Podcasts about Axiom

Life Cycle For this program, Life Cycle, we have identified six stages of human development: Infant/Child/Teenager/Young Adult/Mature Adult/Senior Adult. For each stage we have selected two songs. Starting in the womb with Paul Anka and Odia Coates singing You're Having My Baby, the birth of a baby in Axiom's A Little Ray of Sunshine and finishing with comedian Jimmy Durante's poignant version of September Song and the Beatle's jaunty When I'm 64.  Playlist You're Having My Baby – Paul Anka/Odia Coates A Little Ray of Sunshine – Axiom Clair – Gilbert O'Sullivan Isn't She Lovely – Stevie Wonder Twixt Twelve And Twenty – Pat Boone Only Sixteen – Dr Hook Girls Just Wanna Have Fun – Cindi Lauper Smiley – Ronnie Burns One's On The Way – Loretta Lynn I Am Woman – Helen Reddy September Song – Jimmy Durante When I'm 64 – Beatles To re-live previous episodes, visit joy.org.au/yesterdayoncemore ENJOY! Don’t forget to tune into JOY 94.9 next Sunday at 5pm for another most enjoyable episode of Yesterday Once More. JOY 94.9 – Out.Loud.Proud – Your Voice – Your Radio Station Support JOY, support this podcast, donate, become a valued member:  https://www.joy.org.au/support joy For Support visit: joy.org.au/Support Your opinion is highly valued.  Please feel free to share your thoughts and suggestions.  Your feedback helps us to improve your listening experience.  Thank you in advance for your time and contribution The post Life Cycle appeared first on Yesterday Once More.

-A redesigned ChatGPT would encourage users beyond just chatting and towards using "coding tools, image generation and applications built by partners such as Canva and Booking.com." -NASA tasked Axiom Space and Prada to create new, high-tech spacesuits. -Using data from the James Webb Space Telescope, researchers have measured the mass of a dormant black hole 10 billion light-years away. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Bob Zimmerman dismisses NASA's sheltering orders on the ISS as an overreaction to routine Russian repair work on the Zvezda module. He details SpaceX's massive IPO, which aims to raise billions, and observes that private space station firms like Axiom and Vast continue to secure significant capital despite SpaceX's market dominance.1939

SCHEDULE JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW, 6-5-2026.1900 ADAMS BOULEVARD LA. Jeff Bliss highlights the stark contrast between Seattle's controlled homelessness and the pervasive crisis in Los Angeles. The discussion transitions to California's jungle primary, where late-arriving ballots in the Los Angelesmayoral race show statistically improbable gains for Karen Bass and Nithya Raman, fueling accusations of election irregularities. Jeff Bliss previews the opening of a massive, multi-story In-N-Out Burger in Las Vegas, predicting it will become a celebrity destination similar to Hollywood's historic clubs or New York's Stork Club. He also reflects on a rare 1955 invitation from Walt Disney, noting its role in establishing Disneyland's enduring cultural legacy. Richard Epstein examines the 14th Amendment's opening clause, distinguishing the robust rights of citizens from the conditional privileges of aliens. He argues that naturalization was historically a federal prerogative, noting that early statutes, influenced by Thomas Jefferson, included explicit racial exclusions for persons of African or Asiandescent. Richard Epstein disputes the "plain meaning" application to the 14th Amendment, arguing that "subject to the jurisdiction" requires natural allegiance rather than mere physical presence. Critiquing the Wong Kim Ark ruling, he suggests that children of legal permanent aliens should inherit their parents' status rather than automatic citizenship. Jim McTague reports on the cautious economic sentiment in Lancaster County, where despite falling gas prices, consumers remain budget-conscious. While tourism remains strong at venues like the Sight and Sound Theatre, local officials recently rejected a proposed data center in Columbia due to technicalities and concerns over its utility. Lorenzo Fiori provides an optimistic update on Italy's economy, noting improved employment rates across various demographics. He highlights a landmark legislative shift toward nuclear energy, with small plants planned by 2034. For travelers, he recommends San Miniato, a strategic, less-crowded Tuscan village famous for its white beans. Bob Zimmerman dismisses NASA's sheltering orders on the ISS as an overreaction to routine Russian repair work on the Zvezda module. He details SpaceX's massive IPO, which aims to raise billions, and observes that private space station firms like Axiom and Vast continue to secure significant capital despite SpaceX's market dominance. Bob Zimmerman surveys global spaceport developments, contrasting Spain's investment in French Guiana with the liquidation of the UK's Sutherland facility due to red tape. He debunks claims that the interstellar comet 3I/Atlas is an alien craft and notes that unpredictable sunspot activity continues to defy scientific models. Andrew Bayliss recounts how Pericles provoked the Peloponnesian War by steering Athens toward confrontation with Sparta. He details the Athenian strategy of retreating behind city walls and relying on naval imports, a move that tragically facilitated a devastating plague, claiming thousands of lives, including Pericleshimself. Andrew Bayliss profiles Lysander, a Spartan general of modest origins who secured crucial Persian funding to challenge Athenian naval supremacy. Lysander achieved victory not through direct combat, but by using deception to capture the Athenian fleet while the crews were uncharacteristically casual and off their ships. Andrew Bayliss explores the aftermath of Sparta's victory, noting that Lysander's