Acima Development cover art

Acima Development

Acima Development

Written by: Mike Challis
Listen for free

About this listen

 At Acima, we have a large software development team. We wanted to be able to share with the community things we have learned about the development process. We'll share some tech specifics (we do Ruby, Kotlin, Javascript, and Haskell), but also talk a lot about mentoring, communication, hiring, planning, and the other things that make up a lot of the software development process but don't always get talked about enough.© 2026 Acima Development Economics Management Management & Leadership Self-Help Success
Episodes
  • Episode 89: Agentic AI

    Episode 89: Agentic AI
    Jan 7 2026
    The episode opens with host David Brady introducing a panel to talk about recent advances in AI, kicking off with “story time” from Mike. Mike describes how massive investment has accelerated progress and uses a hotel analogy to explain the shift from traditional AI tools (you ask for a specific thing and it does exactly that) to agentic AI (you describe a goal like “I’m cold,” and the system takes multiple independent actions to solve it). The panel frames this as a major interface change: instead of issuing step-by-step commands, you collaborate with a tool that can plan, execute, and iterate—powerful, but also riskier if it takes the wrong initiative. They then ground the idea in practical software work. David describes using an AI agent to scan a large, messy, decade-old Rails codebase for dead or “zombie” code—surfacing unused files, routes, and even database tables with no activity since years ago—while also noting how the agent can misunderstand intent (e.g., trying to “fix” missing controllers instead of removing obsolete routes). Justin and Matt extend this into security and ops: combining logs (like Datadog/WAF), an OpenAPI spec, and code access—potentially via MCP (Model Context Protocol)—to identify unused APIs and shrink attack surface. A recurring theme is that agents excel at tedious grunt work (grep-style hunting, bash plumbing, awk/sed, git forensics), but they still require review, guardrails, and clear instructions. The conversation widens into “AI fluency” and human factors: prompt skill matters, “prompt engineer” is treated as a real craft, and vague requests can cause agents to take unhelpful liberties. They discuss personality differences among models—sycophancy and overly affirming behavior versus more nuanced ethical reasoning—and how that can affect users, sometimes dangerously. The panel debates whether software creation will move toward natural language: some argue English is too ambiguous for precise specs (hence lawyering), while others think we’ll keep needing discipline and precision even if interfaces get friendlier. They close by flagging major risks—unattended agents with broad permissions, security exposure, and IP leakage—and tease that AI security and governance deserves a full follow-up episode. Transcript: DAVID: Hello and welcome to the Acima Developer Podcast. I'm your host today, David Brady. And we have got a fun panel. And we're going to talk about advances in AI today. Today we've got…on the panel, we've got Kyle Archer; we've got Mike Challis; we've got Eddy, who's down in Mexico now. That's awesome. We've got an AI bot who I'm pretty sure is our coworker, Justin. You're elsewhere now, aren't you? JUSTIN: Yes. DAVID: Yeah, awesome. Well, I mean, it's terrible for us [laughter]. We've got Will Archer. We've got Van…well, you go by Thomas, don't you? Wilcox and Matt Hardy. And this is going to be a good, good show. We always start with story time with Uncle Mike, and I'm not going to break that trend. It's great because Mike did not say in the pre-call that he had a story ready. I'm just putting him on the spot. MIKE: Well, I've been grappling with how to think about or how to express the changes that have happened in AI over the last few months. And if you put, you know, like, hundreds of billions of dollars into something, it's going to tend to move, and that's happened. DAVID: Something will happen. MIKE: There have been amazing, amazing level of money, like, shocking levels of investment in AI. And I'm sure not all of it will pan out, and we'll probably touch on that a little bit, but some things already have. And there are new ways of doing things that didn't exist, like, a year ago, in, you know, any meaningful commercial format. And one of this is this agentic approach to AI. And I've been trying to think about how to express this. If you're like me, you've been to a hotel. And if you have kids and you go to put a bed on the…sorry, some covers on the fold-out bed out of the couch, and you're like, oh, wait, there is no blanket here. I'm not going to have my kids sleep on the springs. And so, you know, you call into the desk and say, "Hey, can we please have a blanket?" Or you walk down there and ask for a blanket. And they'll bring it to you, right? And they'll bring it to you. It's part of the service, and it's covered. But it's very much, I am going to ask you to do this, and you will do it for me. And that's how AI tools have been up until fairly recently. But there's been a change. Now they've got these agents, and so it's more like you call in and say, "I'm cold." And they say, "Okay," and a few minutes…well, maybe actually more like an hour later. It takes longer [laughs] [inaudible 02:43]. You know, they show up with, like, an electric blanket and a comforter. And they go over, and they raise the temperature in your room, and, like, “Oh, this is how you use the thermostat,” because it is...
    Show More Show Less
    48 mins
  • Episode 88: Balance

