Update

6 files changed, 2745 insertions, 7 deletions

diff --git a/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..32d90f1e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+WEBVTT
+
+00:00:01.280 --> 00:00:28.079
+Introduction and conclusion
+
+00:00:28.080 --> 00:01:07.199
+Who am I?
+
+00:01:07.200 --> 00:02:26.958
+Is Emacs unpopular?
+
+00:02:26.959 --> 00:04:15.679
+What does popularity really mean?
+
+00:04:15.680 --> 00:04:32.399
+How do we measure popularity?
+
+00:04:32.400 --> 00:06:18.318
+Google Trends
+
+00:06:18.319 --> 00:08:19.999
+Stack Overflow Survey
+
+00:08:20.000 --> 00:10:23.199
+Community Activity
+
+00:10:23.200 --> 00:10:38.319
+How do editors lose popularity?
+
+00:10:38.320 --> 00:12:25.679
+A new editor with better features appears
+
+00:12:25.680 --> 00:14:01.039
+Lack of sufficient maintenance
+
+00:14:01.040 --> 00:14:36.958
+The "fashion" moves on
+
+00:14:36.959 --> 00:17:10.239
+What happens when an editor loses popularity?
+
+00:17:10.240 --> 00:17:20.159
+How will Emacs survive *despite* popularity?
+
+00:17:20.160 --> 00:19:51.439
+Emacs is more deeply hackable than almost all other editors
+
+00:19:51.440 --> 00:21:15.279
+Emacs has a strong community of highly skilled package authors
+
+00:21:15.280 --> 00:22:33.439
+Emacs has a very strong user community
+
+00:22:33.440 --> 00:23:40.959
+The Emacs maintainers and contributors care about the users
+
+00:23:40.960 --> 00:24:22.879
+Isn't all this supposed to come when an editor is popular?
+
+00:24:22.880 --> 00:24:23.880
+When someone talks about popularity...
diff --git a/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..026216c8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt
@@ -0,0 +1,2674 @@
+WEBVTT
+
+00:01.280 --> 00:02.800
+Hi everyone! I'm very excited
+
+00:02.800 --> 00:05.200
+to be here at EmacsConf 2021 today
+
+00:05.200 --> 00:06.640
+to give my talk called
+
+00:06.640 --> 00:09.360
+"M-x Forever: How Emacs Will Outlast
+
+00:09.360 --> 00:11.519
+Text Editor Trends."
+
+00:11.519 --> 00:13.759
+So let's start with the conclusion first.
+
+00:13.759 --> 00:15.040
+I know, it's a little bit unorthodox,
+
+00:15.040 --> 00:16.960
+but let's just try and see what happens.
+
+00:16.960 --> 00:18.400
+So no matter what happens
+
+00:18.400 --> 00:19.760
+in the wider software world,
+
+00:19.760 --> 00:21.520
+GNU Emacs will continue to be
+
+00:21.520 --> 00:22.640
+a beloved program
+
+00:22.640 --> 00:24.080
+with a dedicated community
+
+00:24.080 --> 00:25.199
+and a healthy team
+
+00:25.199 --> 00:00:28.079
+of maintainers and contributors.
+
+00:28.080 --> 00:29.439
+You're probably wondering
+
+00:29.439 --> 00:31.141
+who am I to be making such a claim,
+
+00:31.141 --> 00:32.640
+so I'll tell you.
+
+00:32.640 --> 00:34.640
+I am David Wilson, the creator of the
+
+00:34.640 --> 00:36.000
+System Crafters YouTube channel
+
+00:36.000 --> 00:38.079
+and community. If you want to see
+
+00:38.079 --> 00:39.040
+a lot of really great videos
+
+00:39.040 --> 00:41.280
+about GNU Emacs, GNU Guix, etc.,
+
+00:41.280 --> 00:42.719
+come check out my YouTube channel.
+
+00:42.719 --> 00:44.480
+I'm also on LBRY and Odysee
+
+00:44.480 --> 00:46.399
+if you don't want to go use YouTubea
+
+00:46.399 --> 00:47.360
+And also, if you're the type of person
+
+00:47.360 --> 00:48.399
+who doesn't want to use
+
+00:48.399 --> 00:49.680
+any of these websites
+
+00:49.680 --> 00:51.039
+and you want to see my videos anyway,
+
+00:51.039 --> 00:52.160
+please just send me an email
+
+00:52.160 --> 00:53.280
+at the email address below
+
+00:53.280 --> 00:54.079
+and I'll see if I can set you up
+
+00:54.079 --> 00:55.520
+with that. You can also check out
+
+00:55.520 --> 00:58.160
+my website and the places where we chat,
+
+00:58.160 --> 00:59.440
+especially on libera.chat
+
+00:59.440 --> 01:01.440
+at the #systemcrafters channel.
+
+01:01.440 --> 01:02.719
+If you have any thoughts
+
+01:02.719 --> 01:03.600
+after seeing this talk,
+
+01:03.600 --> 01:04.799
+please feel free to send me an email
+
+01:04.799 --> 00:01:07.199
+or find me on chat.
+
+01:07.200 --> 01:09.920
+So there is a recurring concern
+
+01:09.920 --> 01:11.119
+in the Emacs community
+
+01:11.119 --> 01:12.799
+about its popularity.
+
+01:12.799 --> 01:14.320
+This is something that keeps coming back
+
+01:14.320 --> 01:16.479
+time and time again. You probably see it
+
+01:16.479 --> 01:18.640
+every year or two where people on Reddit
+
+01:18.640 --> 01:19.840
+or maybe on the emacs-devel
+
+01:19.840 --> 01:21.600
+mailing list are talking about ways
+
+01:21.600 --> 01:24.000
+to increase Emacs popularity.
+
+01:24.000 --> 01:25.600
+More recently, there was a discussion
+
+01:25.600 --> 01:27.600
+on Hacker News where somebody posted
+
+01:27.600 --> 01:28.159
+a link to this
+
+01:28.159 --> 01:31.360
+Making Emacs Popular Again blog post
+
+01:31.360 --> 01:32.479
+which does chronicle some of the
+
+01:32.479 --> 01:34.479
+more recent discussions on emacs-devel
+
+01:34.479 --> 01:35.840
+about things that could be done
+
+01:35.840 --> 01:38.479
+to make Emacs a more popular editor.
+
+01:38.479 --> 01:40.079
+So the title of my talk claims
+
+01:40.079 --> 01:41.280
+that Emacs is going to
+
+01:41.280 --> 01:43.759
+outlast text editor trends.
+
+01:43.759 --> 01:45.840
+So to elaborate on this claim,
+
+01:45.840 --> 01:46.799
+we're going to try to answer
+
+01:46.799 --> 01:48.720
+a few specific questions.
+
+01:48.720 --> 01:51.200
+First of all, what is popularity
+
+01:51.200 --> 01:53.280
+and how do you even measure it?
+
+01:53.280 --> 01:54.240
+If people are saying
+
+01:54.240 --> 01:55.920
+that Emacs needs to be more popular,
+
+01:55.920 --> 01:57.040
+then what do we really mean
+
+01:57.040 --> 01:59.040
+by popularity?
+
+01:59.040 --> 02:00.159
+Also, what are the benefits
+
+02:00.159 --> 02:01.920
+of popularity? If emacs did somehow
+
+02:01.920 --> 02:03.920
+become more popular, what benefits
+
+02:03.920 --> 02:05.680
+would it receive from that?
+
+02:05.680 --> 02:07.439
+And also, how does an editor
+
+02:07.439 --> 02:08.720
+lose popularity, and what are
+
+02:08.720 --> 02:11.120
+the possible consequences to that?
+
+02:11.120 --> 02:12.480
+And then what are the unique factors
+
+02:12.480 --> 02:13.680
+about Emacs that will ensure
+
+02:13.680 --> 02:16.000
+that it survives long term?
+
+02:16.000 --> 02:17.520
+What is special about Emacs
+
+02:17.520 --> 02:19.440
+that will help it to thrive
+
+02:19.440 --> 02:21.920
+despite whatever happens in the
+
+02:21.920 --> 02:24.560
+popular sphere of text editors and
+
+02:24.560 --> 00:02:26.958
+programming languages, etc.?
+
+02:26.959 --> 02:28.800
+So, first of all, what does popularity
+
+02:28.800 --> 02:30.720
+really mean? When someone says
+
+02:30.720 --> 02:32.400
+that Emacs needs to become more popular,
+
+02:32.400 --> 02:33.680
+what are they really saying
+
+02:33.680 --> 02:35.840
+is that there needs to be more users,
+
+02:35.840 --> 02:37.102
+and that they stick around.
+
+02:37.102 --> 02:38.800
+Like, they learn how to use Emacs
+
+02:38.800 --> 02:41.680
+and they continue to be users.
+
+02:41.680 --> 02:42.800
+If we did get those new users,
+
+02:42.800 --> 02:45.599
+what would it actually do for Emacs?