immense power and ambition ultimately led to his death during a failed siege. Sparta's dominance eventually collapsed at the Battle of Leuctradue to a dwindling citizen population, reducing the once-mighty superpower to a minor village. Andrew Bayliss critiques the modern application of the "Thucydides Trap" to US-China relations, arguing that the original Peloponnesian War was not inevitable. He suggests the conflict was precipitated by specific provocations and accidental circumstances, drawing parallels to the circumstantial outbreak of the First World War. Henry Sokolski warns of China's fast breeder reactor program, which produces super weapons-grade plutonium capable of fueling efficient nuclear triggers. He also notes South Korea's growing interest in developing independent nuclear capabilities and submarines to counter threats from North Korea and China, despite international non-proliferation standards. Henry Sokolski explains the strategic significance of deploying Dual Capable Aircraft (DCA), such as the F-35, to reinforce NATO's nuclear deterrent in Europe. He observes that while Moscow and Beijing oppose these deployments, the aircraft act as vital "glue" for alliances, ensuring that American nuclear guarantees remain credible. Richard Epstein analyzes the Wong Kim Ark decision, arguing that Justice Horace Gray erroneously applied birthright citizenship to the children of ineligible aliens. He further critiques the expansion of the Equal Protection Clause in the 20th century, claiming it was originally intended for criminal matters rather than civil benefits. Richard Epstein discusses the legal complexities of a proposed executive order to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens. He highlights the rise of "manufactured citizenship" through birth tourism and predicts the Supreme Court may eventually distinguish between transient visitors and those seeking permanent residency.

Joey Brannon sits down with Axiom advisor Cameron Earhart, CEPA, to break down a recent client sale to a private equity firm. Cameron worked with the owner through the process, and the two talk candidly about why the buyer mattered more than the number, what changes the day after closing, and how the right firm turns a team loose to grow. It is an honest look at how these deals work from the inside and how to land in the small group of owners who are genuinely glad they sold.IN THIS EPISODE, YOU'LL LEARN:• Why your future CEO is the relationship that decides everything• How to read a buyer before you sign the LOI• What changes the day after you sell• The three boxes to check before your first PE meetingDOWNLOAD THE LEADERSHIP GUIDE:‍ ‍Episode 191: Not All PE Is The DevilHELP US IMPROVE THE SHOW: Take our 30-second SurveyHave a question for the show? Email us at contact@axiomstrategic.comCONNECT WITH AXIOM• Website• LinkedIn• Instagram• Facebook• YouTubeABOUT AXIOM STRATEGIC: Axiom Strategic helps business owners and leaders build mission-driven businesses by aligning culture, leadership, operations, sales, and financials.

In 2025, seven-month-old startup Axiom solved all 12 of the problems Putnam exam (scoring 8/12 in the time limit) a prestigious undergraduate math exam. The 12/12 score is better than the top undergraduates (110/120) and the closest AI system that reported a result (DeepSeek 103/120), although it is unclear what the people and other systems would have scored with more time. Nonetheless, the Putnam exam is legendary for its difficulty, with the median score typically being 0 or 1 points. Taken by itself, this seems like a minor feather in the cap of AI; one of a long series of accomplishments by AI systems in elite competitions with humans, starting with Deep Blue beating Kasparov.Fast forward to mid-2026, and Claude Code is eating the world. In 2024 Anthropic's bet on code and enterprise looked like a more pragmatic niche play vs. OpenAI's better models and massive consume scale. Today, Amodei's all in bet on acceleration via code (images and video be damned) seems prescient.Despite Anthropic's growing momentum, however, Axiom CEO Carina Hong sees coding ability as a necessary but not sufficient milestone on the path to AGI. Code arguably pushes the jagged frontier to the point of super intelligence in some domains outside of coding, but there are surprising gaps (link) that Carina believes will bottleneck AI progress. (Stats on math benchmarks).The informal bottleneck“Verified AI” sounds like eating broccoli (footnote: I actually love broccoli, but then again, I also believe strongly in Test Driven Development, so ¯(ツ)/¯ ) and paying taxes, but to Axiom it means something very different. “Verification to me is about scaling brilliance, compounding brilliance,” Carina told us.It actually took a while for me to understand what she means by this. It sounded like marketing-speak to me, until it clicked. Carina emphasizes an story about legendary mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan to illustrate the point. When G.H. Hardy finally persuaded Ramanujan to formally prove theorems instead of relying on his (formidable) intuition, it reportedly improved his own capabilities. This is presumably because formally proving things forced Ramanujan to articulate the details in a way that open up new lines of thinking, etc. This is one part of “compounding.”But formally proving things also allowed others to benefit from his intuition: the proofs are way of communicating an intuition and persuading others that the intuition is correct. This is scaling (more people use the result) and compounding (people can learn from and build on his work).This is the analogy that Carina wants us to focus on.Verified GenerationThere are two ways that Verified AI shows up: in training and in inference.But a quick detour: to a first