    Episode 88: Balance
    Dec 24 2025
    On this episode of the Acima Development Podcast, Mike hosts a large panel discussion about balance in engineering and why extremes tend to hurt teams. He opens with a cycling story about staying upright on a narrow strip of packed gravel, using it as a metaphor for finding the “middle path” instead of letting the pendulum swing from one extreme to another. The group quickly agrees balance is everywhere in work, from meetings to planning to personal wellness, and the question becomes how to recognize when you have drifted too far. Meetings become the first concrete example. The panel talks about how remote work made it effortless to invite too many people, schedule too often, and fill calendars until there is no time left to actually build. They debate what “enough” meetings looks like, noting that too few meetings can also be a problem when people lose context, alignment, or a clear understanding of priorities. Ideas include limiting meeting size, setting blackout hours for individual contributors, using short meetings with tight agendas, and treating unclear requirements as a sign to pause work rather than plow ahead. From there, the conversation shifts into sustainable pace, velocity, and measurement. Will and Dave share stories about burnout, crunch time, and how more hours do not necessarily translate into more output, especially when fatigue just pushes life admin and distraction into work time. Alfred and others extend the metaphor with cadence and “gearing down,” arguing that there is an effective operating range where teams move fast enough to be productive but not so fast they break. The group closes on the importance of self-assessment and metrics, like blocked focus time, screen-time signals, sleep, and other indicators that you are drifting, so you can correct early and keep the long-term trend line healthy. Transcript: MIKE: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Acima Development Podcast. I'm Mike, and I'm hosting again today. I have with me Kyle, for the first time, Alfred. We've got Will Archer. We've got Dave. We've got Sam. For the first time, Thomas, and also, for the first time, James, and Jordan. Those of you listening, you can look in the notes if you want [chuckles] any details. But we're all here to have a conversation on a topic I've thought about for a long time, and I thought today was a good time to bring it up. And, as usual, I'll introduce it by bringing up something outside of software. I've mentioned this a few times: I've done a lot of cycling in the last few years, a few reasons for that, but I've really enjoyed it. It definitely leads me to think a lot about balancing [chuckles], and actually, I don't think a lot about it because that's the thing about being on a bike. If you don't have the internalized idea of balancing, you don't stay on the bike. So, very quickly, as you learn to ride a bike, the balancing part becomes so internalized you don't think about it because that's what riding on a bike is, is keeping balance. You don't lean too far in either direction. Bad things happen, or it changes your control, right? It sends you in a direction, and you want to choose to do that, not do it by accident. I was thinking about this a lot, actually, I've thought about it off and on since a ride I went on earlier this year. I went to a hilly area in northwest Illinois, and it goes up into Wisconsin, and Iowa, and Minnesota. There's a place called the Driftless Area, sometimes it's called The Driftless. And it wasn't glaciated in the last Ice Age, and so it's very hilly, unlike what you normally think of when you think of the Great Plains, because it's not the plains; it's the hills [laughs]. And it's really pretty, really pretty area. In the summer, everything's lush and green, well, pretty anytime. But I was there right at midsummer and was climbing up a hill where they just...I looked at it on the map [chuckles]. I had not been there. I climbed up this steep, long gravel hill, and they had freshly laid soft gravel on it. That is hard on a bike, I'll have you know [chuckles]. It's hard on probably any vehicle, but especially on a bicycle. And, honestly, I couldn't make it up the soft gravel, except where I followed a tread where a vehicle had been up ahead of me. But that meant that I had about six inches of room to ride in, and if I went to one side or the other, I was stopped. I was hard stopped. I'd get off the bike, walk to a space that's a little flatter to get back on because you're not going to get back up on the gravel. And I've thought about that a lot since, you know, following the middle of that line is the right way. And there's lots of things in life, including in business, where we have a tendency to ride a pendulum. We swing to one side, then we swing to the other. We'll even add some moralizing to it, saying, well, if a little of something is good, then more is better, right? So, let's go really far that way. And that pendulum swing is ...
    Show More Show Less
    55 mins
  • Episode 87: Handling Miscommunication

