 --> 00:21:36,400 I've seen when people are having a dialogue. 407 00:21:36,440 --> 00:21:39,320 I'm I'm new in an organization right now started in January. 408 00:21:39,720 --> 00:21:43,160 People are having a talk and I ask a question because they're 409 00:21:43,160 --> 00:21:45,880 like not addressing this part and I'm not sure if they know, 410 00:21:46,240 --> 00:21:47,600 but it needs to be explicit, right? 411 00:21:47,600 --> 00:21:50,640 Then I can have an equal level of dialogue, which is then 412 00:21:50,640 --> 00:21:54,120 interesting because that's what one of the people used as a 413 00:21:54,120 --> 00:21:55,840 word. When they actually answered me, 414 00:21:55,840 --> 00:21:58,320 they were like, yeah, we are working on the dis implicit 415 00:21:58,320 --> 00:22:00,560 knowledge that you don't have, so let's make it explicit. 416 00:22:00,920 --> 00:22:03,760 I feel like that's a really cool skill to have that you figure 417 00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:07,280 out what this conversation is, where there are gaps, and then 418 00:22:07,280 --> 00:22:08,960 make those explicit. Those can be right. 419 00:22:09,280 --> 00:22:11,160 Well, they can be wrong, but if they're wrong, we have to change 420 00:22:11,160 --> 00:22:13,040 them. Yeah, indeed, I have a great 421 00:22:13,040 --> 00:22:16,200 example of that. What happens today when I was in 422 00:22:16,200 --> 00:22:22,400 a refinement session. So the the the obvious thing 423 00:22:22,400 --> 00:22:25,200 happened, we were working on too many epics at the same time. 424 00:22:25,200 --> 00:22:28,800 So and and we agreed upon not doing 3 epics at the same time a 425 00:22:28,800 --> 00:22:30,680 long, long time ago. But somewhere it's. 426 00:22:31,200 --> 00:22:34,280 When it always happens. It always happens every every 427 00:22:34,280 --> 00:22:36,000 now and then. You need to remind yourself from 428 00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:39,000 that. So we sat down with the team and 429 00:22:39,000 --> 00:22:43,480 we said, look, the the column of the epics already has a maximum 430 00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:45,440 of three and if you have 4, it turns rat. 431 00:22:45,640 --> 00:22:49,160 So it's just a matter of looking at that board and seeing, hey, 432 00:22:49,160 --> 00:22:50,880 it's rat. We need to make a choice here 433 00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:55,040 which one will go out. And then you get an interesting 434 00:22:55,040 --> 00:22:58,920 discussion because you can ask the product owner which one is 435 00:22:59,040 --> 00:23:02,200 important because we direct the 4th one in on your request. 436 00:23:02,520 --> 00:23:07,520 Which one of the other has to go has to go by making it explicit, 437 00:23:07,760 --> 00:23:13,400 you sync the whole team, you recalibrate all the priorities 438 00:23:13,400 --> 00:23:18,240 because if somebody is sick that day or whatever, he doesn't get 439 00:23:18,240 --> 00:23:20,160 that context. But if the epic is actually 440 00:23:20,160 --> 00:23:24,200 moved into an on hold status or all the the stories got removed 441 00:23:24,200 --> 00:23:28,120 from the Sprint because any new important thing was added, then 442 00:23:28,120 --> 00:23:29,800 he will have. Questions, of course. 443 00:23:29,920 --> 00:23:32,880 If you leave it in, he will come back to work and he will start 444 00:23:32,880 --> 00:23:35,360 continue working on other things, on the things that he 445 00:23:35,360 --> 00:23:36,400 was working on. Yeah. 446 00:23:36,760 --> 00:23:42,000 So by making it this explicit, you actually sync with the team 447 00:23:42,000 --> 00:23:44,800 a lot better as well. Yeah, I feel like it's, it's 448 00:23:44,920 --> 00:23:47,560 quite a mature approach. Yeah, in some teams I've been 449 00:23:47,560 --> 00:23:50,760 in, when something new pops up, it's just added work and nothing 450 00:23:50,760 --> 00:23:52,040 goes. And I'm like, well, that's not 451 00:23:52,040 --> 00:23:57,120 really healthy. Well, especially well as long as 452 00:23:57,120 --> 00:24:00,000 there is no downside at the end of the Sprint that you did not 453 00:24:00,000 --> 00:24:02,200 complete all the work. If you don't have that 454 00:24:02,200 --> 00:24:05,560 consequence in there, then it's easy to accept, okay, we will do 455 00:24:05,560 --> 00:24:07,680 that and we're all adults, right? 456 00:24:07,680 --> 00:24:11,680 So we all understood if you add this to the Sprint, then we 457 00:24:11,680 --> 00:24:14,800 cannot deliver that. If you're in A-Team that works 458 00:24:14,800 --> 00:24:17,400 that way and you have a understanding product owner that 459 00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:21,000 also sees it that way and the share the stakeholders above 460 00:24:21,000 --> 00:24:23,240 that also understand that, then there's no problem. 461 00:24:23,720 --> 00:24:27,240 But if you look at why Agile was created, it's not for that. 462 00:24:27,720 --> 00:24:30,800 It's for having control over the philosophy and making sure that 463 00:24:30,800 --> 00:24:34,320 you have all those those insights so that you can give a 464 00:24:34,320 --> 00:24:36,560 reliable planning towards the business. 