approximation, “Formal Verification” means using type checkers (like for TypeScript, C++ or Rust, but more capable) to verify mathematical proofs that are meticulously specified using a language like Lean (footnote: Formal verification also includes model checking (TLA+, SPIN), SMT-based tools (Dafny, F*, Why3), and refinement-type systems (Liquid Haskell) — many of which don't look much like “type checking a proof” from the user's perspective even when there's a similar logical core underneath. It also gets applied to software and hardware correctness, not only pure mathematics.). It takes a lot of work to translate an “informal” proof (albeit one that most people would not remotely call “informal”) in to a Lean proof (footnote: This is an understatement. Most theorems remain informal because formalization is so hard to do. There has been a great deal of effort to formalize the most important proofs, with mixed results)You can imagine how this would be (very) useful during Reinforcement Learning: instead of relying on best guesses based on statistics (GRPO, RLHF, etc.), you can just verify the proof is correct using a Lean verifier. This is obviously a much stronger reward signal, akin to compiling code and testing it (which is what is typically done with RL on coding).The catch: LLM are not (currently) very good at proving things with Lean.Enter Axiom: While they have not officially reported benchmark numbers besides the 12/12 Putnam result, Carina reports that they have achieved a very impressive 99% (187/189) ProofGen on the Verina benchmark. This benchmark is to generate code and proof of correctness for a series of problems. For context, OpenAI o3 (the last known OpenAI run) achieved 4.9% on this benchmark.Based on the sparse benchmarking, it's hard to say what the frontier labs are currently doing, but Carina suggests that they still are not training to generate Lean proofs directly, rather relying on informal proofs.Time will tell if the frontier labs' current approaches will close this gap.Scaling and compoundingCarina's Ramanujan analogy is pretty direct. Better proofs → better Lean generation → better RL. A stronger signal means higher sample efficiency and higher maximum performance. Great!Scaling is pretty clear too: once I have proved something in Lean, the quality of the output is basically (footnote: one might argue that its a bit lower because the proof is in distribution for the LLM) as high as if it came from a human, so my high quality training set has grown in a way that an informal rollout corpus cannot. I can trust my Lean proofs.Compounding is also clear: now all of future inference and training can build upon those proofs.On the other hand, a model trained only using statistical signals like GRPO during RL lacks the sample efficiency, maximum performance and compounding corpus that a system that uses formal verification benefits from.All roads lead to verificationBroccoli and taxes notwithstanding, “verification” has shown up in a lot of conversations recently. In the in physical system control:“I think [verifiability] is probably the hardest problem right now, because the as the models get better, it can be harder and harder to find the faults on the system. And so the problem of doing proper eval to find those faults, that problem also keeps getting harder as the models get better.” -In theoretical physics:“…now that we're in this regime where you can just get ChatGPT to tackle thousands of questions at the same time, it will return proofs for a significant fraction of them. Now actually the onus is back on the humans to verify all the outputs. And so, yeah, as that becomes a bottleneck, I think formalizing math and automating verification will become more valuable.” -Verification is, in fact, the key differences between AI for science and AI for computation: in science you to have to actually test (verify) your hypothesis by performing physical experiments. Lab in the loop systems like Radical AI and Lila build around exactly this premise (we have recorded episodes with both of these teams and will release them soon!)And yes, formally verifying critical systems such as flight control, nuclear power plants and pacemakers is a growing focus as the software and hardware that run them becomes more complex.Carina believes so strongly that AGI requires verified generation that she makes the unqualified claim that “We do not believe there is any other possible future.”Expensive to produce, cheap to verifyLean proofs are hard generate, but they can be easily shown to be correct or incorrect. But how do you know that the proof you created maps correctly to the problem you care about? As Carina puts it: “Anything that can be specified can be proven. Humans are bad at specifying everything we want.”Are we now in the specification business? Check out the episode to hear Carina's take, as well as:* Why hardware verification is a killer app* Details on the AXLE open API and recently released Discovery toolkit* The Erdos debacle* The OpenAI GPT-f diaspora This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.latent.space/subscribe

The episode begins with a recap of recent happenings in professional wrestling, focusing on WWE SmackDown. It covers the setup of the women's match, Sami Zayn's interruption and heel turn, The Miz vs. Axiom match, Matt Cardona and Sami Zayn confrontation, tag team matchup, concerns about tag team championships, Dan Housen's experiment, and the United States title picture.TakeawaysWWE SmackDown recapUnited States title pictureChapters00:00 Introduction and Recent Happenings in Professional Wrestling07:23 Dan Housen's Experiment and United States Title Picture