+
+02:45.599 --> 02:47.440
+Also, is it that there are
+
+02:47.440 --> 02:48.959
+more community members that are
+
+02:48.959 --> 02:51.040
+creating new packages?
+
+02:51.040 --> 02:52.480
+You know, that sort of assumes
+
+02:52.480 --> 02:53.519
+that the editor itself
+
+02:53.519 --> 02:54.720
+doesn't have enough packages,
+
+02:54.720 --> 02:55.519
+or that the only way
+
+02:55.519 --> 02:57.120
+that the an editor stays alive
+
+02:57.120 --> 02:58.800
+is for there to be constant churn,
+
+02:58.800 --> 03:01.440
+with new packages coming around.
+
+03:01.440 --> 03:03.120
+Is it that there is more content
+
+03:03.120 --> 03:04.319
+being created by users,
+
+03:04.319 --> 03:05.840
+like more blog posts being written,
+
+03:05.840 --> 03:07.920
+more YouTube videos being made,
+
+03:07.920 --> 03:09.360
+more other ways that people are
+
+03:09.360 --> 03:11.599
+evangelizing the use of Emacs
+
+03:11.599 --> 03:14.720
+and also teaching people how to use it?
+
+03:14.720 --> 03:16.080
+Also, is it that
+
+03:16.080 --> 03:18.720
+more long-term stability is had
+
+03:18.720 --> 03:20.159
+in the editor, and more core
+
+03:20.159 --> 03:21.280
+improvements that are being made
+
+03:21.280 --> 03:22.879
+over time? I mean, I guess you could say
+
+03:22.879 --> 03:23.760
+that it does make sense
+
+03:23.760 --> 03:25.680
+that if the editor is more popular,
+
+03:25.680 --> 03:26.959
+then people will be more invested
+
+03:26.959 --> 03:28.080
+in improving it, and there will be
+
+03:28.080 --> 03:30.000
+more new contributors coming in,
+
+03:30.000 --> 03:32.480
+but is greater and greater popularity
+
+03:32.480 --> 03:33.280
+really what's needed
+
+03:33.280 --> 03:35.280
+to ensure that this happens?
+
+03:35.280 --> 03:37.040
+Also, it could just be that
+
+03:37.040 --> 03:38.080
+there's more validation
+
+03:38.080 --> 03:40.480
+for someone's personal choices.
+
+03:40.480 --> 03:42.159
+You know, people tend to use
+
+03:42.159 --> 03:43.760
+these software choices they use
+
+03:43.760 --> 03:44.799
+as part of their identity.
+
+03:44.799 --> 03:46.000
+So is it that they want Emacs
+
+03:46.000 --> 03:46.799
+to be more popular
+
+03:46.799 --> 03:48.319
+so that they can finally say,
+
+03:48.319 --> 03:49.440
+"I'm an Emacs user,"
+
+03:49.440 --> 03:50.080
+and have people think
+
+03:50.080 --> 03:51.840
+that they're cool or "hip" or whatever?
+
+03:51.840 --> 03:52.720
+I hope that... Hopefully,
+
+03:52.720 --> 03:53.370
+that's not the case.
+
+03:53.370 --> 03:54.239
+Hopefully, it's one of these
+
+03:54.239 --> 03:56.000
+other points. But it could be something
+
+03:56.000 --> 03:57.120
+because, as we see, you know,
+
+03:57.120 --> 03:59.439
+there's a lot of trends and fashion
+
+03:59.439 --> 04:00.879
+when it comes to software development
+
+04:00.879 --> 04:02.640
+and also free software
+
+04:02.640 --> 04:04.159
+and open source tools.
+
+04:04.159 --> 04:05.840
+So as we go through this talk,
+
+04:05.840 --> 04:07.200
+keep these questions in mind
+
+04:07.200 --> 04:07.760
+as we talk about 
+
+04:07.760 --> 04:09.680
+some of the finer points on all of this,
+
+04:09.680 --> 04:11.280
+and see whether you think 
+
+04:11.280 --> 04:13.680
+that popularity really correlates
+
+04:13.680 --> 00:04:15.679
+with these things.
+
+04:15.680 --> 04:17.919
+So first of all, how do we measure
+
+04:17.919 --> 04:20.720
+popularity? What information do we have
+
+04:20.720 --> 04:21.600
+to actually determine 
+
+04:21.600 --> 04:23.360
+which editors are popular,
+
+04:23.360 --> 04:25.199
+and whether they're gaining or losing
+
+04:25.199 --> 04:26.880
+popularity? So I've got a few, 
+
+04:26.880 --> 04:27.759
+or a couple places here 
+
+04:27.759 --> 04:29.120
+that we can look at 
+
+04:29.120 --> 04:30.560
+to judge the popularity 
+
+04:30.560 --> 00:04:32.399
+of various editors.
+
+04:32.400 --> 04:33.840
+First of all, Google Trends.
+
+04:33.840 --> 04:35.199
+Google actually gives us the ability
+
+04:35.199 --> 04:37.199
+to track and compare search volume 
+
+04:37.199 --> 04:39.040
+for particular terms and topics 
+
+04:39.040 --> 04:41.759
+over time. So if you wanted to know 
+
+04:41.759 --> 04:43.040
+how often someone was searching
+
+04:43.040 --> 04:44.800
+about Emacs, maybe to try to find help
+
+04:44.800 --> 04:46.479
+for something, or look for documentation,
+
+04:46.479 --> 04:48.800
+or maybe look for blog posts, etc., 
+
+04:48.800 --> 04:49.919
+you can look at Google Trends
+
+04:49.919 --> 04:51.600
+to see how often people are searching 
+
+04:51.600 --> 04:53.440
+for Emacs over time.
+
+04:53.440 --> 04:55.199
+One useful ability is that we can
+
+04:55.199 --> 04:57.360
+compare how much people are searching
+
+04:57.360 --> 04:58.720
+across various different topics 
+
+04:58.720 --> 05:00.000
+and see a graph, which is 
+
+05:00.000 --> 05:01.680
+what i'm going to show you right now.
+
+05:01.680 --> 05:04.000
+This graph shows you the search volume
+
+05:04.000 --> 05:06.320
+for Emacs compared to Vim, Atom,
+
+05:06.320 --> 05:08.800
+Sublime Text, and Visual Studio Code
+
+05:08.800 --> 05:11.120
+from 2004 to the present
+
+05:11.120 --> 05:12.880
+worldwide, so all across the world
+
+05:12.880 --> 05:14.479
+where searches are happening. 
+
+05:14.479 --> 05:16.240
+You can see that in 2004, 
+
+05:16.240 --> 05:18.479
+Emacs is the reigning king supreme
+
+05:18.479 --> 05:21.039
+where you have the most search terms
+
+05:21.039 --> 05:22.720
+or searches happening on emacs
+
+05:22.720 --> 05:25.199
+at that time. Also, Vim is quite high
+
+05:25.199 --> 05:26.960
+on this list as well.
+
+05:26.960 --> 05:28.560
+Let's see. Sublime Text is a bit lower
+
+05:28.560 --> 05:31.120
+in the list, but it's in third place.
+
+05:31.120 --> 05:32.080
+Nope. Yep. That's right.
+
+05:32.080 --> 05:34.880
+Then atom is quite low, but I think that
+
+05:34.880 --> 05:36.320
+Atom didn't exist yet,
+
+05:36.320 --> 05:37.759
+so maybe at that point, you know, 
+
+05:37.759 --> 05:39.120
+this is probably something else. 
+
+05:39.120 --> 05:41.360
+Google is just getting random data.
+
+05:41.360 --> 05:42.880
+And then Visual Studio Code
+
+05:42.880 --> 05:43.919
+also didn't exist,
+
+05:43.919 --> 05:45.039
+so probably this is like 
+
+05:45.039 --> 05:46.479
+Visual Studio searches,
+
+05:46.479 --> 05:48.000
+but then as you go across the years,
+
+05:48.000 --> 05:48.960
+you see that gradually, 
+
+05:48.960 --> 05:52.160
+Emacs popularity appears to be declining.
+
+05:52.160 --> 05:54.639
+As does Vim, but not quite so much. 
+
+05:54.639 --> 05:56.560
+And then over time, Sublime Text
+
+05:56.560 --> 05:57.520
+becomes more popular,
+
+05:57.520 --> 05:59.280
+and then VS Code in more recent years
+
+05:59.280 --> 06:00.319
+becomes very popular 
+
+06:00.319 --> 06:02.400
+compared to everything else.
+
+06:02.400 --> 06:04.479
+So it looks like Emacs 
+
+06:04.479 --> 06:06.960
+has declined significantly in popularity,
+
+06:06.960 --> 06:09.600
+while the other editors have taken over.
+
+06:09.600 --> 06:11.360
+But is the search volume really 
+
+06:11.360 --> 06:12.800
+the only important factor 
+
+06:12.800 --> 06:14.800
+that indicates popularity or health
+
+06:14.800 --> 06:16.080
+of a given editor? 