465 00:24:36,560 --> 00:24:39,960 When will this feature ship? And that will not never happen 466 00:24:39,960 --> 00:24:43,160 if you work that way. So it's a control thing. 467 00:24:43,240 --> 00:24:45,240 That's how you see it. And I think that's quite 468 00:24:45,240 --> 00:24:48,320 interesting. Like I, I like working in agile 469 00:24:48,320 --> 00:24:50,600 teams, but I've never viewed it as a control thing. 470 00:24:50,600 --> 00:24:53,640 Some people go above and beyond with regards to when is what 471 00:24:53,640 --> 00:24:56,040 done and how much is story point in days. 472 00:24:56,040 --> 00:24:58,160 And I'm like, it really defeats the purpose. 473 00:24:58,160 --> 00:25:00,720 In essence, when I was responsible for product, I kind 474 00:25:00,720 --> 00:25:04,280 of got, I took ownership of that and I was like, I want to work 475 00:25:04,280 --> 00:25:07,160 with story points and teams were like, well, do our people asking 476 00:25:07,160 --> 00:25:09,280 for deadlines and plans. I said no, we can throw away the 477 00:25:09,280 --> 00:25:10,600 story points in the end, I don't care. 478 00:25:10,840 --> 00:25:13,440 I want to know that when someone says an 8 and someone says a 479 00:25:13,440 --> 00:25:14,920 three, I want that dialogue to happen. 480 00:25:15,000 --> 00:25:16,240 Yeah, I think that's very interesting. 481 00:25:16,400 --> 00:25:18,240 That's where the value is, yeah, for me. 482 00:25:18,240 --> 00:25:20,680 Do we have the same understanding of what this 483 00:25:20,680 --> 00:25:23,120 means? If you say 8 and I say 3, 484 00:25:23,120 --> 00:25:25,280 clearly there is something wrong. 485 00:25:25,280 --> 00:25:27,720 You're thinking of things that should be in there and I'm just 486 00:25:27,720 --> 00:25:30,160 neglecting the thing, the things that you're thinking of 487 00:25:30,640 --> 00:25:32,360 potentially. So that's what I wanted. 488 00:25:32,480 --> 00:25:35,520 And then I said then we don't even need to capture the stories 489 00:25:35,720 --> 00:25:37,840 in the end. I do know that if we have a 490 00:25:37,840 --> 00:25:41,160 magnitude of eights, I'm only going to get one or two of them 491 00:25:41,160 --> 00:25:42,400 that are actually going to be finished. 492 00:25:42,400 --> 00:25:45,480 So it will help us from a planning perspective, but if 493 00:25:45,480 --> 00:25:47,720 it's in the way for you, I don't need that. 494 00:25:47,720 --> 00:25:49,960 I can read the story and figure out kind of how big it is 495 00:25:49,960 --> 00:25:52,600 myself. Technical background helps, but 496 00:25:52,600 --> 00:25:54,360 I want that dialogue to happen. That's the only reason. 497 00:25:54,680 --> 00:25:57,000 And then teams were like, oh, no problem. 498 00:25:57,160 --> 00:25:59,880 This I can get on board with because they see the value 499 00:25:59,880 --> 00:26:01,160 there. Yeah, definitely. 500 00:26:01,680 --> 00:26:06,880 So I from an agile perspective, I'm yes, I'm kind of agreeing 501 00:26:06,880 --> 00:26:10,560 that agile is needed in this world to, to be a little bit 502 00:26:10,560 --> 00:26:14,720 successful in developing Solver. But on the other hand, having 503 00:26:14,720 --> 00:26:17,680 more trust in the group of people that are actually 504 00:26:17,680 --> 00:26:23,400 developing also helps. And agile is, for my experience, 505 00:26:23,400 --> 00:26:28,240 what I've seen is it's not really helping the trust there, 506 00:26:28,280 --> 00:26:31,680 I would say because like you mentioned, if you do story, 507 00:26:31,760 --> 00:26:35,440 story points, philosophies and over X amount of sprints and 508 00:26:35,440 --> 00:26:40,320 then we know this is an T-shirt size L, which is roughly X 509 00:26:40,320 --> 00:26:43,280 amount of velocity, then we can ship this feature. 510 00:26:43,280 --> 00:26:47,240 If it's used that way, then you're neglecting the fact that 511 00:26:47,240 --> 00:26:49,680 there is technical depth, that there are other things that can 512 00:26:49,680 --> 00:26:52,040 pop up. And that's why deadlines are 513 00:26:52,320 --> 00:26:55,480 usually not made. And if they're made, we did 514 00:26:55,480 --> 00:26:59,360 shortcuts adding on to the technical depth, which is no 515 00:26:59,360 --> 00:27:02,000 time for because the next big thing is already scheduled, of 516 00:27:02,000 --> 00:27:03,480 course. Is on the finish line. 517 00:27:03,640 --> 00:27:07,400 Yes, well, if you, well, if you turn it around and make the 518 00:27:07,920 --> 00:27:11,520 developers responsible for the the road map as well and have to 519 00:27:11,520 --> 00:27:15,160 dive dialogue with the developers itself, they clearly 520 00:27:15,160 --> 00:27:18,360 understand what's needed to deliver those features by 521 00:27:18,360 --> 00:27:22,520 removing all the overhead of doing X amount of meetings and 522 00:27:22,520 --> 00:27:26,000 scrum meetings etcetera, you can also develop stuff in that area 523 00:27:26,120 --> 00:27:30,680 in that time. So I'm a bit in between, like 524 00:27:30,920 --> 00:27:33,720 where is the