The Space Launch Simorgh-asbord

Jeffrey Lewis 0:02

Right? Where we're going, we don't need eyes. You are listening to the Arms Control Wonk podcast, a podcast on arms control, disarmament, and non-proliferation. I'm Jeffrey Lewis, the founding publisher of the Arms Control Wonk blog, and a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

Scott LaFoy 0:26

And I am Scott LaFoy, super producer on the Arms Control Wonk podcast and program manager for national security and intelligence at Exeger Federal Solutions.

Jeffrey 0:34

It's incredible that we can now have you on with your actual job title.

Scott 0:40

I'm so excited about it. They're very happy about the pod and they're very nice people. Though, as always, my opinions are my own and not representative of my employer.

Jeffrey 0:49

Just remarkable to imagine a boss happy about the pod. You know, when I started the blog, the number one demand of more than one employer was that I had to kill it to go work for them.

Scott 1:05

Did they get mad at the content or the tone?

Jeffrey 1:08

Well, you could raise legitimate objections to both. Suggesting that a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation had a small penis was probably not an appropriate thing for me to be saying. But yeah, it was a little bit of both. It was definitely my attitude and tone combined with my hippie left-wingism.

Scott 1:31

So it's really the core concept was the problem with the blog, basically.

Jeffrey 1:36

You know, I often thought to myself, I think what you just don't like is me. It's not really the blog. The blog is just a website. It's just some ones and zeros processed through a graphical interface. The content you find objectionable is me.

Scott 1:57

Well, you know who else might find your content somewhat objectionable? Might be the Iranian Space Agency right now, because I imagine they're a little miffed with you.

Jeffrey 2:09

I have seen – there was a statement in the Tehran Times today from I think their minister of communications who denied that there had been a failed space launch and mentioned that they had two satellites ready to go, which I observe is one less satellite than a different Iranian cabinet official six months ago said they had to go.

Yeah.

Scott 2:33

Math is hard. So what is going down at Imam Khamenei's spaceport? Because CNN has broken a story that looks like it's driven by your and Planet Labs graphics.

Jeffrey 2:45

Well, I would say our analysis and the images of both Maxar and Planet Labs. This was an all hands on deck kind of experience. So, you know, first of all, did you know I'm writing a monograph on Iran's space program? I'm shocked to hear it. Yeah, that's been something I'm a little bit behind on, actually, at the moment.

But we've been really taking a deep dive into Iran space programs. And as part of that, we, you know, monitor the spaceport, the Imam Khomeini spaceport, pretty closely. And... I will admit that maybe we got a little bit lazy because we've all been distracted. And Dave Schmerler noticed a June 6th image taken by Maxar. That had all of the signatures that we would associate with a space launch.

And we can go through and talk about them, but as Dave was saying the other day, and I think this is totally true, this is like one for the textbooks. If you wanted to write a case study for a textbook on... How do you infer events like space launches from satellite images? This is one where they're very specific.

They're easy to understand. They're clear as a bell. And you never see them in any other context. And so we thought, hey, there's a satellite launch coming. And we worked with Planet to get them to task. And we talked to Maxar. And they were going to keep an eye on it. And then when we got the next high resolution picture, the place was dead.

Scott 4:23

So, you know, all of it's gone. All the signatures of the launch are gone.

Jeffrey 4:27

Yeah. I mean, there are a few vehicles around, but they're in like different places and a bunch of stuff. It had, you know, had split town. So it was pretty clear that they had been gearing up unambiguously for a space launch. And then they weren't gearing anymore, which, you know, naturally leads to this question of like, well, like what happened?

Scott 4:46

Right, but there was no evidence of a... I feel like because of what this podcast is, we should note, there wasn't evidence of necessarily some sort of catastrophic event necessarily. It's that the signatures were gone. Is that correct?

Jeffrey 4:57

Yeah, that's right. I mean, boy, it's probably inappropriate, but I would call the images post-coital. You know, there was no great catastrophe had befallen the place. It's just that, you know, they weren't quite as... Worked up as they were before.

Scott 5:20

So they did a stand down then.

Jeffrey 5:22

Yeah, which to us really looked like there had been a launch. But of course, the problem was the Iranians didn't announce a launch. Right. And had a launch succeeded, the, what is it, the 18th Space Control Squadron would have entered the satellite and, you know, probably the kick stage into the orbital catalog. But they didn't do that either.