+
+06:16.080 --> 00:06:18.318
+That still remains to be seen.
+
+06:18.319 --> 06:19.680
+We can also take a look 
+
+06:19.680 --> 06:22.400
+at the yearly survey 
+
+06:22.400 --> 06:24.602
+that the website Stack Overflow puts out
+
+06:24.602 --> 06:26.533
+asking developers about the tools
+
+06:26.533 --> 06:27.360
+that they use to find out 
+
+06:27.360 --> 06:28.720
+which ones are being used 
+
+06:28.720 --> 06:29.759
+most frequently and that are 
+
+06:29.759 --> 06:31.919
+gaining popularity over time.
+
+06:31.919 --> 06:33.680
+So there is a great blog post 
+
+06:33.680 --> 06:35.039
+by someone named Roben Kleene, 
+
+06:35.039 --> 06:37.039
+who synthesizes some 
+
+06:37.039 --> 06:37.840
+of this data together,
+
+06:37.840 --> 06:39.120
+specifically about editors,
+
+06:39.120 --> 06:40.240
+and provides us with a graph
+
+06:40.240 --> 06:41.680
+that we can take a look at
+
+06:41.680 --> 06:43.440
+that compares the popularity 
+
+06:43.440 --> 06:44.639
+of particular editors
+
+06:44.639 --> 06:46.560
+in the last maybe four or five years,
+
+06:46.560 --> 06:49.199
+at least 2015 to 2019,
+
+06:49.199 --> 06:50.560
+based on the responses 
+
+06:50.560 --> 06:52.560
+to the Stack Overflow survey.
+
+06:52.560 --> 06:54.479
+In this case we see that 
+
+06:54.479 --> 06:56.560
+Emacs is the light blue line,
+
+06:56.560 --> 06:59.440
+and it sort of stays in maybe, let's see,
+
+06:59.440 --> 07:00.960
+maybe third place in the beginning,
+
+07:00.960 --> 07:02.000
+and then fifth place, 
+
+07:02.000 --> 07:03.520
+and basically just stays in fifth place
+
+07:03.520 --> 07:05.039
+the whole time, compared to things like
+
+07:05.039 --> 07:07.120
+Atom, Sublime Text, and VS Code.
+
+07:07.120 --> 07:08.560
+As we saw before, the VS Code
+
+07:08.560 --> 07:10.960
+just sort of ramps up at the end.
+
+07:10.960 --> 07:13.199
+Now, this is another thing 
+
+07:13.199 --> 07:14.560
+that basically is showing us
+
+07:14.560 --> 07:17.039
+similarly to the Google Trends
+
+07:17.039 --> 07:19.280
+that Emacs's popularity is not quite
+
+07:19.280 --> 07:21.840
+as much as other editors out there.
+
+07:21.840 --> 07:23.840
+You can also look at the 2021 results
+
+07:23.840 --> 07:26.160
+of the Stack Overflow survey,
+
+07:26.160 --> 07:27.199
+which I'll show you now,
+
+07:27.199 --> 07:30.319
+which shows Emacs in 16th place.
+
+07:30.319 --> 07:31.680
+Let's see. If we look here,
+
+07:31.680 --> 07:32.960
+we see Visual Studio Code
+
+07:32.960 --> 07:34.400
+is the most popular, then we have 
+
+07:34.400 --> 07:36.800
+a whole bunch of other well-known editors.
+
+07:36.800 --> 07:37.840
+Some are kind of surprising, 
+
+07:37.840 --> 07:40.400
+like Notepad++ is quite high up there,
+
+07:40.400 --> 07:42.080
+but then we have Emacs here
+
+07:42.080 --> 07:43.199
+coming right in behind
+
+07:43.199 --> 07:44.879
+PhpStorm and NetBeans,
+
+07:44.879 --> 07:46.400
+which is pretty funny to me. 
+
+07:46.400 --> 07:48.879
+But it just goes to show you 
+
+07:48.879 --> 07:54.000
+that the Emacs community is smaller
+
+07:54.000 --> 07:55.599
+than what you might consider 
+
+07:55.599 --> 07:56.960
+for other editors, or at least
+
+07:56.960 --> 07:58.800
+the Emacs user base, maybe. 
+
+07:58.800 --> 07:59.440
+Maybe it's just the people
+
+07:59.440 --> 08:00.800
+who actually respond to the survey. 
+
+08:00.800 --> 08:02.080
+You can't really tell for sure
+
+08:02.080 --> 08:03.759
+because all this data is coming from
+
+08:03.759 --> 08:05.039
+a self-selected group of people 
+
+08:05.039 --> 08:06.720
+who have responded to the survey. 
+
+08:06.720 --> 08:08.879
+So I think what... Basically, 
+
+08:08.879 --> 08:10.560
+what I'm trying to say is that
+
+08:10.560 --> 08:12.080
+if you look at all these things,
+
+08:12.080 --> 08:14.080
+you would probably get the perception
+
+08:14.080 --> 08:15.919
+that Emacs is dead
+
+08:15.919 --> 08:17.199
+and that maybe nobody really 
+
+08:17.199 --> 08:18.240
+uses the editor anymore,
+
+08:18.240 --> 00:08:19.999
+or that it's on its way out.
+
+08:20.000 --> 08:21.599
+However, I think there's another way 
+
+08:21.599 --> 08:24.879
+to look at the health or popularity 
+
+08:24.879 --> 08:27.280
+of Emacs (or any other editor, really),
+
+08:27.280 --> 08:28.240
+and that is to judge 
+
+08:28.240 --> 08:29.520
+the popularity and health
+
+08:29.520 --> 08:30.240
+by taking a look 
+
+08:30.240 --> 08:32.080
+at the community activity
+
+08:32.080 --> 08:33.680
+in places such as Reddit,
+
+08:33.680 --> 08:35.760
+or maybe on Discord servers, 
+
+08:35.760 --> 08:38.880
+Slack servers, IRC channels, 
+
+08:38.880 --> 08:40.000
+mailing lists, particularly
+
+08:40.000 --> 08:41.120
+on emacs-devel, 
+
+08:41.120 --> 08:42.640
+where all of the conversation
+
+08:42.640 --> 08:45.120
+about the development of Emacs happens.
+
+08:45.120 --> 08:46.640
+Blogs. There's quite a lot of people
+
+08:46.640 --> 08:47.519
+in the Emacs community 
+
+08:47.519 --> 08:48.959
+writing blog posts. 
+
+08:48.959 --> 08:50.640
+There's quite a few YouTube channels now
+
+08:50.640 --> 08:52.399
+making content about Emacs
+
+08:52.399 --> 08:53.839
+pretty frequently, and then
+
+08:53.839 --> 08:56.880
+conferences like this one, EmacsConf.
+
+08:56.880 --> 08:58.399
+If you've spent any time
+
+08:58.399 --> 08:59.600
+in any of these places recently,
+
+08:59.600 --> 09:00.640
+did you actually get the sense 
+
+09:00.640 --> 09:03.440
+that Emacs community lacks activity?
+
+09:03.440 --> 09:04.800
+I personally don't. 
+
+09:04.800 --> 09:06.560
+I see quite a lot of activity on Reddit,
+
+09:06.560 --> 09:07.360
+I see a lot of activity 
+
+09:07.360 --> 09:08.320
+in various other places,
+
+09:08.320 --> 09:11.040
+even my own chats that I've created.
+
+09:11.040 --> 09:12.480
+Lots of people talking about Emacs
+
+09:12.480 --> 09:16.320
+every day. But this is harder to measure,
+
+09:16.320 --> 09:18.160
+because you would have to go count 
+
+09:18.160 --> 09:21.279
+all of the mailing list emails
+
+09:21.279 --> 09:22.560
+compared to other editors,
+
+09:22.560 --> 09:23.760
+or maybe like the Reddit posts
+
+09:23.760 --> 09:24.959
+compared to other editors. 
+
+09:24.959 --> 09:26.880
+We could do that, but really,
+
+09:26.880 --> 09:27.839
+the more important thing 
+
+09:27.839 --> 09:29.920
+is to just go experience the community
+
+09:29.920 --> 09:31.279
+by going to one of these places
+
+09:31.279 --> 09:33.360
+and take a look at what's going on. 
+
+09:33.360 --> 09:34.560
+You can get a really good sense of that
+
+09:34.560 --> 09:37.760
+by checking out Sacha Chua's Emacs News
+
+09:37.760 --> 09:39.120
+roll-up blog posts
+
+09:39.120 --> 09:40.399
+that come out every week. 
+
+09:40.399 --> 09:42.000
+It's a very good distillation of things
+
+09:42.000 --> 09:42.560
+that are happening 
+
+09:42.560 --> 09:43.920
+in the Emacs community.