balance? But the problem with the 525 00:27:33,720 --> 00:27:37,240 approach of the trust is without doing Scrum is, is that you need 526 00:27:37,240 --> 00:27:41,040 a hell of a team that is high quality and can trust each other 527 00:27:41,040 --> 00:27:42,960 completely. And if you have that. 528 00:27:43,520 --> 00:27:45,000 Everything's fine. Everything is fine. 529 00:27:45,080 --> 00:27:47,960 It's like the A-Team. Yeah, like 10X developers, 530 00:27:47,960 --> 00:27:49,680 right. The team of 10X developers, you 531 00:27:49,680 --> 00:27:52,640 do, you just say these are the the the things that we need to 532 00:27:53,000 --> 00:27:55,480 deliver this year. And they will say, OK, let's do 533 00:27:55,480 --> 00:27:58,480 this feature before that feature because this has a lot of 534 00:27:58,920 --> 00:28:01,800 building blocks that the other feature can help for. 535 00:28:01,800 --> 00:28:04,280 And if we do it the other way around, they are specific to 536 00:28:04,280 --> 00:28:07,600 this feature and we cannot reuse it for that, for instance. 537 00:28:07,880 --> 00:28:10,520 That's the team I want to work in and operate in. 538 00:28:10,600 --> 00:28:13,240 And I feel like the people that really want to kind of manage 539 00:28:13,240 --> 00:28:15,760 deadlines and manage expectations in that way, maybe 540 00:28:15,760 --> 00:28:19,200 they've been burned a little bit too much in the past because 541 00:28:19,200 --> 00:28:21,520 developer state, they do hold a lot of power, right? 542 00:28:21,520 --> 00:28:24,280 If I want to work with a specific agentic tool and it's 543 00:28:24,280 --> 00:28:26,440 not in the org, some people might be like, well, I'll just 544 00:28:26,440 --> 00:28:29,400 do that personally, or I might leave the organization. 545 00:28:29,400 --> 00:28:32,040 Then you lose a really good person because you didn't enable 546 00:28:32,040 --> 00:28:35,040 them to do what they want to. It's a very interesting power 547 00:28:35,040 --> 00:28:37,440 dynamic. Oh, it's like I mentioned in the 548 00:28:37,440 --> 00:28:40,160 beginning, right? You need to go to work enjoying 549 00:28:40,160 --> 00:28:42,960 your time to be there. And if you're being, you're 550 00:28:42,960 --> 00:28:46,040 working in an organization that doesn't allow you to do that, at 551 00:28:46,040 --> 00:28:48,200 one point they will leave. Yeah, Yeah. 552 00:28:48,200 --> 00:28:49,760 I think that's in the end it's fair, right? 553 00:28:49,760 --> 00:28:51,160 Because that's also the relationship. 554 00:28:51,520 --> 00:28:55,520 If I can be my best at work and I go Sprint after Sprint in no, 555 00:28:55,520 --> 00:28:58,520 in no other industry do we go Sprint after Sprint after 556 00:28:58,520 --> 00:29:00,240 Sprint. Like 50 sprints back-to-back. 557 00:29:00,640 --> 00:29:03,120 If I then don't enjoy what I'm doing and I'm still doing 50 558 00:29:03,120 --> 00:29:05,360 sprints back-to-back, you're going to get burned out quite 559 00:29:05,360 --> 00:29:07,520 quickly. And I've seen different 560 00:29:07,520 --> 00:29:09,040 approaches on how you can do this right. 561 00:29:09,040 --> 00:29:11,200 You do X amount of feature sprints and then you do 1 562 00:29:11,200 --> 00:29:12,680 technical depth Sprint for instance. 563 00:29:12,680 --> 00:29:15,960 So there are a lot of ways on how you can how you can deal 564 00:29:15,960 --> 00:29:17,920 with this. But I think having the dialogue 565 00:29:17,920 --> 00:29:22,360 with your developers is the most important to to to solve this 566 00:29:22,360 --> 00:29:25,000 problem. Now hopefully AI will help us 567 00:29:25,000 --> 00:29:27,160 with solving all that technical depth. 568 00:29:28,800 --> 00:29:31,720 Yeah, let's see, let's. See, I want to get back into 569 00:29:31,720 --> 00:29:35,600 that because when I really worked well with the genetic 570 00:29:35,600 --> 00:29:37,920 tooling was when I focused on having really good 571 00:29:37,920 --> 00:29:39,880 specifications. And those really good 572 00:29:39,880 --> 00:29:43,320 specifications came down from really good distilled user 573 00:29:43,320 --> 00:29:45,840 requirements. A vision of where we want to go, 574 00:29:46,000 --> 00:29:49,120 what we're going to do in order that makes sense, deliver value 575 00:29:49,120 --> 00:29:51,680 as fast as possible, then test assumptions and build on top of 576 00:29:51,680 --> 00:29:54,120 that rather than going for a moon shot. 577 00:29:54,120 --> 00:29:57,920 In the end, I just had a lot of specs and I could run them in 578 00:29:57,920 --> 00:29:59,720 parallel and I built features that way. 579 00:29:59,920 --> 00:30:02,960 And I loved it to be honest. And then the outcomes of that, I 580 00:30:02,960 --> 00:30:04,840 reviewed it. I reviewed it again with the 581 00:30:04,840 --> 00:30:07,480 agent fresh context and then put up a pool request and people 582 00:30:07,480 --> 00:30:09,640 reviewed it. And from those review marks, I 583 00:30:09,640 --> 00:30:12,000 made skills to even do better pool requests. 