And so we were like a little bit confused when I got a great DM. And I have to obscure this a little bit because there is a little bit of open source collateral. It's super vague. But Jonathan McDowell, who is the repository of all things space, he writes Jonathan's space report. He had noticed an online comment that I swear if you or I saw it, we would think nothing of it.

But from this really... Really cryptic comment online, Jonathan was like, do you have any evidence that there was a failed space launch somewhere in the world last weekend? And I was like, yeah, actually. What makes you say it? And he shared it with me. And I was like, I, I don't, I don't, boy, that's really hard to interpret.

And, you know, and Jonathan sort of worked out, I think, correctly that this, this really cryptic online comment only made sense if there had been a failed space launch somewhere in the wide world. And, you know, so then we got like really excited. Because we thought, just based on the satellite imagery alone, the signatures, which I guess we should talk about, but just on those signatures, we were convinced that they had gone all the way up to the point where they would launch.

The simplest explanation was it had launched, it had failed, and they just hadn't reported it. But we went to Zachary Cohen at CNN, and we let Zach do what Zach is so good at doing, which is taking our information and wringing the rest of it out of the Pentagon.

Scott 7:24

So let's talk about those signatures. You mentioned you want to talk about how did you know?

Jeffrey 7:28

Yeah.

Scott 7:29

Before you went to CNN, how did you take a look at this station and say, this is a setup for a space launch?

Jeffrey 7:36

Yeah, it's such a beautiful case study in photo interpretation. The first signature, which is just wonderful, is vehicle traffic at the horizontal checkout building. So there's a big building at the Amangkomeni spaceport where when the rocket comes to the spaceport, They assemble it horizontally just to check it out, make sure everything's fine. Then they take it back apart, and they transport it to the gantry where they're going to launch it, and then they assemble it vertically.

But you don't put it together vertically until you've at least done it horizontally and checked everything out, made sure there are no problems. And at that facility, which we know exactly where it is because the Iranians have showed us pictures of previous Samorgs getting checked out in the building, there's uncovered parking. And people just drive to work.

And they only drive to work When they have a reason to be there, which is to say right before the space launches. And it's kind of funny because we noticed, and again, we just weren't, I think, as amped about this as we should have been because we knew a space launch was coming because the Iranians said one was coming, but whatever, we got lazy.

About a month before the vehicles showed up, they put up these black canopies over where the cars were parked.

Scott 9:05

Oh, just the regular parking lot.

Jeffrey 9:07

Yeah. And so we actually, our initial assumption was that they were like trying to deny us the ability to count the cars. But then the cars showed up and the canopies were like semi-transparent. Oh, just for heat? Yeah, they just wanted to make some shade so people's cars didn't boil in the desert sun. Fair enough. So we went ahead and counted the cars.

And that was signature one, a really large number of vehicles on site, which is basically people showing up to do the checkout activities. It's not North Korea. They don't bus them there or make them walk there. People just, you know, you have your car, you drive in, show your pass, and you go park in the parking lot.

So that's one signature. The second signature, which is really lovely, is when they, and this and the rest of the signatures are all actually at the launch gantry, right? So where they assemble the thing vertically and then fire it. When the rocket is assembled vertically, They have like a mobile work platform, you know, like a cherry picker, basically.

I mean, it's a really big, nice cherry picker that allows them to inspect the outside of the rocket even after the gantry has been pulled back.

Scott 10:34

So it's already freestanding. So this is not one of those platforms that folds in on the gantry so you can look at a stage. This is an external observation platform.

Jeffrey 10:41

Right. They assemble it vertically inside the gantry where they have little platforms and they can get to it. But before launch, they're going to pull that gantry back. And there are a few things, I guess, that they still want to do or check out once the gantry has been retracted. And they use the cherry picker for that.

And we have like a really nice video of them doing that. It shows the gantry pullback and then the cherry picker is kind of going up and down the rocket as they're, you know, doing their last minute stuff. Well, that thing, I assume it must be stored on site someplace, but it's like always put away. The only time you ever see it out in the elements is right before they're going to use it.

And so that thing is sitting right next to the gantry. So that's a pretty good sign.

Scott 11:26

And unlike when you get gas tanks and whatnot, it's something from the missile side of things to note on that is something like that is not necessarily going to be pulled out for practices in the same way that more sensitive equipment that requires specialized training would. Sort of they're like slightly more mundane usage ground support equipment.