+
+09:43.920 --> 09:48.080
+If you look at those things 
+
+09:48.080 --> 09:49.040
+and look at all that,
+
+09:49.040 --> 09:50.640
+you can tell that there is actually
+
+09:50.640 --> 09:51.360
+something happening 
+
+09:51.360 --> 09:52.240
+in the Emacs community 
+
+09:52.240 --> 09:54.000
+that is more than what you see
+
+09:54.000 --> 09:55.680
+in the numbers on Google Trends
+
+09:55.680 --> 09:58.080
+and on Stack Overflow.
+
+09:58.080 --> 09:59.200
+Another interesting point 
+
+09:59.200 --> 10:00.480
+that doesn't really fit into all this,
+
+10:00.480 --> 10:01.440
+but if you want to look 
+
+10:01.440 --> 10:02.640
+at the actual data 
+
+10:02.640 --> 10:03.920
+from the Emacs community 
+
+10:03.920 --> 10:06.160
+about how the community uses Emacs,
+
+10:06.160 --> 10:06.880
+check out the results 
+
+10:06.880 --> 10:08.480
+of the 2020 Emacs survey. 
+
+10:08.480 --> 10:09.040
+I'm sure there's going to be 
+
+10:09.040 --> 10:11.760
+another Emacs survey at some point soon,
+
+10:11.760 --> 10:13.120
+as well, but that will give you 
+
+10:13.120 --> 10:14.480
+some insight into what's happening 
+
+10:14.480 --> 10:16.000
+within the community itself. 
+
+10:16.000 --> 10:16.399
+You can see that 
+
+10:16.399 --> 10:17.600
+there's quite a lot of activity 
+
+10:17.600 --> 10:19.839
+and a lot of different use cases for Emacs
+
+10:19.839 --> 00:10:23.199
+and types of people who are using Emacs.
+
+10:23.200 --> 10:24.000
+Let's talk about 
+
+10:24.000 --> 10:26.079
+how editors lose popularity.
+
+10:26.079 --> 10:26.880
+So people are worried 
+
+10:26.880 --> 10:29.360
+that Emacs is going to lose popularity.
+
+10:29.360 --> 10:31.440
+What do they worry is going to happen
+
+10:31.440 --> 10:34.000
+if that happens?
+
+10:37.040 --> 00:10:38.319
+Or how actually could it happen?
+
+10:38.320 --> 10:39.680
+So maybe a new editor 
+
+10:39.680 --> 10:41.839
+with better features appears. 
+
+10:41.839 --> 10:43.440
+So one theory for why users 
+
+10:43.440 --> 10:45.920
+left TextMate for Sublime Text...
+
+10:45.920 --> 10:46.880
+If you don't know about TextMate,
+
+10:46.880 --> 10:49.600
+it was a very popular editor on macOS
+
+10:49.600 --> 10:52.160
+back probably in the Ruby on Rails craze
+
+10:52.160 --> 10:54.079
+time frame, maybe like the mid-2000s,
+
+10:54.079 --> 10:57.200
+2005 or so. Then eventually Sublime Text
+
+10:57.200 --> 10:59.519
+came along, and it had 
+
+10:59.519 --> 11:01.360
+a better extensibility API
+
+11:01.360 --> 11:03.200
+and really good performance.
+
+11:03.200 --> 11:05.200
+It also was able to use 
+
+11:05.200 --> 11:07.040
+some of the same stuff from TextMate,
+
+11:07.040 --> 11:08.720
+like these syntax highlighting grammars
+
+11:08.720 --> 11:11.040
+and the snippet definitions, etc. 
+
+11:11.040 --> 11:12.240
+So you had TextMate
+
+11:12.240 --> 11:13.519
+which was a well-loved editor, 
+
+11:13.519 --> 11:15.200
+but then a new editor called Sublime Text
+
+11:15.200 --> 11:17.200
+came along with better functionality, 
+
+11:17.200 --> 11:18.880
+and people started switching over to it
+
+11:18.880 --> 11:20.160
+because it could do more things
+
+11:20.160 --> 11:21.680
+and the user had more ability 
+
+11:21.680 --> 11:24.399
+to add functionality to it.
+
+11:24.399 --> 11:26.880
+Also, VS Code came along
+
+11:26.880 --> 11:27.920
+and used a similar model 
+
+11:27.920 --> 11:29.120
+to the Atom editor,
+
+11:29.120 --> 11:31.360
+basically being a web-based editor
+
+11:31.360 --> 11:32.480
+using Electron,
+
+11:32.480 --> 11:34.640
+but it greatly improved upon performance
+
+11:34.640 --> 11:36.640
+and IDE tooling ecosystem.
+
+11:36.640 --> 11:38.640
+For people getting real work done 
+
+11:38.640 --> 11:39.519
+with large projects,
+
+11:39.519 --> 11:41.120
+you need to have things like IntelliSense,
+
+11:41.120 --> 11:42.800
+and being able to find definitions 
+
+11:42.800 --> 11:45.839
+of functions or classes that are defined.
+
+11:45.839 --> 11:47.040
+So you have a new editor 
+
+11:47.040 --> 11:47.519
+that comes along 
+
+11:47.519 --> 11:49.440
+that has basically better functionality
+
+11:49.440 --> 11:51.279
+than the one that was there before.
+
+11:51.279 --> 11:52.399
+But the thing is,
+
+11:52.399 --> 11:53.760
+if you have a new editor that comes along
+
+11:53.760 --> 11:54.720
+with better functionality,
+
+11:54.720 --> 11:57.120
+it still has to be at least as good as
+
+11:57.120 --> 11:58.800
+or better than the previous editor
+
+11:58.800 --> 12:00.000
+for people to stick with it. 
+
+12:00.000 --> 12:02.480
+So it's a very tall order 
+
+12:02.480 --> 12:03.680
+for someone to say
+
+12:03.680 --> 12:05.200
+there's going to be some editor
+
+12:05.200 --> 12:05.839
+that will come along 
+
+12:05.839 --> 12:07.040
+that would be better than Emacs 
+
+12:07.040 --> 12:08.240
+on every dimension,
+
+12:08.240 --> 12:09.680
+because there are some unique dimensions
+
+12:09.680 --> 12:11.360
+that are hard to beat 
+
+12:11.360 --> 12:14.160
+in an editor like Emacs.
+
+12:14.160 --> 12:15.920
+Lack of sufficient maintenance. 
+
+12:15.920 --> 12:16.560
+That's one thing 
+
+12:16.560 --> 12:17.600
+that could possibly happen
+
+12:17.600 --> 12:19.279
+if an editor loses popularity.
+
+12:19.279 --> 12:20.687
+So maybe sometimes... 
+
+12:20.687 --> 12:22.480
+Sorry, that's something 
+
+12:22.480 --> 12:23.440
+that can cause a lack, 
+
+12:23.440 --> 00:12:25.679
+a loss of popularity. 
+
+12:25.680 --> 12:26.959
+Sometimes the development team
+
+12:26.959 --> 12:28.320
+for an editor either moves on
+
+12:28.320 --> 12:29.279
+or maybe switches focus 
+
+12:29.279 --> 12:30.720
+to a different project. 
+
+12:30.720 --> 12:32.079
+When this happens, the development 
+
+12:32.079 --> 12:33.360
+of the editor can stagnate,
+
+12:33.360 --> 12:36.240
+giving the impression that it's dead.
+
+12:37.279 --> 12:38.160
+You can see this happening 
+
+12:38.160 --> 12:40.720
+a lot of times on repositories 
+
+12:40.720 --> 12:41.920
+for open source projects,
+
+12:41.920 --> 12:43.440
+where if someone doesn't make any commits
+
+12:43.440 --> 12:44.639
+or adding new features for a while,
+
+12:44.639 --> 12:45.839
+people just automatically assume
+
+12:45.839 --> 12:46.880
+that the thing is dead,
+
+12:46.880 --> 12:48.399
+even if it's in a very stable state
+
+12:48.399 --> 12:49.920
+and doesn't really need any improvements
+
+12:49.920 --> 12:53.680
+to be made. This is something 
+
+12:53.680 --> 12:55.360
+that can happen over time. 
+
+12:55.360 --> 12:56.720
+The developers of Sublime Text
+
+12:56.720 --> 12:57.920
+sometimes give the impression 
+
+12:57.920 --> 12:59.519
+that the editor isn't being maintained
+
+12:59.519 --> 13:02.000
+because of long breaks between updates,
+
+13:02.000 --> 13:03.360
+and this gives people...
+
+13:03.360 --> 13:04.560
+If you go search for 
+
+13:04.560 --> 13:05.440
+"Is Sublime Text dead?", 
+
+13:05.440 --> 13:06.800
+you'll see posts about this
+
+13:07.519 --> 13:08.240
+every couple years, 
+
+13:08.240 --> 13:09.120
+where people are wondering 
+
+13:09.120 --> 13:10.320
+what's happening with Sublime Text,
+
+13:10.320 --> 13:12.320
+when in reality, there's actually
+
+13:12.320 --> 13:15.120
+development happening on this project,
+
+13:15.120 --> 13:18.160
+and paid users are getting these updates
+
+13:18.160 --> 13:19.279
+because they've paid,
+
+13:19.279 --> 13:20.639
+but the product is not open source.