584 00:30:12,240 --> 00:30:14,840 That whole life cycle was a lot of fun. 585 00:30:15,360 --> 00:30:17,800 And if you're talking about going from a transcript from 586 00:30:17,800 --> 00:30:21,360 conversations with the business or from within the team and then 587 00:30:21,360 --> 00:30:24,840 creating user stories, an additional or and a step even 588 00:30:24,840 --> 00:30:28,360 beyond that would be to create the specifications for then an 589 00:30:28,360 --> 00:30:30,200 agent to pick that up. Yeah. 590 00:30:30,200 --> 00:30:36,080 So that's reality already within Cbas that is already being done. 591 00:30:36,880 --> 00:30:41,640 So I just hinted on the first area of of the solution, but it 592 00:30:41,640 --> 00:30:45,200 goes all the way of running the application into production and 593 00:30:46,280 --> 00:30:49,480 writing the code can be done based on the specification. 594 00:30:49,480 --> 00:30:51,920 Like I mentioned, you get the requirements, you get the story, 595 00:30:51,920 --> 00:30:56,720 so you get the smaller tasks that need needed to be executed. 596 00:30:57,080 --> 00:30:59,720 Although an agent would go faster through the sprints and 597 00:30:59,720 --> 00:31:03,400 the stories as a as a human would be, but still the same 598 00:31:03,400 --> 00:31:07,240 steps are being taken. And from that, you can generate 599 00:31:07,240 --> 00:31:10,960 a very rich spec that you can feed into these, these 600 00:31:10,960 --> 00:31:13,800 development tools to actually build the application as well. 601 00:31:16,120 --> 00:31:19,880 And so, so just curious, because you mentioned you did somewhat 602 00:31:19,880 --> 00:31:24,240 similar for yourself. How did you share that with the 603 00:31:24,240 --> 00:31:27,240 team that you were working on? Because usually what I see is, 604 00:31:27,240 --> 00:31:30,080 is that yes, developers are experimenting with AI. 605 00:31:30,080 --> 00:31:35,640 They're doing what is cool and, but it's very local orientated. 606 00:31:35,640 --> 00:31:38,160 And if you're lucky, they're sharing it with the development 607 00:31:38,160 --> 00:31:42,480 team that they're working with, like help your your neighborly 608 00:31:42,680 --> 00:31:47,320 developer, but across that the team, there are multiple 609 00:31:47,320 --> 00:31:48,800 development teams in organizations. 610 00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:52,720 So how do you scale that up? That is an interesting. 611 00:31:52,720 --> 00:31:54,080 This is the. Challenge I'm trying to solve. 612 00:31:54,080 --> 00:31:56,960 Actually it's a new assignment, but back when I was doing hands 613 00:31:56,960 --> 00:32:01,320 on that was at a startup. So very much I came in to do 614 00:32:01,320 --> 00:32:04,200 kind of a one man army assignment and I got to do that. 615 00:32:04,760 --> 00:32:08,240 I don't think we ever we, we like to share knowledge with 616 00:32:08,240 --> 00:32:12,360 regards to our IDE usage or how we manage kind of on the 617 00:32:12,360 --> 00:32:14,880 keyboard versus turn men all get commands and stuff like that. 618 00:32:15,320 --> 00:32:16,720 But it was never something that we shared. 619 00:32:16,920 --> 00:32:19,640 It's still very much personal productivity and I feel like 620 00:32:19,640 --> 00:32:23,760 this is again similar to personal productivity, except 621 00:32:23,760 --> 00:32:26,280 there is a lot more benefits in sharing that, right? 622 00:32:26,280 --> 00:32:29,160 If I share with you that if I do command shift Y, my terminal 623 00:32:29,160 --> 00:32:32,560 opens, it's not as beneficial to you as it is to me because 624 00:32:32,560 --> 00:32:34,680 that's my heart. That's like finger muscle 625 00:32:34,680 --> 00:32:36,160 memory. That works for you. 626 00:32:36,200 --> 00:32:38,600 That works for me. But if I share with you that 627 00:32:38,880 --> 00:32:41,200 actually the value that I've seen in this life cycle, for me 628 00:32:41,200 --> 00:32:44,560 it was very much in how well I do the specification. 629 00:32:44,840 --> 00:32:47,080 And I would actually go through the specification and they would 630 00:32:47,080 --> 00:32:49,560 ask the agent to change things and I would review it again 631 00:32:49,880 --> 00:32:52,880 until I really thought that if all of this is good, then I'm 632 00:32:52,880 --> 00:32:55,320 good. Then I could just execute it and 633 00:32:55,320 --> 00:32:57,520 work on the next specification. I was like working out 634 00:32:57,520 --> 00:33:00,680 specifications back-to-back. That's how I did it in the end. 635 00:33:01,040 --> 00:33:03,080 And I don't know if that's going to scale to a certain point. 636 00:33:03,080 --> 00:33:05,840 I feel like it's going to be interesting to try and make that 637 00:33:05,840 --> 00:33:08,960 scale to also feel to also figure out where there is then 638 00:33:08,960 --> 00:33:12,480 code based drift versus what you have captured in specifications. 639 00:33:13,000 --> 00:33:16,200 But I do feel like we will solve those newer engineering 640 00:33:16,200 --> 00:33:17,920 problems. I know we can fly. 641 00:33:18,360 --> 00:33:22,640 Yeah. So relating to the the personal, 642 00:33:25,200 --> 00:33:26,960 how do you call it, productivity gains? 