Mark Henry gives his instant reaction to the final faceoff before Clash in Italy between Cody Rhodes and GUNTHER before breaking down the rest of Smackdown emanating from Barcelona. To visit our partners at Chewy, click here. The Master's Class is now available on its own podcast feed! SUBSCRIBE NOW to hear over 50 episodes of Dave, Bully, Mark, and Tommy taking you behind the scenes like only they can, plus BRAND NEW episodes every week. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of Busted Open ad-free and get exclusive access to bonus episodes. Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Get 54% off Norton VPN: https://norton.ow5a.net/c/221109/3757569/4405?subId1=0526_WCYT_7 Our WWE SmackDown review as Simon Miller recaps:0:00 Jade Cargill vs. Alexa Bliss 3:39 Backstage promos5:14 Axiom vs. The Miz6:10 Tama Tonga & Talla Tonga vs. Damian Priest & Royce Keys8:19 Sami Zayn vs. Matt Cardona9:21 Carmelo Hayes vs. Ricky Saints10:56 Chelsea Green vs. Nia Jax13:28 Cody Rhodes and Gunther faceoff Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

SmackDown in Barcelona had energy, big stars, and plenty of drama. Jade Cargill opened the show with the Baddies, Rhea Ripley came out strong, Charlotte Flair and Alexa Bliss got involved, and Jade still ended the night looking dangerous heading into Clash in Italy. Axiom got a huge win over The Miz in front of his home country crowd, Carmelo Hayes and Ricky Saints had a very good match with a chaotic finish, and Cody Rhodes and Gunther closed the show with a final face-off that did exactly what it needed to do.In this review, I break down the entire show in under 10 minutes — the good, the bad, the weird, and what actually mattered most going into Clash in Italy. Fast review, honest reaction, no nonsense.Visit our website ➡️➡️➡️ https://www.majesticproduction.com/Watch our full podcast here ➡️➡️➡️ anchor.fm/majestic-production

Kate (@MissKatefabe) and Cresta (@CrestaTheeStarr) discuss tonight's episode of Smackdown, May 29, 2026 including: -WWE Champion Cody Rhodes addresses Gunther's latest attack -Jade Cargill has one final message for WWE Women's Champion Rhea Ripley -Jade Cargill vs. Alexa Bliss -Chelsea Green vs. Nia Jax -Ricky Saints vs. Carmelo Hayes -Trick Williams appears -Axiom vs. The Miz -Sami Zayn vs. Matt Cardona EXCLUSIVE NordVPN Deal ➼ https://nordvpn.com/fightful Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee! A MUST HAVE for wrestling fans! Watch all WWE shows with one Netflix subscription, and save HUNDREDS on AEW PPV events with a MYAEW subscription! Buy two months of BlueChew Gold, and get the third for FREE with promo code FIGHTFUL! Visit BlueChew.com, code FIGHTFUL! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Space Show Presents Shubber Ali, Sunday, 4-19-26Quick Summary:This Space Show program featured Shubber Ali, the original founder of Space Cynics, discussing his return to critiquing space industry claims and over hyping. Shubber explained how Space Cynics began in the mid-2000s as a blog focused on questioning exaggerated claims about space technology, particularly around reusable rockets and commercial space ventures. The discussion centered heavily on Shubber's criticism of current space projects, including Elon Musk's data center plans in space, orbital mirrors for solar power, and space-based solar power systems. Shubber argued these projects were economically unfeasible due to launch costs, engineering challenges, and unrealistic timelines, using detailed calculations to demonstrate why proposed constellations would take decades to deploy rather than the claimed 5-year timeframes. The conversation also touched on NASA's Artemis program, government debt concerns, and the challenges of space colonization, with Shubber expressing skepticism about many current space industry promises while acknowledging the long-term potential for space development.Detailed Summary:The Wisdom Team discussed the background of Shubber Ali, who joined the meeting late due to a family commitment. They shared memories of past encounters, including a NASA Ames event and Shubber's work on the X33 “Adventure Star” project 25 years ago. The conversation touched on personal updates, including Shubber's recent move from California to Maryland and his company's location in Maine. The conversation ended with a brief discussion about potential future topics to cover, including data centers and reflecting mirrors, though the specific focus was not finalized.David welcomed Shubber Ali to the Sunday Space Show to discuss the resurrection of Space Cynics, a blog and award system that Shubber had originally founded in the mid-2000s. Shubber explained that Space Cynics focused on critiquing outlandish claims made by space companies, particularly through their “Walking Eagle Award” given to companies making unrealistic promises. Shubber shared his background working at KPMG in the 1990s, where he managed a space consulting team that produced the first annual State of the Space Industry report in collaboration with SpaceVest and other partners. The discussion began to cover the history of RLV (Reusable Launch Vehicle) companies from that era, though the transcript ended before this topic was fully explored.Shubber discussed the history of reusable rockets and space industry economics, highlighting how SpaceX's success demonstrated the viability of reusable technology despite earlier failures like the Space Shuttle program. He criticized current space industry hype, particularly around data centers in space, explaining that such projects face significant challenges in physics, engineering, and timeline feasibility. Shubber provided specific calculations showing that deploying a large constellation of data center satellites would take decades, not the 5-year timeline often proposed, and emphasized that basic mathematical analysis could disprove many space industry claims.Shubber expressed skepticism about Elon Musk's business