+
+13:20.639 --> 13:21.600
+You have no visibility 
+
+13:21.600 --> 13:22.399
+into the development.
+
+13:22.399 --> 13:24.639
+So if people have the perception
+
+13:24.639 --> 13:26.160
+that the editor is not being maintained,
+
+13:26.160 --> 13:26.880
+then there's going to be 
+
+13:26.880 --> 13:28.079
+rumors getting started, 
+
+13:28.079 --> 13:29.200
+and that could cause 
+
+13:29.200 --> 13:30.959
+the mentality of people to shift
+
+13:30.959 --> 13:32.639
+and try to move on to other editors
+
+13:32.639 --> 13:34.240
+because they perceive them to be
+
+13:34.240 --> 13:36.399
+more well-maintained or more active.
+
+13:36.399 --> 13:37.920
+Another problem can be that there are
+
+13:37.920 --> 13:39.839
+major bugs that persist over a long time
+
+13:39.839 --> 13:41.040
+that aren't being fixed 
+
+13:41.040 --> 13:42.560
+while the maintainers are focusing on 
+
+13:42.560 --> 13:44.639
+some other efforts in the project,
+
+13:44.639 --> 13:46.000
+and this could hurt sentiment 
+
+13:46.000 --> 13:48.160
+in the community and cause a backlash
+
+13:48.160 --> 13:49.120
+leading to an exodus.
+
+13:49.120 --> 13:51.120
+So if you have really bad bugs
+
+13:51.120 --> 13:51.600
+and people think 
+
+13:51.600 --> 13:52.560
+that you're not really concerned
+
+13:52.560 --> 13:53.519
+about fixing them, 
+
+13:53.519 --> 13:54.399
+then that could be something 
+
+13:54.399 --> 13:55.360
+that would cause an editor 
+
+13:55.360 --> 13:56.399
+to lose popularity 
+
+13:56.399 --> 13:58.000
+as people move on to find something else
+
+13:58.000 --> 00:14:01.039
+that appears to be more stable.
+
+14:01.040 --> 14:03.199
+Lastly, sometimes all it takes is 
+
+14:03.199 --> 14:04.480
+for a new programming language 
+
+14:04.480 --> 14:05.279
+to become popular 
+
+14:05.279 --> 14:06.880
+or for an influential person to say 
+
+14:06.880 --> 14:08.720
+that they switched to a different editor,
+
+14:08.720 --> 14:14.560
+because people are capable of being led
+
+14:14.560 --> 14:16.720
+by someone else who is influential,
+
+14:16.720 --> 14:18.320
+so sometimes it's just... 
+
+14:18.320 --> 14:20.240
+All it takes is someone to say, you know,
+
+14:20.240 --> 14:22.240
+I'm not going to use this editor any more,
+
+14:22.240 --> 14:24.000
+and other people will follow. 
+
+14:24.000 --> 14:26.240
+But oftentimes, it's not just about
+
+14:26.240 --> 14:27.199
+the fashion changing,
+
+14:27.199 --> 14:28.560
+it's also there's other problems 
+
+14:28.560 --> 14:29.040
+that are happening.
+
+14:29.040 --> 14:29.680
+Some of these other things 
+
+14:29.680 --> 14:30.959
+that I mentioned before 
+
+14:30.959 --> 14:32.160
+that could be contributing 
+
+14:32.160 --> 14:33.839
+to this overall sentiment
+
+14:33.839 --> 00:14:36.958
+that caused people to move on.
+
+14:36.959 --> 14:38.000
+So then what happens 
+
+14:38.000 --> 14:40.000
+when an editor loses popularity? 
+
+14:40.000 --> 14:40.800
+If people are worried 
+
+14:40.800 --> 14:43.120
+that Emacs is going to lose popularity,
+
+14:43.120 --> 14:44.880
+what happens if it doesn't gain more? 
+
+14:44.880 --> 14:47.839
+So what are the possible consequences?
+
+14:47.839 --> 14:49.120
+Well, maybe core maintainers 
+
+14:49.120 --> 14:50.399
+will gradually leave the project
+
+14:50.399 --> 14:52.160
+with nobody to replace them. I mean,
+
+14:52.160 --> 14:53.839
+if you have a project like Emacs
+
+14:53.839 --> 14:57.199
+where there's a core
+
+14:57.199 --> 14:58.240
+that's written in a language 
+
+14:58.240 --> 14:59.600
+that's different than the language 
+
+14:59.600 --> 15:01.040
+everybody uses to extend it,
+
+15:01.040 --> 15:02.240
+then maybe it's risky 
+
+15:02.240 --> 15:03.440
+to have people leave the project 
+
+15:03.440 --> 15:04.800
+because you don't have other people 
+
+15:04.800 --> 15:06.560
+to come along who can help maintain it
+
+15:06.560 --> 15:10.240
+and to carry on the knowledge of the core.
+
+15:10.240 --> 15:11.519
+Also, maybe no new features 
+
+15:11.519 --> 15:13.279
+are being added to stay competitive 
+
+15:13.279 --> 15:14.800
+with other editors. 
+
+15:14.800 --> 15:15.920
+So this is one of these things 
+
+15:15.920 --> 15:17.120
+where people kind of feel like
+
+15:17.120 --> 15:18.800
+there's a feature mill, where you know
+
+15:18.800 --> 15:20.880
+if new features are coming online
+
+15:20.880 --> 15:21.680
+in other editors,
+
+15:21.680 --> 15:23.279
+maybe your editor needs to catch up.
+
+15:23.279 --> 15:24.160
+Well, I don't really think that
+
+15:24.160 --> 15:25.279
+that's necessarily needed,
+
+15:25.279 --> 15:28.160
+but if there are new paradigms
+
+15:28.160 --> 15:29.839
+or usage patterns or workflows
+
+15:29.839 --> 15:32.320
+that are becoming... 
+
+15:32.320 --> 15:33.759
+I guess you could say mainstream,
+
+15:33.759 --> 15:34.800
+sometimes it does make sense 
+
+15:34.800 --> 15:37.199
+for an editor to be able to adopt these,
+
+15:37.199 --> 15:37.759
+but if you have 
+
+15:37.759 --> 15:39.519
+a sufficiently extendable editor, 
+
+15:39.519 --> 15:41.440
+then oftentimes, you don't really need to
+
+15:41.440 --> 15:42.079
+do anything other than 
+
+15:42.079 --> 15:44.480
+just write a new package.
+
+15:44.480 --> 15:46.160
+Critical bugs that never get fixed...
+
+15:46.160 --> 15:48.240
+I mean, if people start to drift off 
+
+15:48.240 --> 15:49.839
+from the project, it is much more likely
+
+15:49.839 --> 15:52.720
+that bad bugs won't get fixed over time.
+
+15:52.720 --> 15:54.079
+Less community interest in creating 
+
+15:54.079 --> 15:55.199
+and maintaining packages. 
+
+15:55.199 --> 15:56.320
+There's another possibility 
+
+15:56.320 --> 15:57.519
+if people don't feel like
+
+15:57.519 --> 15:58.880
+it's worth their time anymore
+
+15:58.880 --> 16:00.079
+because not many people 
+
+16:00.079 --> 16:00.880
+are using an editor, 
+
+16:00.880 --> 16:02.480
+maybe they'll have more users 
+
+16:02.480 --> 16:03.279
+or more interaction 
+
+16:03.279 --> 16:04.959
+if they go write a similar package 
+
+16:04.959 --> 16:07.440
+for a different editor.
+
+16:07.440 --> 16:10.079
+Less blog posts, videos, content. 
+
+16:10.079 --> 16:11.519
+Basically, like, if people feel 
+
+16:11.519 --> 16:12.480
+that it's not worth their time 
+
+16:12.480 --> 16:13.839
+to make content about the editor either,
+
+16:13.839 --> 16:15.360
+or if you're just not interested any more,
+
+16:15.360 --> 16:17.040
+then those things will dry up.
+
+16:17.040 --> 16:18.639
+And also one thing that is possible, 
+
+16:18.639 --> 16:19.839
+but probably not very likely, 
+
+16:19.839 --> 16:21.839
+is that the program may not be 
+
+16:21.839 --> 16:24.000
+packaged any more in Linux distributions
+
+16:24.000 --> 16:25.680
+or for other operating systems. 
+
+16:25.680 --> 16:27.519
+So if it's not worth someone to package it,
+
+16:27.519 --> 16:29.040
+or they just sort of lose interest 
+
+16:29.040 --> 16:31.360
+in the editor, then maybe those things
+
+16:31.360 --> 16:32.320
+sort of drift away 
+
+16:32.320 --> 16:33.920
+and you can't even install it any more 
+
+16:33.920 --> 16:35.360
+in many places.