643 00:33:27,160 --> 00:33:31,840 So in the assignment that I currently working in, I also 644 00:33:31,840 --> 00:33:34,400 created an agent, but I actually stored it in the git repo. 645 00:33:34,800 --> 00:33:38,080 I'm using Copilot there. So if you use the dot GitHub 646 00:33:38,080 --> 00:33:40,840 folder slash agent, you can actually store the agent there 647 00:33:41,400 --> 00:33:43,880 and you can actually use that on your code base. 648 00:33:44,360 --> 00:33:48,000 And what this agent particularly did was it had very specific 649 00:33:48,000 --> 00:33:52,720 instructions to, when you ask it to update the documentation, it 650 00:33:52,720 --> 00:33:56,640 will actually scan the, the, the code base that that it was 651 00:33:56,640 --> 00:34:00,480 living in and actually had some very specific instructions on 652 00:34:00,480 --> 00:34:03,680 how to update the documentation. So you can just change your code 653 00:34:03,680 --> 00:34:06,680 base and then ask it to hey, update my documentation. 654 00:34:06,680 --> 00:34:09,400 And then all the documentation pages were reflecting based on 655 00:34:09,679 --> 00:34:12,920 the changes that you did. Having that checked into the 656 00:34:12,920 --> 00:34:16,480 repository actually helped the whole team to actually reuse 657 00:34:16,480 --> 00:34:20,080 that agent as well. But beyond that, how to scale 658 00:34:20,080 --> 00:34:23,280 that across organizations, that becomes a a bit more 659 00:34:23,280 --> 00:34:25,560 challenging. And that's what I really liked 660 00:34:25,560 --> 00:34:28,960 about the a solution that we had it it's, it's, it's kind of 661 00:34:29,040 --> 00:34:33,679 forces you in a workflow kind of working, which is more 662 00:34:33,679 --> 00:34:37,760 organizational driven. It's a no code solution where 663 00:34:37,760 --> 00:34:41,520 you actually work with normal interaction with, with human 664 00:34:41,520 --> 00:34:45,040 language and you, you change specs and it gives out specs. 665 00:34:45,760 --> 00:34:50,159 But regardless of what project you're using, the, the, the base 666 00:34:50,159 --> 00:34:52,800 instructions, the system prompts are all the same for all the 667 00:34:52,800 --> 00:34:54,440 teams. So if you change something 668 00:34:54,440 --> 00:34:57,000 there, it applies to all the teams from a scalability 669 00:34:57,000 --> 00:34:58,960 perspective. I found that very interesting 670 00:34:58,960 --> 00:35:02,920 and I'm curious how that will scale in larger organizations as 671 00:35:02,920 --> 00:35:03,720 well. Yeah. 672 00:35:04,160 --> 00:35:08,440 I've seen a conversation on, OK, are we going a multitude of 673 00:35:08,440 --> 00:35:12,240 agents or are we going with one general purpose agent and then a 674 00:35:12,240 --> 00:35:14,040 multitude of skills that it can apply. 675 00:35:14,520 --> 00:35:16,480 And I think that conversation is still ongoing. 676 00:35:16,480 --> 00:35:19,640 But whatever it is, I feel like offering, if you're talking 677 00:35:19,640 --> 00:35:22,000 about multiple teams, an organization with 1000 678 00:35:22,000 --> 00:35:26,560 engineers, so hundreds of engineering teams having 679 00:35:26,560 --> 00:35:29,200 something central that is kind of a baseline template with some 680 00:35:29,200 --> 00:35:32,320 general purpose things and some very specific things, I think is 681 00:35:32,320 --> 00:35:35,600 always valuable. And then if people take that and 682 00:35:35,600 --> 00:35:38,000 they say, well, our conventions are XY and Z and we make 683 00:35:38,000 --> 00:35:41,800 something very specific for our repository of use case, I think 684 00:35:41,800 --> 00:35:44,320 that's phenomenal. I feel like that's the way it's 685 00:35:44,320 --> 00:35:47,280 heading. And I I don't know if I see any 686 00:35:47,280 --> 00:35:50,960 other alternatives other than kind of teams managing it 687 00:35:50,960 --> 00:35:54,360 themselves. I don't think it's sustainable 688 00:35:54,800 --> 00:35:59,080 to let teams manage themselves because especially in bigger 689 00:35:59,080 --> 00:36:02,640 organizations, you have certain quality aspects that need to be 690 00:36:02,640 --> 00:36:06,160 met. Some, to be honest, some teams 691 00:36:06,160 --> 00:36:12,800 find it's not needed to scan, for instance, with Sonar Cube or 692 00:36:13,280 --> 00:36:16,160 Sneak or whatever kind of tool you have to do security 693 00:36:16,160 --> 00:36:19,840 scanning. And they found that one example 694 00:36:19,840 --> 00:36:23,480 that I used to have. From my experience, if you use 695 00:36:23,480 --> 00:36:27,320 Sonar Cube to scan your code base and it says OK, this is not 696 00:36:27,360 --> 00:36:33,160 a Safeway of using it, then the first developer response that 697 00:36:33,160 --> 00:36:38,520 I've tended to see was yeah, but it cannot do any harm in this 698 00:36:38,520 --> 00:36:40,560 particular situation. Not in this case. 699 00:36:40,760 --> 00:36:44,240 Not in this case. OK, so there is a security 700 00:36:44,240 --> 00:36:47,680 hotspot now in this dashboard, it says 1, OK. 701 00:36:47,720 --> 00:36:50,120 And then the next thing pops up and then it says 2. 