Jeffrey 11:42

Exactly. And that's the other signature is there are two particular vehicles and we don't know what they freaking do. But, you know, you live at a certain level of abstraction, I guess, in this business. I would love to figure out what they do. But one always parks backed up to the other side of the gantry on the concrete pad where the rails are.

And so it backs up and I don't know if it brings equipment or what. But it's always parked right next to the gantry with its back facing toward it. It's a big truck. And then there's another truck that looks like a truck with a trailer that we always see parked someplace else. And both of those vehicles are present.

And again, just like with the cherry picker, you never see these vehicles except prior to a launch. So that's pretty good. You know, three specialized pieces of support equipment that only appear before launches are suddenly out. And then the last thing, which I just, was so much fun to do. Once we realized like, holy crap, there's this picture on June 6th, they're going to launch.

I went back and looked at some images that Planet took and we had missed it because, you know, whatever, nobody's perfect. But on June 1st, All the containers of fuel were lined up at the launch site.

Scott 13:18

Oh, okay.

Jeffrey 13:19

So someone's getting ready to gas up. And they're very distinct canisters because they're the same style of canister that you use for the Scud. And we have like lots of pictures of them. And what was really beautiful about that picture is I counted them And I had to make an assumption that they were 1,000 liter containers. That's a little bit of a guess.

But if they're 1,000 liter containers, the amount of fuel matches perfectly our estimate for the S'morg first stage and the S'morg second stage. And they were grouped in the right numbers. Which I think is actually getting a little bit lucky because that stuff shows up and then they start moving it to put it into the rocket. So to actually get them all lined up at once is not a thing that we actually have always seen.

But it was just beautiful because this is the pad where only the S'morg launches. And on top of that, when you calculate how much fuel appears to be on site, it is the exact right amount of fuel for the first stage, plus another grouping of containers that is the exact right amount of fuel for the second stage.

It felt great.

Scott 14:36

It's almost like keeping your encyclopedia of missile stats and missile signatures together for quick reference has once again paid off when trying to solve a mystery out in the desert.

Jeffrey 14:47

You know, it's the same talking point I hit in every talk I give. What I love about good open source work is that it is progressive in the sense that our knowledge can build upon itself. When you know how big a rock it is, then it gives you a bunch of other details like... How powerful it is, how much fuel it takes.

And you can then use that information to better understand the satellite images you're looking at. Yeah, that's right. If we didn't have a great model of the Simorgh, we might not have realized that it was exactly the right amount of fuel. And then the last thing, which is a little bit more ambiguous, for whatever reason, and I don't know why they do this, but scud fuel comes in these containers, these little containers, somewhere between 500 and 1,000 liters each.

And... And that's what we see in Iran. Like there was a Saphir launch where they had the little containers. But we think the oxidizer, which would be nitric acid, comes in one container, one giant container, probably because it's so toxic and corrosive that you have to have like a really special container to handle it. And there is a giant container that showed up next to the fuel.

So our assumption is it's probably oxidizer. It's probably big enough for all the oxidizer needs, but I don't know. We have ground pictures of the fuel containers. So like, we're pretty sure that's what those are. We do not have a nice, pretty picture of an oxidizer container. So that's like that's a thing I'm guessing at.

Scott 16:33

It's not a thing I'm sure about, but I, you know, add it all up.

Jeffrey 16:37

Like that's kind of a lot.

Scott 16:40

Yeah, no, that's hitting the signatures from pretty much every possible angle. You've got the personnel angle, cars coming in, so you've got your personnel and staff that you've been monitoring. You can tell when you have atypical timing. You've got Mysterious Stranger on the internet providing a tip, which is a different kind of open source usage that you don't always get.

Jeffrey 16:59

Well, it was a public comment someone made, which I could not have interpreted, which Without this person saying, yeah, I think that's what that means.

Scott 17:12

Gotcha. But then you have, so one thing that's actually sticking out to me in particular as being interesting is the SCUD derivative fuel supplies, just because that's something that's also used for, you know, legacy North Korean systems as an identifier is just, oh, anytime you have something that's from the SCUD arc, you can start tracking very specific ground support equipment because it follows the SCUD everywhere for some reason.