+
+16:35.360 --> 16:36.399
+But I feel that these things 
+
+16:36.399 --> 16:37.279
+would only really happen 
+
+16:37.279 --> 16:39.279
+if there was already other major issues
+
+16:39.279 --> 16:41.920
+in the dev team or in the community,
+
+16:41.920 --> 16:44.320
+like maybe a high profile schism 
+
+16:44.320 --> 16:45.199
+in the maintainer team,
+
+16:45.199 --> 16:47.519
+sort of like what we saw with GNU Emacs
+
+16:47.519 --> 16:49.759
+versus XEmacs, because you have 
+
+16:49.759 --> 16:50.959
+two competing versions 
+
+16:50.959 --> 16:52.160
+of the same idea 
+
+16:52.160 --> 16:53.600
+with different implementations,
+
+16:53.600 --> 16:54.800
+and then over time,
+
+16:54.800 --> 16:55.920
+one of them may fade out
+
+16:55.920 --> 16:57.839
+because people just lose interest 
+
+16:57.839 --> 17:00.800
+and maybe something like GNU Emacs
+
+17:00.800 --> 17:02.399
+gradually catches up and surpasses it
+
+17:02.399 --> 17:04.720
+in functionality. So these things
+
+17:04.720 --> 17:07.520
+can happen, but it's not really 
+
+17:07.520 --> 00:17:10.239
+as likely as people would think, I think.
+
+17:10.240 --> 17:12.959
+So how is Emacs going to survive
+
+17:12.959 --> 17:15.280
+despite popularity? I feel that 
+
+17:15.280 --> 17:16.640
+there are a few important 
+
+17:16.640 --> 17:17.679
+and unique factors 
+
+17:17.679 --> 00:17:20.159
+that are going to contribute to this.
+
+17:20.160 --> 17:21.520
+First of all, Emacs is
+
+17:21.520 --> 17:22.720
+more deeply hackable 
+
+17:22.720 --> 17:24.959
+than almost all other editors.
+
+17:24.959 --> 17:26.000
+I'm couching that a bit,
+
+17:26.000 --> 17:26.880
+but really it is
+
+17:26.880 --> 17:28.000
+basically more extensible 
+
+17:28.000 --> 17:28.960
+than any other editor. 
+
+17:28.960 --> 17:29.679
+I haven't seen one 
+
+17:29.679 --> 17:31.440
+that's more extensible than Emacs so far,
+
+17:31.440 --> 17:32.000
+and that's because 
+
+17:32.000 --> 17:34.160
+Emacs was designed for this.
+
+17:34.160 --> 17:35.360
+The whole point of Emacs
+
+17:35.360 --> 17:36.960
+is that you should be able to go in
+
+17:36.960 --> 17:38.320
+and customize your workflow,
+
+17:38.320 --> 17:39.600
+and customize the editor to do
+
+17:39.600 --> 17:41.039
+exactly what you want it to do. 
+
+17:41.039 --> 17:44.080
+It's this whole idea of user freedom.
+
+17:44.080 --> 17:46.320
+You're not letting the editor designer
+
+17:46.320 --> 17:47.120
+tell you what to do,
+
+17:47.120 --> 17:48.880
+you're telling the editor what to do
+
+17:48.880 --> 17:50.559
+at every step of the way.
+
+17:50.559 --> 17:53.440
+Also, an Emacs user can grow their skills
+
+17:53.440 --> 17:55.039
+from small configuration tweaks,
+
+17:55.039 --> 17:56.240
+just basically setting variables 
+
+17:56.240 --> 17:57.280
+and whatnot, to writing 
+
+17:57.280 --> 17:58.960
+their own packages over time,
+
+17:58.960 --> 17:59.600
+and then eventually 
+
+17:59.600 --> 18:01.280
+to contributing to Emacs itself-- 
+
+18:01.280 --> 18:02.320
+the same skill set, 
+
+18:02.320 --> 18:03.360
+because the majority 
+
+18:03.360 --> 18:04.640
+of the functionality of the editor
+
+18:04.640 --> 18:06.160
+is written with the same language
+
+18:06.160 --> 18:07.600
+that you use to configure it.
+
+18:07.600 --> 18:09.280
+So unlike other editors,
+
+18:09.280 --> 18:10.960
+where you have... 
+
+18:10.960 --> 18:12.960
+the way that you write extensions 
+
+18:12.960 --> 18:13.440
+for the editor,
+
+18:13.440 --> 18:14.960
+that has a specific API,
+
+18:14.960 --> 18:16.400
+but if you go contribute to the core,
+
+18:16.400 --> 18:18.160
+the code base is completely different.
+
+18:18.160 --> 18:19.280
+It's different with Emacs 
+
+18:19.280 --> 18:22.640
+because you have basically the same APIs,
+
+18:22.640 --> 18:24.320
+the same code and same everything
+
+18:24.320 --> 18:26.080
+that you use to write a package
+
+18:26.080 --> 18:28.160
+versus writing actual code 
+
+18:28.160 --> 18:29.600
+for functionality for the editor.
+
+18:29.600 --> 18:30.960
+Now obviously, there's the C layer
+
+18:30.960 --> 18:32.000
+that is different, 
+
+18:32.000 --> 18:34.000
+but I think a lot of the actual packages
+
+18:34.000 --> 18:35.280
+and functionality in Emacs 
+
+18:35.280 --> 18:36.640
+are at the Emacs Lisp layer.
+
+18:36.640 --> 18:38.797
+So what this means is that
+
+18:38.797 --> 18:41.120
+Emacs configuration hackers 
+
+18:41.120 --> 18:42.000
+and package authors 
+
+18:42.000 --> 18:43.200
+are prime candidates 
+
+18:43.200 --> 18:44.880
+for eventually becoming contributors 
+
+18:44.880 --> 18:46.960
+to Emacs itself. You see this play out 
+
+18:46.960 --> 18:48.559
+a lot of times in Emacs community,
+
+18:48.559 --> 18:49.760
+where someone writes 
+
+18:49.760 --> 18:51.039
+some really good packages,
+
+18:51.039 --> 18:52.240
+and either parts of those 
+
+18:52.240 --> 18:53.440
+get merged into Emacs
+
+18:53.440 --> 18:55.520
+or that person maybe makes contributions
+
+18:55.520 --> 18:57.280
+to Emacs to add new functionality
+
+18:57.280 --> 18:59.360
+that their own packages can use,
+
+18:59.360 --> 19:01.679
+or just to improve Emacs as a whole.
+
+19:01.679 --> 19:03.679
+So there's much more chance
+
+19:03.679 --> 19:04.880
+that people who are involved 
+
+19:04.880 --> 19:06.160
+in the community of Emacs
+
+19:06.160 --> 19:07.440
+can actually become contributors 
+
+19:07.440 --> 19:08.480
+to the project itself. 
+
+19:08.480 --> 19:09.200
+I think that's going to be
+
+19:09.200 --> 19:11.600
+very important for its health.
+
+19:11.600 --> 19:13.200
+Also, you don't need to add functionality
+
+19:13.200 --> 19:14.080
+to Emacs core 
+
+19:14.080 --> 19:16.160
+to make the editor itself better. 
+
+19:16.160 --> 19:17.120
+Package authors are on
+
+19:17.120 --> 19:18.480
+an equal playing field
+
+19:18.480 --> 19:19.679
+as the built-in functionality,
+
+19:19.679 --> 19:21.008
+for the same reason what I said before. 
+
+19:21.008 --> 19:22.640
+Everything's written with Emacs Lisp,
+
+19:22.640 --> 19:24.160
+or I guess a lot of the functionality
+
+19:24.160 --> 19:26.000
+is written with Emacs Lisp. 
+
+19:26.000 --> 19:28.720
+Since there's a lot of ways to hook into
+
+19:28.720 --> 19:30.720
+or replace functionality in Emacs,
+
+19:30.720 --> 19:33.280
+you can do a lot of deep customizations
+
+19:33.280 --> 19:35.360
+to Emacs itself to make it better 
+
+19:35.360 --> 19:37.600
+in ways that aren't really...
+
+19:37.600 --> 19:39.760
+The core developers don't need to
+
+19:39.760 --> 19:40.960
+add new things for you to do that.
+
+19:40.960 --> 19:42.320
+You can just do it if you want to.
+
+19:42.320 --> 19:44.640
+So that gives Emacs more of
+
+19:44.640 --> 19:45.840
+a platform feel
+
+19:45.840 --> 19:47.440
+rather than just being an editor 
+
+19:47.440 --> 00:19:51.439
+that can't really be changed very much.
+
+19:51.440 --> 19:53.440
+Also, Emacs has a strong community 
+
+19:53.440 --> 19:56.080
+of highly-skilled packaged authors
+
+19:56.080 --> 19:58.000
+and the high-quality packages 
+
+19:58.000 --> 19:59.919
+that they create make it far better
+
+19:59.919 --> 20:01.679
+and more uniquely valuable 
+
+20:01.679 --> 20:02.960
+than many other editors.