702 00:36:50,600 --> 00:36:53,520 And then if you have a good secure security practice, you 703 00:36:53,520 --> 00:36:55,960 would actually review those hotspots. 704 00:36:55,960 --> 00:36:59,920 And then you would say, OK, it's safe to use here because of this 705 00:36:59,920 --> 00:37:01,520 reason. You do an annotation there. 706 00:37:02,320 --> 00:37:07,480 But if you review that regularly, or at least in a 707 00:37:07,880 --> 00:37:10,840 fixed cadence, could be 6 months, could be 3 months, could 708 00:37:10,840 --> 00:37:14,840 be once a year, but at least once a year, worst case 709 00:37:14,840 --> 00:37:18,360 scenario, I would say you would review this list and see, Oh 710 00:37:18,360 --> 00:37:20,240 yeah. Is it still OK to use this? 711 00:37:20,560 --> 00:37:23,520 And you're spending with 2-3 people like 5 minutes debating. 712 00:37:23,520 --> 00:37:25,040 Oh, yeah. What was this about? 713 00:37:25,040 --> 00:37:27,280 Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's still still valid. 714 00:37:27,880 --> 00:37:31,040 Still valid. So there was 1515 minutes. 715 00:37:32,240 --> 00:37:35,440 So. But the fix for that problem was 716 00:37:35,440 --> 00:37:39,800 probably like 2 minutes. Now if you do this on a regular 717 00:37:39,800 --> 00:37:43,560 basis, these reviews, then you're spending 5 minutes every 718 00:37:43,560 --> 00:37:47,640 time discussing it will cost you a lot of time in the end. 719 00:37:47,640 --> 00:37:52,120 And that is just one issue. So I'm tend to be more of just 720 00:37:52,120 --> 00:37:55,600 use those tools, fix the fix the problems right away. 721 00:37:55,600 --> 00:37:59,240 If it's a fix of one minute, yeah, don't be that lazy that 722 00:37:59,240 --> 00:38:01,720 you don't want to do those kind of fixes so. 723 00:38:02,720 --> 00:38:06,120 The problems is they, they compound in a very interesting 724 00:38:06,120 --> 00:38:07,880 way, right? You can say, well, in this 725 00:38:07,880 --> 00:38:11,080 linear way that we have right now, this, this moment in time, 726 00:38:11,560 --> 00:38:15,400 it's fine, but things compound, knowledge gets lost, right? 727 00:38:15,400 --> 00:38:20,280 I, I really try and put as much as I can in my commits, in my 728 00:38:20,280 --> 00:38:22,560 pull requests, in my descriptions, because that's for 729 00:38:22,560 --> 00:38:24,960 future me and for future colleagues that I will never get 730 00:38:24,960 --> 00:38:26,720 to meet. In the end, that's as much 731 00:38:26,720 --> 00:38:29,680 context as I can do right now for the future. 732 00:38:30,160 --> 00:38:32,120 And if you don't do that, then things will compound. 733 00:38:32,120 --> 00:38:33,520 We're not necessarily building a system. 734 00:38:33,520 --> 00:38:37,160 Sometimes it's like an Organism and problems can just emerge 735 00:38:37,360 --> 00:38:40,280 because we have a few hotspots and all of a sudden they form a 736 00:38:40,280 --> 00:38:42,040 triangle and they mess with your system. 737 00:38:42,080 --> 00:38:44,760 Well, too bad, that's just how it goes. 738 00:38:44,880 --> 00:38:47,360 Definitely. So to come back to the point, so 739 00:38:48,160 --> 00:38:51,920 do you want to have your developers responsible for 740 00:38:51,920 --> 00:38:56,960 arranging all those work flows, some teams, maybe other teams, 741 00:38:57,400 --> 00:39:01,480 maybe not. So from that perspective, you 742 00:39:01,480 --> 00:39:04,040 probably for the bigger organizations, you do want to 743 00:39:04,040 --> 00:39:06,800 have some control, some governance over how your 744 00:39:06,800 --> 00:39:10,880 developers are are working. And again, not as a department 745 00:39:10,880 --> 00:39:14,880 as no, but how can we actually use this technology to to help 746 00:39:14,880 --> 00:39:19,080 you excel in your business in a safe and secure manner. 747 00:39:19,080 --> 00:39:22,600 Also from the cases that you didn't thought off of or don't 748 00:39:22,600 --> 00:39:26,120 have experience with. I feel like we are in a unique 749 00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:29,840 point in time where people have an opinion on people's personal 750 00:39:29,840 --> 00:39:31,760 productivity when it comes to software engineers. 751 00:39:32,120 --> 00:39:35,000 Before software engineers are scarce, they are highly 752 00:39:35,000 --> 00:39:38,280 intellectual people, they have quite a valuable skill set and 753 00:39:38,280 --> 00:39:40,720 there's no alternative. Now there is an alternative. 754 00:39:40,720 --> 00:39:43,920 It is the first I think ever to disagree that there is an 755 00:39:43,920 --> 00:39:47,280 alternative. So people have opinions and I 756 00:39:47,280 --> 00:39:49,560 think it's very interesting because some people are not 757 00:39:49,560 --> 00:39:51,360 budging. They're like, this is a hype, 758 00:39:51,480 --> 00:39:52,920 this is a bubble, it's going to fade. 759 00:39:53,320 --> 00:39:56,800 Some people are kind of in the middle or they feel that this is 760 00:39:56,800 --> 00:39:58,320 definitely something they need to jump on. 761 00:39:58,320 --> 00:40:00,400 But there may be hesitant, there's maybe a lack of 762 00:40:00,400 --> 00:40:01,960 knowledge. They may, they might not get as 763 00:40:01,960 --> 00:40:04,800 much room working. And then you have the the 764 00:40:04,800 --> 00:40:07,880 complete opposite. That is like all in that says if 765 00:40:07,880 --> 00:40:11,120 you do not use this, then you will become obsolete. 