ventures, particularly SpaceX and the Boring Company, arguing that while Musk has vision and funding, the actual execution relies heavily on his team. Shubber criticized the overvaluation of AI companies, claiming there's a significant bubble in the AI industry that will likely burst, with most AI applications being overhyped and overvalued. Philip disagreed, arguing that AI provides real value through productivity gains in areas like document drafting and research, though Shubber countered that these benefits are limited and often require significant human correction due to AI errors and hallucinations.Next, the discussion focused on evaluating business proposals and technological ideas, particularly around supply and demand economics. Shubber explained his approach to identifying problematic business projections, emphasizing how increased supply typically leads to lower prices unless demand grows commensurately. The conversation also addressed Elon Musk's Hyperloop concept, with AJ suggesting it was a bad idea without providing specific economic reasoning, which led to moderation intervention from David to keep the discussion focused on Shubber's planned topics. The discussion concluded with technical considerations around satellite positioning and space-based solar power challenges.We talked about the feasibility of space-based solar power, with Shubber and Phil both expressing skepticism about the technology's practicality in the near term. Shubber emphasized engineering challenges including launch costs, construction of large structures at geostationary orbit, and the inability to service equipment there, while Phil focused on economic inefficiencies due to energy conversion losses and high launch costs. The conversation also covered the status of space hotels, with David sharing insights about Bob Bigelow's withdrawal from the space hotel business following personal tragedy, and the group debated the value and hype surrounding NASA's Artemis program, particularly regarding the SLS rocket and moon missionsThe team discussed the Artemis program and NASA's budget challenges. Shubber criticized the SLS project as inefficient and suggested opening it up to commercial competition. The conversation then shifted to the national debt and unfunded liabilities, particularly regarding Social Security. Shubber explained the financial challenges of the current system and expressed skepticism about proposed solutions like moving Social Security to a cryptocurrency system. The discussion concluded with a brief mention of orbital mirrors and their potential applications, though Shubber expressed doubts about their practicality and use cases.The group discussed the feasibility and business case of using orbital mirrors to provide artificial sunlight, particularly for solar farms. Shubber and Philip analyzed the technical requirements, including the size of mirrors needed and the challenges of maintaining continuous sunlight. The discussion also touched on environmental impacts, including effects on agriculture and wildlife, and the long-term prospects for human space colonization, with Shubber suggesting that while space colonization may be necessary in the very long term, current public interest in returning to the moon remains limited.The group discussed space tourism and commercial space missions. They clarified that while Axiom missions have taken approximately 16 people to the ISS, these were not traditional space tourists but rather business investors funding scientific research. The conversation then shifted to GRU Space, a company claiming to develop the first lunar hotel, though participants expressed skepticism about its credibility and media presence. The discussion concluded with Shubber outlining a framework for evaluating space business proposals based on physics, engineering, and economics principles.The discussion focused on the challenges and realities of space technology investments, particularly regarding StarCloud's satellite project. Shubber explained how companies like StarCloud secure funding through connections and hype rather than proven technology, contrasting them with older-style VCs like Ed Tuck who focused on legitimate due diligence. The conversation then shifted to nuclear energy, where Shubber expressed support for nuclear power while noting that regulatory and construction challenges, rather than technical feasibility, are the main obstacles. The discussion concluded with a debate about the role of space advocates, where Shubber emphasized the importance of balancing ambitious vision with realistic timelines to maintain credibility and avoid damaging the broader space industry through unwarranted hype.The declining quality in journalism and scientific reporting was a topic. Shubber shared his experience of discovering that even respected publications like Scientific American contained inaccurate information, leading him to question the credibility of mainstream media. David described how his experience as a parent of a child with cystic fibrosis revealed widespread miscommunication between journalists and scientists, with researchers confirming that journalists often misunderstood their work. The discussion concluded with Ajay expressing concern about increasing dishonesty in scientific research, though Shubber clarified that the core scientific method remains sound and that issues arise when researchers prioritize agenda-driven outcomes over objective truth.The group discussed the challenges of modern engineering and space technology, particularly focusing on SpaceX's Starship development and the complexity of creating new products compared to historical examples like the Model T. Shubber mentioned his plans to write an upcoming OP-ed about space exploration and financial concerns, comparing the current situation to Britain before the fall of Singapore. The conversation concluded with a discussion about the likelihood of experiencing the Kessler syndrome by 2050, with participants expressing varying levels of optimism about humanity's ability to prevent such a scenario.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentWe use Zoom phone numbers for program participation.For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:No Program for Friday, May 29, 2026 | Friday 29 May 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonNo program today, Friday, May 26, 2026Broadcast 4596: Zoom: Open Lines Discussion | Sunday 31 May 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines Discussion. Email DrSpace prior to air time for Zoom phone number access. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