It's like they had a discount at the SCUD support store. They're trying to get it all out. Yeah. So that's your signatures. You and Jonathan McDowell put together this open source picture that this launch failed. Now, going back to what we were talking about in the first third of the pod, you took this to Zachary Cohen at CNN so that he could, as you said, wring the rest of the information out of it.

Jeffrey 17:54

Yeah, because, you know, look, from our perspective, the satellite imagery is enough. I mean, it's a way of knowing about the world. It's a pretty reliable way of knowing about the world. I was totally comfortable on the basis of the images that we had saying that between the June 6 Maxar image and the June 1 planet image.

There was a space launch. Like, you just don't go through that level of work and then not do it. And, you know, like, well, maybe they scrubbed the launch, yeah, but then I think we would have seen other signs. We had that kind of back and forth. I think for a news story, you really need the Pentagon to go, yes, those guys are right.

You know, because to be honest, there's like a lot of bad OSINT out there. And so part of me gets cranky because, you know, the CNN story leads with the Pentagon says, and it's like, Hey, we're the ones who figured it out. But the, the reality of the matter is it's the Pentagon says that's news. And, you know, Zach was very generous about this, so I don't have any complaint with how he handled it.

You know, but we understand that you couldn't have gotten the Pentagon to confirm it happened without the open source information, right? That basically made it hard for them to stay quiet. Because once it's out like that, they knew somebody was going to talk. So, I mean, you know, to me, it's kind of a textbook example of what's Powerful about open source intelligence, because on the one hand, we see that we can use this information to disprove false claims that people might make in a biased way from the government.

But also, we can use it to force the government to be more transparent about things that they might not otherwise want to be. So the Iranians certainly didn't want to announce that they had a failure. And for whatever reason, well, I think I know the reason, which we can talk about in a second. But the Biden administration didn't want to announce that there had been a failed space launch either.

So that doesn't come to light unless we do this work.

Scott 20:21

Right. And it gives you the stick by which you can hit the tree that is not providing information if you just shake it. Yeah, I think that's right. It's a normal metaphor.

Jeffrey 20:30

You know, as these things go.

Scott 20:32

So why would the Biden administration possibly not want to mention this on their own?

Jeffrey 20:38

Because it wasn't over yet. Because we got a picture on June 20th for a planet that showed the Iranians were going to try again.

Scott 20:45

So we've got the second, so they may be down to one satellite if they don't do this right.

Jeffrey 20:48

Yeah, I mean, we saw all the same signatures. There actually weren't quite as many vehicles at the site, at the horizontal checkout building this time. But there were, again, a little spike in vehicles. But what really stood out was the cherry picker was back in place right next to the gantry. The white truck was backed up against the other side of the gantry.

And there were not a full complement, but an almost full complement of fuel containers, plus the thing that we thought might be an oxidizer container. So to see them get the band back together, you know, and it wasn't that it had sat there the whole time, right? Like they had like that stuff had dispersed and gone away.

And that they brought everything back out. They're trying again. And so, you know, like when is that thing going to go? Has it already gone? I don't know. Although I have to say we have a high resolution image from today. And again, it looks like whatever was there is gone now. So...

Scott 21:51

Oh, interesting. So it may have launched in the last, you know... 24 or 48 hours, yeah. Ooh, interesting.

Jeffrey 21:58

Okay. And, you know, may have failed again, which is why we haven't heard about it from the audience. Or, you know, whatever, they're just getting their media rollout done, or I don't know. So we're just taking a careful look. You know, at some level, I have to say, we... Love being able to use this information to predict the future.

That's cool. And when you do it, it feels awesome. But as a photo interpreter, I think you have to just a little bit content yourself with being an observer. Because not all of your calls are going to be correct. And life is weird and surprising. And strange things happen. And I think when you get so focused on predicting the future, it really becomes about your ego.

And that kind of blinds you to just taking the data for what it is and kind of enjoying it.

Scott 23:04

It's not always a prescriptive science. Sometimes it is a descriptive and informative historical science.

Jeffrey 23:10

Yeah. So like we are, we're doing this other thing, which I love and will probably be its own podcast where we Steven De La Fuente is one of our research assistants. We're teaching a computer to recognize Changes at the DF-41 launch site in China.

Scott 23:36

It's really good.