766 00:40:11,120 --> 00:40:13,440 There is no point in writing by hand anymore. 767 00:40:13,920 --> 00:40:17,480 Which I think is so fascinating. Never before have we had this. 768 00:40:18,160 --> 00:40:21,560 And then if that side wins, if the latter side wins, that says 769 00:40:21,560 --> 00:40:23,680 you have to do this, you cannot write by hand anymore. 770 00:40:24,000 --> 00:40:25,280 Then that. That might just be an 771 00:40:25,280 --> 00:40:28,440 organizational policy where the fact that you're writing by 772 00:40:28,440 --> 00:40:31,120 hand, even though you enjoy that, you should not do that in 773 00:40:31,120 --> 00:40:32,960 the organization anymore. You should do that in hobby 774 00:40:32,960 --> 00:40:35,400 projects, get your fulfilment from that. 775 00:40:35,400 --> 00:40:39,320 But this is a business and this is a very interesting trend. 776 00:40:39,640 --> 00:40:41,920 Yeah. But again, that really depends 777 00:40:41,920 --> 00:40:45,400 on how you define a developer or a software engineer or a 778 00:40:45,400 --> 00:40:49,600 programmer. So I I saw somewhere on the 779 00:40:49,600 --> 00:40:51,120 Internet. In a podcast. 780 00:40:51,280 --> 00:40:55,960 In a podcast or in a book, I don't know where I saw it, I saw 781 00:40:55,960 --> 00:41:00,360 something like are you a programmer who writes code or 782 00:41:00,360 --> 00:41:03,640 are you a software engineer that you design software 783 00:41:03,800 --> 00:41:07,200 architectures and that you write applications. 784 00:41:07,800 --> 00:41:10,440 Writing application can also be that you define how the 785 00:41:10,440 --> 00:41:12,760 architecture works, that you review that. 786 00:41:13,040 --> 00:41:17,640 So the tools, how you built the software just changes. 787 00:41:18,320 --> 00:41:24,760 So I really need to find joy in the developments process of how 788 00:41:24,760 --> 00:41:28,680 you actually shape and build the application versus actually 789 00:41:28,680 --> 00:41:32,000 writing the lines of code and figuring out what a semi colon 790 00:41:32,160 --> 00:41:34,200 got lost and that you have a parse error. 791 00:41:34,920 --> 00:41:38,640 So what is the thing that you gives you enjoy and hopefully 792 00:41:38,640 --> 00:41:41,600 for the majority of the software engineers, I would say it is in 793 00:41:41,600 --> 00:41:46,040 the designing part. Then your job is still safe 794 00:41:46,040 --> 00:41:50,920 because you still need to review the, you need to make up your 795 00:41:51,080 --> 00:41:52,480 requirements. You need to review the 796 00:41:52,480 --> 00:41:55,440 requirements, you need to review the architectural decisions from 797 00:41:55,440 --> 00:41:57,760 large language models. And of course they will get 798 00:41:57,760 --> 00:42:01,320 better and there will be less errors, but still, you are the 799 00:42:01,840 --> 00:42:05,120 author of the application. You're only using a tool to 800 00:42:05,120 --> 00:42:10,320 build it for you. It's not let's take a different 801 00:42:10,320 --> 00:42:13,040 approach. It's would be the same as me as 802 00:42:13,040 --> 00:42:18,080 a manager asking hey this is how the application should work like 803 00:42:18,080 --> 00:42:20,240 right? Fully specced developers go 804 00:42:20,240 --> 00:42:22,560 build. That would be exactly. 805 00:42:22,560 --> 00:42:27,960 The magical world. For me, for my, my, how I see 806 00:42:27,960 --> 00:42:30,920 the world, then whether I ask this from a developer to create 807 00:42:30,920 --> 00:42:34,920 or an enlarged language model to create and I the end result will 808 00:42:34,920 --> 00:42:39,080 probably be the same or even better with with an coding 809 00:42:39,080 --> 00:42:42,720 assistant. It's yeah, it's. 810 00:42:42,720 --> 00:42:46,760 What do you call it? It's. 811 00:42:48,000 --> 00:42:51,200 I think it's how you look at it in the you can do more I think 812 00:42:51,200 --> 00:42:52,680 even now. So if you really enjoy the 813 00:42:52,680 --> 00:42:57,320 problem solving aspect of it, I felt quite empowered to solve 814 00:42:57,640 --> 00:43:00,560 problems faster because I didn't have to do it hands on in the 815 00:43:00,560 --> 00:43:02,200 code. Sometimes I've been in 816 00:43:02,200 --> 00:43:06,080 refinement where we discuss a problem and then in this team 817 00:43:06,080 --> 00:43:09,720 specifically, they want the solution or the solution 818 00:43:09,720 --> 00:43:11,960 described in the ticket as well. So then the only thing the 819 00:43:11,960 --> 00:43:15,200 person has to do is read, they understand the context and 820 00:43:15,200 --> 00:43:17,280 execute. And that I don't have to do 821 00:43:17,280 --> 00:43:18,320 anymore. So I don't have to do the 822 00:43:18,320 --> 00:43:19,960 execute anymore. I still have to do the thinking. 