SmackDown de España, AAA Noche de los Grandes, WWE Clash in Italy. Muchas cosas que comentar, con un enfrentamiento entre los Grandes Americanos histórico, un SmackDown en horas bajas que vuelve a Barcelona y una WWE que inicia la gira europea con Axiom por un lado y con una cartelera espectacular en Italia por el otro. Analizamos todo ello y hablamos también de la farándula del wrestling, con Vince Russo como protagonista, con x.com/TomasiSantiago. ¡No te lo pierdas y únete al análisis más completo del wrestling en español! Suscríbete por 1,99€/mes y escucha episodios especiales cada sábado en: — iVoox (pestaña 'Apoyar') — Spotify (https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/uhep/subscribe) — Apple Podcasts (https://apple.co/3pqZLmZ) — YouTube (https://bit.ly/3MrSWLf) Con acceso al Discord para mecenas: https://discord.gg/G79hvUCRSR ➕ Artículos para suscriptores Compra merchandising oficial de WWE en Fanatics con mi código: http://fanatics.93n6tx.net/baXOax Sígueme en X: https://www.twitter.com/SrAlexGomez Sígueme en Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/siralexgomez Sígueme en Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/SrAlexGomez Compra merchandising en la tienda de UHEP: https://www.latostadora.com/uhep #AAA #AEW #Dynamite #NochedelosGrandes #Wrestling #LuchaLibre 00:00 Intro 00:24 Editorial 11:14 Farándula de Vince Russo 30:00 Grande Americano 33:00 Clash in Italy 43:10 Curtis Axel detenido + Q&A

Bob Zimmerman, # 4594, May 26, 2026Quick Summary:This Space Show program focused on NASA's announcement of a restructuring plan for the Artemis lunar program led by Isaacman, which includes multiple unmanned lunar lander missions and the establishment of a lunar base by 2028. Bob detailed how NASA is relying heavily on private companies rather than building hardware internally, with contracts awarded to Blue Origin, Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines, and Firefly for missions starting as early as late 2023. The discussion covered the competitive landscape of commercial space stations, with VAST, Starlab, and Axiom leading the market, while Sierra Space's Orbital Reef partnership with Blue Origin appears to be struggling. The conversation also addressed SpaceX's Starship development progress, with participants debating whether SpaceX would attempt a double catch of both booster and ship on their single launch tower before building a second tower. The show concluded with a discussion about the political and cultural challenges facing space exploration, with participants weighing optimistic versus pessimistic views about the future of commercial spaceflight and space policy.SummaryBob discussed NASA's recent press conference announcing details of its Artemis lunar exploration program, including contract awards and mission plans. The program involves multiple private companies launching lunar landers and rovers to the South Pole region, with the first three missions already scheduled before the end of 2023. Robert noted that while the program is ambitious with plans for up to 20 launches and 25 landings by 2028, it relies heavily on private sector development rather than NASA-built hardware, with Blue Origin receiving significant contracts including two new awards totaling $188 million.Bob discussed Blue Origin's lunar landing plans, expressing skepticism about their timeline of 20 landings by 2028, particularly given their reliance on Blue Origin and the challenges with their New Glenn rocket. The group examined a map shown during a press conference about a potential lunar base location near Shackleton Crater, with Joseph identifying a similar crater field in the area and Robert noting the lack of specific location details in the presented map. The discussion concluded with speculation that NASA might be deliberately withholding specific location information to protect potential landing sites from competitors, particularly China.NASA's lunar exploration plans were talked about, explaining that missions will focus on scouting and engineering work to prepare for future manned landings and a lunar base. He also revealed that NASA awarded SpaceX additional crew launch contracts through 2030, which he interpreted as effectively ending Boeing's Starliner program due to lack of funding for further development. Joseph clarified that NASA is not obligated to provide additional funding to Boeing until they successfully complete their original cost-fixed contract.Bob focused on the current status of commercial space stations, ranking five active projects and noting that while there are market opportunities for ferrying services, Boeing's Starliner faces challenges due to Boeing's poor management. He explained that Dream Chaser's status remains uncertain, with recent delays and incomplete ground testing raising questions about its viability. Robert also provided an update on the five commercial space stations, ranking them and noting that while some projects like VAST and Starlab show promise, Sierra Space's Orbital