+
+20:02.960 --> 20:04.960
+Specifically, things like Org mode, 
+
+20:04.960 --> 20:06.240
+Magit, Org-roam, 
+
+20:06.240 --> 20:07.039
+and a lot of other things 
+
+20:07.039 --> 20:08.000
+that we've talked about 
+
+20:08.000 --> 20:10.000
+on the System Crafters channel over time,
+
+20:10.000 --> 20:11.136
+and the hundreds of other
+
+20:11.136 --> 20:12.480
+workflow-improving packages 
+
+20:12.480 --> 20:14.720
+that have been created over the years.
+
+20:14.720 --> 20:18.559
+So all these things really make Emacs
+
+20:18.559 --> 20:20.159
+a unique offering 
+
+20:20.159 --> 20:21.679
+in the space of text editors,
+
+20:21.679 --> 20:22.640
+or development tools, 
+
+20:22.640 --> 20:24.240
+or even just general 
+
+20:24.240 --> 20:25.440
+information management tools, 
+
+20:25.440 --> 20:27.120
+or desktop environments, 
+
+20:27.120 --> 20:28.960
+if you want to call it that.
+
+20:28.960 --> 20:31.280
+So the people who are involved
+
+20:31.280 --> 20:32.159
+in making these things 
+
+20:32.159 --> 20:33.600
+make Emacs far better than it could be
+
+20:33.600 --> 20:35.039
+just by itself,
+
+20:35.039 --> 20:37.360
+and this thriving ecosystem helps Emacs
+
+20:37.360 --> 20:39.120
+to continually feel fresh, 
+
+20:39.120 --> 20:40.320
+regardless of what's happening 
+
+20:40.320 --> 20:41.600
+in core Emacs development,
+
+20:41.600 --> 20:43.840
+because packages can do so much
+
+20:43.840 --> 20:45.280
+and because people can come along
+
+20:45.280 --> 20:46.640
+and propose sort of 
+
+20:46.640 --> 20:47.760
+a new way of doing things
+
+20:47.760 --> 20:49.360
+and other people can start using it. 
+
+20:49.360 --> 20:51.120
+Emacs itself doesn't have to be
+
+20:51.120 --> 20:52.400
+beholden to just what
+
+20:52.400 --> 20:53.840
+the core developers do. 
+
+20:53.840 --> 20:55.280
+The community can also play 
+
+20:55.280 --> 20:57.760
+a major role in making Emacs feel fresh
+
+20:57.760 --> 20:59.919
+and be modernized over time.
+
+20:59.919 --> 21:01.360
+Just take a look at what Doom Emacs
+
+21:01.360 --> 21:03.919
+is doing to give Emacs a better face,
+
+21:03.919 --> 21:04.960
+and Spacemacs as well. 
+
+21:04.960 --> 21:06.240
+Those things are very good 
+
+21:06.240 --> 21:08.000
+for making Emacs more palatable
+
+21:08.000 --> 21:09.440
+to the general public,
+
+21:09.440 --> 21:11.120
+because you have a much better experience
+
+21:11.120 --> 21:12.240
+out of the box, and a lot of things
+
+21:12.240 --> 21:12.880
+have been polished 
+
+21:12.880 --> 00:21:15.279
+for the user experience.
+
+21:15.280 --> 21:17.200
+Emacs also has a very strong
+
+21:17.200 --> 21:18.799
+user community. Lots of activity
+
+21:18.799 --> 21:20.000
+and discussion about emacs
+
+21:20.000 --> 21:21.440
+is taking place all the time
+
+21:21.440 --> 21:22.559
+in various places, 
+
+21:22.559 --> 21:23.919
+like we talked about before. 
+
+21:23.919 --> 21:26.559
+Mailing lists, IRC, Reddit, etc.
+
+21:26.559 --> 21:28.159
+If you get into Emacs
+
+21:28.159 --> 21:28.880
+and you go take part 
+
+21:28.880 --> 21:29.840
+in the Emacs community,
+
+21:29.840 --> 21:30.640
+there's always going to be
+
+21:30.640 --> 21:32.000
+somebody around who's going to want to
+
+21:32.000 --> 21:33.520
+talk about Emacs with you
+
+21:33.520 --> 21:34.960
+and answer your questions.
+
+21:34.960 --> 21:37.120
+So it's a very good thing
+
+21:37.120 --> 21:39.039
+for the health of the project 
+
+21:39.039 --> 21:40.320
+because there's a lot of people there 
+
+21:40.320 --> 21:42.640
+that are very invested in it every day 
+
+21:42.640 --> 21:45.120
+and want to see it succeed.
+
+21:45.120 --> 21:47.039
+Also, there's many community members
+
+21:47.039 --> 21:47.840
+writing articles 
+
+21:47.840 --> 21:49.440
+and making videos about Emacs,
+
+21:49.440 --> 21:51.280
+many of which are actually moving forward
+
+21:51.280 --> 21:52.240
+the state of the art 
+
+21:52.240 --> 21:53.679
+about how we use the editor,
+
+21:53.679 --> 21:55.360
+and how we use it... I mean,
+
+21:55.360 --> 21:56.480
+how many times have you seen
+
+21:56.480 --> 21:57.520
+a really great blog post 
+
+21:57.520 --> 21:59.120
+that completely blew your mind
+
+21:59.120 --> 22:00.880
+and showed you a new way
+
+22:00.880 --> 22:02.720
+to use Emacs, or a new way to think about
+
+22:02.720 --> 22:05.120
+how you use Emacs. I see stuff like that
+
+22:05.120 --> 22:08.480
+all the time, like posts by Protesilaos, 
+
+22:08.480 --> 22:10.640
+or by Karthik, or by many other people
+
+22:10.640 --> 22:12.080
+who show you a new way 
+
+22:12.080 --> 22:13.360
+to look at things, and then you're, like,
+
+22:13.360 --> 22:14.720
+Wow. This... I could do things
+
+22:14.720 --> 22:15.200
+completely different 
+
+22:15.200 --> 22:16.559
+than I was doing before.
+
+22:16.559 --> 22:17.200
+This kind of stuff
+
+22:17.200 --> 22:18.240
+is extremely important 
+
+22:18.240 --> 22:20.080
+for the health of the editor
+
+22:20.080 --> 22:22.799
+going forward, because people are able to
+
+22:22.799 --> 22:24.799
+inspire others to use the editor.
+
+22:24.799 --> 22:26.559
+It's a great thing for evangelism as well.
+
+22:26.559 --> 22:28.080
+Like, if someone happens to
+
+22:28.080 --> 22:30.080
+stumble across a video or a blog post,
+
+22:30.080 --> 00:22:33.439
+they may be really inspired to use Emacs.
+
+22:33.440 --> 22:35.280
+And lastly, the Emacs maintainers
+
+22:35.280 --> 22:36.720
+and contributors really care 
+
+22:36.720 --> 22:38.000
+about the users.
+
+22:38.000 --> 22:39.280
+There are many core maintainers 
+
+22:39.280 --> 22:40.080
+who have been with the project 
+
+22:40.080 --> 22:43.360
+for 10+ years, some way longer than that.
+
+22:43.360 --> 22:45.200
+So it shows you that 
+
+22:45.200 --> 22:46.559
+the people who work on this project
+
+22:46.559 --> 22:47.600
+really care a lot, 
+
+22:47.600 --> 22:48.640
+and they're very invested 
+
+22:48.640 --> 22:51.120
+in making sure that it remains healthy 
+
+22:51.120 --> 22:53.360
+for the long term.
+
+22:53.360 --> 22:55.440
+They also really care about ensuring
+
+22:55.440 --> 22:56.720
+that Emacs continues to work well 
+
+22:56.720 --> 22:58.159
+for long-time users, 
+
+22:58.159 --> 23:00.080
+(and some people have been using it
+
+23:00.080 --> 23:01.280
+for 30 to 40 years, 
+
+23:01.280 --> 23:02.400
+which is kind of insane,
+
+23:02.400 --> 23:03.760
+if you think about it),
+
+23:03.760 --> 23:05.679
+all while gradually and sensibly
+
+23:05.679 --> 23:07.120
+enabling new scenarios 
+
+23:07.120 --> 23:08.080
+and core improvements 
+
+23:08.080 --> 23:09.280
+that benefit all of us,
+
+23:09.280 --> 23:11.520
+even the new and the old users.