Jeffrey 23:37

The computer can spot when the environmental shelter moves. And so we're going back and we're comparing the computer-generated list of potential launches against the reported list of potential launches versus the list of potential launches created by analyzing notices to error persons.

Scott 24:01

And none of those lists agree perfectly.

Jeffrey 24:06

And that's okay.

Scott 24:08

Like, that's kind of fun. There's more mysteries to solve?

Jeffrey 24:12

Yeah. Yeah, and then we, you know, we have other ideas about how we might monitor rocket launches. So, you know, like...

Scott 24:20

On the one hand, it is awesome.

Jeffrey 24:23

Like, I cannot tell you how exciting it was. There was like a 48, 72 hour period where we knew just on the strength of the satellite imagery that there had been a failed S'more launch in Iran. And we were just waiting for Zach to get the confirmation. That feels great.

Scott 24:43

So great that I believe you tweeted it out.

Jeffrey 24:45

I did. I couldn't help myself.

Scott 24:46

I believe you tweeted the teaser.

Jeffrey 24:47

Yeah. I mean, it's a really special feeling because you know this thing that's supposed to be secret. Right? And it's so cool. And you know other people will be excited. But for a little bit, it's just yours.

Scott 25:03

You are just for now the only OSINT person in the United States who knows that there is a failed space launch in Iran.

Jeffrey 25:11

Yeah, because if you're an OSINT person, it's different than if you deal with classified information. If you deal with classified information, maybe you have that feeling all the time. I know things you don't know. But as an OSINT person, you're always going to publish because that's the point is it's open. That information is out there for anyone to find.

Your mission in life is to help people learn to use technology to be able to understand the world better. So like, I don't have like the permanent monopoly on secret information that somebody with classified information does. So I have to like savor it while it lasts.

Scott 25:48

You get the shot and the chaser. It's not like having a clearance where it's all shot, no chaser.

Jeffrey 25:53

Yeah, exactly. So, you know, when there are mysteries, then I can't publish because I don't have the answer. But that's fun in its own way, you know, when you see... You see evidence that really points in a particular direction, and yet you, you can't quite make that final call. So your confidence is like, just moderate confidence. Like, sometimes I hate it because it's like, crap, I can't do anything with this. But then there's another part of me that's just, you know, endlessly intrigued. So I don't know, we don't know. Maybe the second one's already gone.

Scott 26:31

But that's what we're waiting for is the endless intrigue to hopefully end and hopefully the Pentagon will tell you this is news. Yeah, I think so. But, you know, I mean, it's amazing. Like, you know, we can learn quite a lot.

Jeffrey 26:45

We can learn that the Iranians are really committed to their space program and we can monitor the progress they're making even when it's not going well and they don't want to tell us. We can infer things about where they are technologically by the problems they have. Because we know the thing went and we can tell it didn't blow up in the pad.

And so chances are it was a problem with the second stage or maybe the kick motor. So, you know, we can do things like confirm the fuel type based on the number of containers. I mean, it's just all kinds of cool stuff. I'm so surprised.

Scott 27:28

I imagine. I'm surprised they did two launches that quickly, one after the other. That is very interesting to me.

Jeffrey 27:36

Well, so... And this is where the language research comes in. And we have a consultant who's doing the foreign language research. Really difficult reasons. I can't give this person the credit I would like to give, but we're going to work that out. But I don't want to take credit for the work. He has been going through all the statements, and it looks like at the beginning of the year, they said they would do three SOMORG launches this year.

Scott 28:12

Oh, interesting. Okay.

Jeffrey 28:13

With three different remote imaging satellites. And then the Iranian official who gave that statement listed them. But we don't know if he listed them in order. So we're actually able to say it was probably an Earth imaging satellite, possibly the Tolu-2. Possibly here means, because that was the one he listed first when he gave us the list, but it could have been alphabetical in Persian, or it could have been the order in which he liked them, or he could have grouped them for some arbitrary reason because it's military and the other two are civilian.

I don't know. I don't know why he grouped them in that way, but the first one he mentioned was this thing, the Tolu II. Absent any other information. All three were Earth imaging satellites, so it was probably an Earth imaging satellite. And since he listed that one first, I will say possibly the Tolu-2.

Scott 29:08

Out of curiosity, are those all supposed to be domestically produced? I know there was talk of the Russians sending some fun remote sensing satellites over.