Reef partnership with Blue Origin appears to be dormant.He also explained that private space stations will outperform the ISS by allowing commercial research to produce saleable products on Earth, unlike the ISS which is restricted to non-commercial research. He discussed how NASA's historical ban on commercial space operations had damaged the American launch industry, citing the example of pharmaceutical research that was halted after the Challenger accident. The group agreed that private companies will own and operate the new stations while NASA purchases services as a customer, representing a shift toward a more capitalist model in space operations.The group discussed SpaceX's lack of response regarding NASA's lunar program, with our guest explaining that SpaceX is focused on manned missions rather than these specific missions and needs to be careful due to their upcoming IPO. The conversation then shifted to comparing NASA's bureaucratic processes with private space station initiatives, with participants noting how private stations are more flexible and business-friendly compared to the complex requirements of getting experiments on the ISS. Bob explained how top-down bureaucratic systems, like the Soviet model, tend to fail due to lack of competition and innovation, while competitive market systems drive better results.Bob did address the historical shift from government-led to commercial space exploration, highlighting how SpaceX and commercial satellite businesses proved that profit could be made in space despite initial skepticism. He explained how NASA's Mars exploration programs have historically been science-focused rather than colonization-focused but noted a recent shift toward engineering-based lunar exploration with the VIPER lander program. The discussion concluded with updates about ULA's Vulcan rocket program, which is currently grounded due to nozzle failures in Northrop Grumman's solid rocket boosters, though static fire tests suggest potential solutions may be in development.The group discussed ULA's challenges with satellite launches, particularly Amazon's delayed satellite deployment and ULA's dependency on strap-on boosters for their Vulcan rocket. Joseph clarified that the NG-4 mission would be a LEO launch carrying 26 satellites, though the rocket's payload capacity might be limited without boosters. The discussion also covered SpaceX's Starship development progress, with Joseph estimating 3-4 flights this year before a second launch tower becomes available in Q4, and the team debated whether SpaceX would attempt a double catch on their current tower or wait for the new one to recover both booster and ship.The Wisdom Team also discussed Elon Musk's management approach and scheduling practices, with Robert explaining that Musk sets realistic but challenging timelines that engineers can trust. The conversation then shifted to Starlink satellite services, with Bob sharing his positive experience using the service despite minor performance issues during house painting. This part of the discussion concluded with my asking Bob for his guess on the political risks facing space commercialization efforts given current uncertainties and realities in the country today.Bob did discuss his perspective as a historian on current societal challenges, presenting both pessimistic and optimistic views of the future. He compared the current political climate to H.G. Wells' time in 1939 and noted that while there are concerning trends, he remains hopeful about society's resilience and ability to correct course. The discussion touched on concerns about data centers, with both David and Joe sharing local experiences about public opposition to data center development, which Bob attributed partly to ignorance and manufactured comments on social media.The team discussed opposition to data center construction, with Joe explaining that while some opposition may be driven by Chinese influence, much of it stems from emotional responses and partisanship rather than rational concerns. Bob emphasized the need for more thoughtful and rational discourse about data centers, distinguishing between legitimate questions about their impact and emotional reactions. Joe clarified that modern data centers use less water than older designs, but the rapid scale of proposed construction (80 gigawatts) far exceeds current grid capacity (40 gigawatts annually), making many planned projects unlikely to be built. Bob concluded that the opposition to data centers on Earth could actually benefit the space industry by driving demand for orbital data centers, which would help develop the rocket industry.The group went on to talk about water requirements for data centers, with Ajay explaining that while traditional nuclear reactors require significant water for cooling, molten salt reactors would not need water for this purpose. The conversation then shifted to political concerns about constitutional issues, with John Hunt warning about potential constitutional collapse and Bob responding with a balanced historical perspective. The conversation ended with technical discussions about SpaceX's Starlink V3 satellites, including their weight and bandwidth capabilities compared to previous versions.Bob Zimmerman, # 4594, May 26, 2026Quick Summary:This Space Show program focused on NASA's announcement of a restructuring plan for the Artemis lunar program led by Isaacman, which includes multiple unmanned lunar lander missions and the establishment of a lunar base by 2028. Bob detailed how NASA is relying heavily on private companies rather than building hardware internally, with contracts awarded to Blue Origin, Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines, and Firefly for missions starting as early as late 2023. The discussion covered the competitive landscape of commercial