823 00:43:19,960 --> 00:43:21,720 I still have to do the reasoning, maybe not on a code 824 00:43:21,720 --> 00:43:24,920 level, but yeah, I do enjoy that part a lot more. 825 00:43:25,080 --> 00:43:29,800 And I would say that trend was already there before AI, because 826 00:43:29,960 --> 00:43:33,960 if you look at monolithic applications and micro services 827 00:43:34,040 --> 00:43:39,600 and then going cloud native or in AWS, for example, that's 828 00:43:40,160 --> 00:43:44,040 sparks your, your, your creativity to think of problems 829 00:43:44,040 --> 00:43:46,440 in a different way. Because if you're writing a 830 00:43:46,440 --> 00:43:50,520 program, a command line program in C, then the solution would be 831 00:43:50,520 --> 00:43:53,360 very different than you would use micro services, for 832 00:43:53,360 --> 00:43:56,520 instance. So you architect your problems 833 00:43:56,960 --> 00:44:00,160 or you architect your solutions differently from your problems 834 00:44:00,160 --> 00:44:02,880 using the technologies that are at hand. 835 00:44:03,360 --> 00:44:09,680 For example you can use an APIAPI gateway and with with 836 00:44:09,720 --> 00:44:12,800 micro services behind it. Or you can create one monolithic 837 00:44:12,800 --> 00:44:17,600 application so that the whole design phase goes more into how 838 00:44:17,600 --> 00:44:22,960 will I use these components Or it will be in a monolithic 839 00:44:22,960 --> 00:44:26,520 application, how will I organise my classes to be somewhat 840 00:44:26,520 --> 00:44:29,680 similar but then with different technology, it's just it's a 841 00:44:29,680 --> 00:44:32,320 shift and and now it's a shift again. 842 00:44:32,320 --> 00:44:35,400 So the tools are just changing, evolving. 843 00:44:35,920 --> 00:44:38,520 It's just right now it's quite quickly that's that's evolving 844 00:44:38,520 --> 00:44:40,600 in the very space Skynet is coming. 845 00:44:40,640 --> 00:44:43,720 Yeah, I have one final question which I think is interesting to 846 00:44:43,720 --> 00:44:46,160 get your perspective on. I do Q&A's. 847 00:44:46,240 --> 00:44:48,920 So in Q&A's people send me their questions and they ask me from 848 00:44:48,920 --> 00:44:52,520 my perspective. This question I thought was very 849 00:44:52,520 --> 00:44:55,160 interesting and I I might have even struggled answering this 850 00:44:55,160 --> 00:44:56,560 because there is no right answer. 851 00:44:56,920 --> 00:44:59,920 They said I have a product background, but I'm trying to 852 00:44:59,920 --> 00:45:01,320 teach myself software engineering. 853 00:45:01,680 --> 00:45:04,000 But even without the product engineering background or 854 00:45:04,000 --> 00:45:07,080 product background at all, how would you nowadays, if you're 855 00:45:07,080 --> 00:45:11,040 responsible as a mentor or as a teacher, teach people about 856 00:45:11,040 --> 00:45:13,080 software engineering? What would they focus on? 857 00:45:13,640 --> 00:45:17,080 My answer was a lot less about actually the creating of code. 858 00:45:17,280 --> 00:45:20,280 I do think understanding is is still there, but I'm curious 859 00:45:20,280 --> 00:45:23,600 what your perspective is. I think it would be more in 860 00:45:23,600 --> 00:45:28,160 system thinking like these are all, are there multiple systems 861 00:45:28,160 --> 00:45:30,720 interacting with each other and how do would they interact with 862 00:45:30,720 --> 00:45:32,760 each other? Who's responsible for what 863 00:45:32,760 --> 00:45:37,560 system? So it's more slicing dice, those 864 00:45:37,560 --> 00:45:41,000 areas like what are the responsibilities for for this 865 00:45:41,000 --> 00:45:44,120 particular entity within the application and have that 866 00:45:44,120 --> 00:45:48,000 understanding on what it does. And then you have, you don't 867 00:45:48,000 --> 00:45:51,560 need to know how it's built. You don't need to know who's 868 00:45:51,560 --> 00:45:53,240 written. It could be written by a human, 869 00:45:53,240 --> 00:45:56,360 could be written by AI, but you know what it's responsible for 870 00:45:56,360 --> 00:45:59,440 and what it's core task is. And if you know that from the 871 00:45:59,440 --> 00:46:02,160 majority of the things, then you have a good understanding on 872 00:46:02,160 --> 00:46:04,760 what's what the application is, what it does, and what the 873 00:46:04,760 --> 00:46:06,080 capabilities are. Yeah. 874 00:46:06,240 --> 00:46:09,200 So you go one level above actually the the software 875 00:46:09,200 --> 00:46:10,960 creation part itself. And look. 876 00:46:11,000 --> 00:46:13,000 At the system as well. Yeah. 877 00:46:13,000 --> 00:46:17,280 And then, then regardless if it's written in PHP, go, Rust, 878 00:46:17,280 --> 00:46:21,840 whatever, it's a system, Yeah, it interacts with something. 879 00:46:22,800 --> 00:46:25,160 Yeah, I like that a lot. Thanks for coming on and sharing 880 00:46:25,160 --> 00:46:26,200 yours. This was really fun. 881 00:46:26,320 --> 00:46:28,040 Yeah, thanks. I really enjoyed it. 882 00:46:28,760 --> 00:46:30,680 If you're still with us, let me know in the comments section 883 00:46:30,680 --> 00:46:32,840 what you thought of this episode and we'll see you on the next 884 00:46:32,840 --> 00:46:33,040 one.