Jeffrey 29:16

Yeah, all three are domestic, and the resolution is not... None of them are submeters. OK, so the thing the Russians are doing, which I think they have said is like or they haven't said, but open source information about the Russian satellite that they're going to build for the Iranians because it's a it's a variant of an existing Russian satellite that has like a a resolution about one point two meters.

So the three Iranian domestic satellites are not as good as that.

Scott 29:56

Good enough for targeting, though.

Jeffrey 29:58

Well, so I mean, this is a whole other podcast, but we lately, now that we have a partnership with L3Harris, have spent a lot of time with Envy using their LAN classification tool. Yeah, OK. When you are dealing with multispectral images like Landsat or even just the four bands on a Planet Dove, soon it'll be eight bands, You know, you can't look at those images with your eyes.

Right. I mean, you can look at them. You're just not going to see shit. So we have really been spending a lot of time with using software to compare different bands. Well, what's the right way to... Basically to work with invisible light and do other kinds of mathematical tricks when you take visible light and slice it into smaller bands.

So... We have a case study that will, I don't know if I want to get into it here, but just tracking Saudi construction in the desert at known missile facilities, which it turns out you can do quite well with Landsat. You can't really see it with your eyes. But the computer can see it, no problem. So one thing we're going to do for the Iran launch is we're going to go back and do some retroactive land classification, see if we can spot things like vehicles moving around, soil disturbance from launches.

But that's all really computer-driven and not the kind of traditional thing you see with your eyes.

Scott 31:42

I always say this. Did you ever see Event Horizon? Yeah. Oh, like once a year.

Jeffrey 31:48

Yeah, right. So when Sam Neill's character pokes out his eyes, that is the future of remote sensing, right? Where we're going, we don't need eyes. The computer is going to do the looking.

Scott 32:01

That should just be on the mission logo of any LN satellite launch from here on out. It should be just where we're going. We don't need eyes.

Jeffrey 32:09

I mean, it's already true with near infrared. Like I routinely, I don't even bother with real color images anymore unless I'm going to show them to like a normal person. But I, I, I just like, no, I just want the, I want a false color NIR image. Thanks. Cause I know the trees are really red. Do you have anything else you want to cover before we, we wrap?

No, man, it was just such a cool, it was such a cool experience. It was so fun to work with Dave to see something, to have that momentary confusion of why are all those vehicles and fuel tanks there to the light bulb going on like, oh my God, it's a launch and they didn't tell anyone to wait, it's a launch and they didn't tell anyone.

Like that was just cool.

Scott 32:57

It also means that the notches on your left of launch belt are getting lefter and lefter, because if memory serves, this is not the first time that you have caught something that hasn't been announced out of Iran.

Jeffrey 33:10

Oh, yeah, the space launch, the signatures are so clear, and at least up until now, they haven't made any effort to hide them. We'll see if this unhappy experience changes that.

Scott 33:22

Well, we can see if we do a follow-up pod for that third satellite as well. Absolutely. We can release the pod before the satellite goes up.

Jeffrey 33:30

You know, I said this to Aaron. This is actually a real problem in our life. It's often not news if it hasn't happened yet. So Iran is going to launch a satellite, even though that's when you want to hear about it, is not as newsy as Iran just launched a satellite and failed. It's kind of sad.

Scott 33:48

From a producer standpoint, that's just two podcasts. That's more content.

Jeffrey 33:56

This is like bad reporters who report false things and then get two stories out of it because they do their reporting. And then they come back and report all the criticism of their reporting as though they were never involved in it to begin with. It's, you know, experts differ.

Scott 34:10

It's just generating your own content at that point. Well, Jeffrey, thank you very much for talking through this today. This is an incredible piece of methodological success, I feel like, and a pretty sweet catch.

Jeffrey 34:25

Thanks, man. It was awesome.

Scott 34:27

And if you would like to hear more about potential upcoming space launches and open source intelligence gathering and methodologies, you can head over to patreon.com slash ACW podcast, where you can continue to support the pod and our work. And at the $3 a month level, if you are a student, or $5 a month level, if you are a normal functioning human being, you can get access to our grand Slack channel where we have a number of other interested parties hanging around doing similar types of work and having cool conversations about it.

Jeffrey 35:02

And with that, thank you very much, Jeffrey. Thanks for talking to me, Scott.

Scott 35:07

And thank you, dear listener, for listening.