    Episode 87: Handling Miscommunication
    Dec 10 2025
    The episode centers on miscommunication—why it happens so often and how to handle it better, especially in remote work. Mike opens with a story about baking baguettes for his in-laws: he and his wife look at the same “thin and crusty” loaves but interpret that comment totally differently. He thinks she’s critiquing what he intentionally made; she’s trying (poorly) to request thicker, softer loaves for garlic bread. Only when she circles back and explicitly explains what she meant do they align, adjust the next batches, and get the bread right. That small domestic example sets up the theme: communication is hard, assumptions are deadly, and clarity requires deliberate effort. From there, the group digs into remote work realities: cameras on, clear signals, and good tooling. Kyle and Will argue hard that turning on video dramatically reduces miscommunication by adding facial expression, body language, and a sense of shared humanity and accountability—especially across locations, time zones, and cultures. They rail against “Helen Keller mode” (muted, cameras off) and the bloated calendar of half-attended meetings that results when people aren’t fully present. They stress being “remote-first” even in hybrid environments, using the right tools (Slack vs. Teams vs. Jira/Confluence), and leveraging things like transcripts, screen recordings, and diagrams to convey ideas. Visuals and written records aren’t just nice-to-haves; they’re how humans actually process information and how teams keep “receipts” for decisions and responsibilities. The conversation then shifts to practical tactics for both preventing and repairing miscommunication. Preventatively, they recommend restating what you heard (“So what I hear you saying is…”), insisting on written decisions, documenting problems with specifics (what you did, what failed, error messages), and always answering the who/what/where/when/why/how when assigning work. Rich PR descriptions, Jira tickets with a clear “why,” and AI-assisted meeting summaries all make future understanding and debugging much easier. When miscommunication does happen, they suggest treating it like a production bug: regulate emotions first, acknowledge the other person’s experience, look for root causes rather than blame, and focus the discussion on “what happened and what do we do about it now.” They close with a quote: “The void created by the failure to communicate is soon filled with poison, misrepresentation, and drivel,” underscoring that silence isn’t neutral—if you’re not communicating clearly, you’re inviting confusion and distrust. Transcript: MIKE: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Acima Development Podcast. I'm Mike, and I am hosting again today. With me, I've got, as usual, Will Archer. Welcome, Will. We've got Kyle, and we've got Jordan. Thank you for joining us. And we have a topic to discuss that's been on my mind. It's...yes, stuff has come up lately, but stuff comes up always on this topic. In fact, outside of work, something came up for me today [laughs]. I'm going to my in-laws tomorrow. I'm getting a family get-together. I get along well with my in-laws, so this isn't, like, a bad scenario [laughs]. It's an okay scenario. But I am bringing bread. We're having lunch, and I'm supposed to bring the bread. We're going to make some garlic bread. Anyway, so I was thinking, a couple of weeks ago, you know, I want to make baguettes. I love crust on my bread, so I want to experiment with that. So, I was making some baguettes, you know, baguettes are long and skinny. That's their thing. That's why you do them because it's crusty. And I was going to make three batches to take to my in-laws: sourdough, a white bread, and whole-grain bread. And I had made the sourdough one, and I had made a test batch earlier in the week. And this batch came out fantastic, exactly how I like them, because I like crust on my bread. I've been that way since I was little. I love crust on my bread. I love a crusty, you know, the more crust the better [laughs]. I love a crusty bread. So, baguette is perfect because, you know, it's so crusty: so thin, you know, thin loaves, lots of crust, love it. And I talked with my wife about it earlier in the week. She's, like, "Yeah, that's the kind you like. I like the bigger loaves because they're chewier in the middle." But she had some of the crusty ones, and she liked those, too. I kind of forgot about that conversation, and I went to make some bread today. I'd, like, raised overnight, got to the bread today. This is going somewhere [chuckles]. This is going somewhere. So, I made the first batch as a sourdough one because I'd let it raise in a warmer environment because sourdough takes longer. And they came out of the oven. And I put it up, and my wife looks at them. And she's, like, "Those are some really thin loaves [chuckles]. They're thin and crusty." And I looked at them, and I thought, yep....
    Show More Show Less
    1 hr and 3 mins
No reviews yet