+
+23:11.520 --> 23:12.880
+Keeping a piece of software
+
+23:12.880 --> 23:13.600
+running and relevant
+
+23:13.600 --> 23:14.400
+for this many years 
+
+23:14.400 --> 23:15.440
+is a huge effort, 
+
+23:15.440 --> 23:16.799
+so I'm very thankful 
+
+23:16.799 --> 23:18.480
+to the maintainers of Emacs,
+
+23:18.480 --> 23:20.159
+and I hope all of you are as well,
+
+23:20.159 --> 23:22.799
+because this is kind of an anomaly
+
+23:22.799 --> 23:23.600
+in the software field
+
+23:23.600 --> 23:24.960
+to have a piece of software 
+
+23:24.960 --> 23:26.640
+that has existed for so long,
+
+23:26.640 --> 23:30.000
+who has managed to survive 
+
+23:30.000 --> 23:31.840
+despite various different types
+
+23:31.840 --> 23:33.280
+of platform transitions, 
+
+23:33.280 --> 23:35.280
+operating transitions over the years
+
+23:35.280 --> 23:37.360
+and still thrive and be a very useful
+
+23:37.360 --> 23:38.559
+and very key piece of software 
+
+23:38.559 --> 00:23:40.959
+for a lot of people.
+
+23:40.960 --> 23:42.320
+So aren't all these things
+
+23:42.320 --> 23:43.039
+that we just talked about
+
+23:43.039 --> 23:43.840
+supposed to come 
+
+23:43.840 --> 23:45.279
+when an editor is popular?
+
+23:45.279 --> 23:46.080
+We've been talking about
+
+23:46.080 --> 23:47.039
+what is popularity, 
+
+23:47.039 --> 23:48.720
+what benefits come with popularity.
+
+23:48.720 --> 23:50.320
+So all the things I just mentioned,
+
+23:50.320 --> 23:51.120
+shouldn't that be something 
+
+23:51.120 --> 23:52.720
+that would only be for editors
+
+23:52.720 --> 23:54.640
+that are super popular? Well, I guess 
+
+23:54.640 --> 23:56.720
+the answer is maybe Emacs is actually
+
+23:56.720 --> 23:57.840
+popular enough. 
+
+23:57.840 --> 23:58.799
+That doesn't necessarily mean
+
+23:58.799 --> 24:00.640
+that we should not try to 
+
+24:00.640 --> 24:03.600
+help other people find Emacs,
+
+24:03.600 --> 24:04.960
+but I think that we should not
+
+24:04.960 --> 24:05.760
+worry so much about 
+
+24:05.760 --> 24:06.880
+the popularity of Emacs,
+
+24:06.880 --> 24:08.480
+because what we have is great,
+
+24:08.480 --> 24:11.120
+and we should just focus our time
+
+24:11.120 --> 24:13.919
+on continuing to improve the health
+
+24:13.919 --> 24:15.520
+of the community that we have
+
+24:15.520 --> 24:17.360
+and the health of the editor itself,
+
+24:17.360 --> 24:19.440
+and not worry too much about chasing
+
+24:19.440 --> 24:20.880
+whatever is happening out in the world
+
+24:20.880 --> 00:24:22.879
+at any given point.
+
+24:22.880 --> 24:26.159
+To conclude, the next time someone says
+
+24:26.159 --> 24:27.760
+we should do this thing 
+
+24:27.760 --> 24:28.559
+or this other thing
+
+24:28.559 --> 24:30.400
+to make Emacs more popular,
+
+24:30.400 --> 24:32.240
+ask them these questions.
+
+24:32.240 --> 24:35.200
+1. What does popularity mean to you?
+
+24:35.200 --> 24:37.279
+2. How do you measure it?
+
+24:37.279 --> 24:39.440
+3. What do you think Emacs is going to
+
+24:39.440 --> 24:41.600
+gain from increased popularity?
+
+24:41.600 --> 24:43.279
+So I hope that you found this talk
+
+24:43.279 --> 24:44.159
+inspiring and maybe
+
+24:44.159 --> 24:46.320
+a little bit reassuring. Thanks so much
+
+24:46.320 --> 24:48.240
+for your time, and happy hacking.
+
+24:48.240 --> 24:50.867
+We'll see ya.
+
+24:50.867 --> 24:51.559
+[captions by sachac]
diff --git a/2021/info/build-schedule.md b/2021/info/build-schedule.md
index 5be9647f..24f3f655 100644
--- a/2021/info/build-schedule.md
+++ b/2021/info/build-schedule.md
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 <!-- Automatically generated by conf-create-info-pages -->
 
 Q&A: live  
-Status: Now playing  
+Status: Finished  
 Duration: 16:54  
 
 
diff --git a/2021/info/forever-schedule.md b/2021/info/forever-schedule.md
index a8e7b336..624c88ae 100644
--- a/2021/info/forever-schedule.md
+++ b/2021/info/forever-schedule.md
@@ -1,13 +1,17 @@
 <!-- Automatically generated by conf-create-info-pages -->
 
 Q&A: live  
-Status: Captions added to video  
+Status: Now playing  
 Duration: 24:52  
-<div class="times" start="2021-11-28T21:07:00Z" end="2021-11-28T21:32:00Z">Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~ 4:07 PM -  4:32 PM EST<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~ 1:07 PM -  1:32 PM PST<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~ 9:07 PM -  9:32 PM UTC<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~10:07 PM - 10:32 PM CET<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~11:07 PM - 11:32 PM EET<br />Monday, Nov 29 2021, ~ 2:37 AM -  3:02 AM IST<br />Monday, Nov 29 2021, ~ 5:07 AM -  5:32 AM +08<br />Monday, Nov 29 2021, ~ 6:07 AM -  6:32 AM JST<br /><a href="/2021/">Find out how to watch and participate</a></div>
 
-If you have questions and the speaker has not indicated public contact information on this page, please feel free to e-mail us at <emacsconf-submit@gnu.org> and we'll forward your question to the speaker.
 
+If you have questions and the speaker has not indicated public contact information on this page, please feel free to e-mail us at <emacsconf-submit@gnu.org> and we'll forward your question to the speaker.
 
+<div class="mainVideo"><div class="video-card vid" data-id="mainVideo"><figure><video controls preload="metadata" poster="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.png" id="mainVideo">
+<source src="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.webm"><track label="English" kind="captions" srclang="en" src="/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt" default><track kind="chapters" label="Chapters" srclang="en" src="/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt" default onload="displayChapters(this)">
+</video></figure>
+<div class="files resources"><ul><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.webm">Download .webm video (24:52, 27.6MB)</a></li><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters.org">Download .org</a></li><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt">Download --main.vtt</a></li><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt">Download --chapters.vtt</a></li><li><a href="https://toobnix.org/w/jSW4Gk3hsuv2ZfW8jXHz39">View on Toobnix</a></li></ul></div><ol class="chapters"></ol></div>
+</div>
 # Description
 
 
diff --git a/2021/schedule-details.md b/2021/schedule-details.md
index 7e31f328..fdbfcb0c 100644
--- a/2021/schedule-details.md
+++ b/2021/schedule-details.md
@@ -50,8 +50,8 @@
 <tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 2:39 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/imaginary">Imaginary Programming</a></td><td>Shane Mulligan</td></tr>
 <tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 2:59 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/clede">CLEDE: the Common Lisp Emacs Development Environment</a></td><td>Fermin MF</td></tr>
 <tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 3:25 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/maintainers">How to help Emacs maintainers?</a></td><td>Bastien Guerry</td></tr>
-<tr><td>now playing</td><td width=100>~ 3:52 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/build">How to build an Emacs</a></td><td>Fermin MF</td></tr>
-<tr><td>captioned</td><td width=100>~ 4:11 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/forever">M-x Forever: Why Emacs will outlast text editor trends</a></td><td>David Wilson (System Crafters)</td></tr>
+<tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 3:52 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/build">How to build an Emacs</a></td><td>Fermin MF</td></tr>
+<tr><td>now playing</td><td width=100>~ 4:15 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/forever">M-x Forever: Why Emacs will outlast text editor trends</a></td><td>David Wilson (System Crafters)</td></tr>
 <tr><td></td><td width=100>~ 4:56 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/day2-close">Closing remarks day 2</a></td><td></td></tr></table><div class="cancelled">Cancelled:<ul><li><a href="/2021/talks/dsl">Self-Describing Smart DSL's: The Next Magits</a> - Psionic</li>
 <li><a href="/2021/talks/devel">Don't write that package! or: How I learned to stop worrying and love emacs-devel</a> - Stefan Kangas</li>
 <li><a href="/2021/talks/rust">Extending Emacs in Rust with Dynamic Modules</a> - Tuấn-Anh Nguyễn</li>
diff --git a/2021/talks/day2-close.md b/2021/talks/day2-close.md
index 9735e574..cde20b42 100644
--- a/2021/talks/day2-close.md
+++ b/2021/talks/day2-close.md
@@ -11,7 +11,6 @@
 
 - Prerecs have already been posted, yay!
 - Sorry some talks couldn't make it; we'll let you know if the speakers can still send videos, so subscribe to <emacsconf-submit@gnu.org>
-  
 - Next steps
   - We'd love to hear what you liked and what we can improve.
     Please share your conference feedback and ideas at the end of the