space stations, with VAST, Starlab, and Axiom leading the market, while Sierra Space's Orbital Reef partnership with Blue Origin appears to be struggling. The conversation also addressed SpaceX's Starship development progress, with participants debating whether SpaceX would attempt a double catch of both booster and ship on their single launch tower before building a second tower. The show concluded with a discussion about the political and cultural challenges facing space exploration, with participants weighing optimistic versus pessimistic views about the future of commercial spaceflight and space policy.SummaryBob discussed NASA's recent press conference announcing details of its Artemis lunar exploration program, including contract awards and mission plans. The program involves multiple private companies launching lunar landers and rovers to the South Pole region, with the first three missions already scheduled before the end of 2023. Robert noted that while the program is ambitious with plans for up to 20 launches and 25 landings by 2028, it relies heavily on private sector development rather than NASA-built hardware, with Blue Origin receiving significant contracts including two new awards totaling $188 million.Bob discussed Blue Origin's lunar landing plans, expressing skepticism about their timeline of 20 landings by 2028, particularly given their reliance on Blue Origin and the challenges with their New Glenn rocket. The group examined a map shown during a press conference about a potential lunar base location near Shackleton Crater, with Joseph identifying a similar crater field in the area and Robert noting the lack of specific location details in the presented map. The discussion concluded with speculation that NASA might be deliberately withholding specific location information to protect potential landing sites from competitors, particularly China.NASA's lunar exploration plans were talked about, explaining that missions will focus on scouting and engineering work to prepare for future manned landings and a lunar base. He also revealed that NASA awarded SpaceX additional crew launch contracts through 2030, which he interpreted as effectively ending Boeing's Starliner program due to lack of funding for further development. Joseph clarified that NASA is not obligated to provide additional funding to Boeing until they successfully complete their original cost-fixed contract.Bob focused on the current status of commercial space stations, ranking five active projects and noting that while there are market opportunities for ferrying services, Boeing's Starliner faces challenges due to Boeing's poor management. He explained that Dream Chaser's status remains uncertain, with recent delays and incomplete ground testing raising questions about its viability. Robert also provided an update on the five commercial space stations, ranking them and noting that while some projects like VAST and Starlab show promise, Sierra Space's Orbital Reef partnership with Blue Origin appears to be dormant.He also explained that private space stations will outperform the ISS by allowing commercial research to produce saleable products on Earth, unlike the ISS which is restricted to non-commercial research. He discussed how NASA's historical ban on commercial space operations had damaged the American launch industry, citing the example of pharmaceutical research that was halted after the Challenger accident. The group agreed that private companies will own and operate the new stations while NASA purchases services as a customer, representing a shift toward a more capitalist model in space operations.The group discussed SpaceX's lack of response regarding NASA's lunar program, with our guest explaining that SpaceX is focused on manned missions rather than these specific missions and needs to be careful due to their upcoming IPO. The conversation then shifted to comparing NASA's bureaucratic processes with private space station initiatives, with participants noting how private stations are more flexible and business-friendly compared to the complex requirements of getting experiments on the ISS. Bob explained how top-down bureaucratic systems, like the Soviet model, tend to fail due to lack of competition and innovation, while competitive market systems drive better results.Bob did address the historical shift from government-led to commercial space exploration, highlighting how SpaceX and commercial satellite businesses proved that profit could be made in space despite initial skepticism. He explained how NASA's Mars exploration programs have historically been science-focused rather than colonization-focused but noted a recent shift toward engineering-based lunar exploration with the VIPER lander program. The discussion concluded with updates about ULA's Vulcan rocket program, which is currently grounded due to nozzle failures in Northrop Grumman's solid rocket boosters, though static fire tests suggest potential solutions may be in development.The group discussed ULA's challenges with satellite launches, particularly Amazon's delayed satellite deployment and ULA's dependency on strap-on boosters for their Vulcan rocket. Joseph clarified that the NG-4 mission would be a LEO launch carrying 26 satellites, though the rocket's payload capacity might be limited without boosters. The discussion also covered SpaceX's Starship development progress, with Joseph estimating 3-4 flights this year before a second launch tower becomes available in Q4, and the team debated whether SpaceX would attempt a double catch on their current tower or wait for the new one to recover both booster and ship.The Wisdom Team also discussed Elon Musk's management approach and scheduling practices, with Robert explaining that Musk sets realistic but challenging timelines that engineers can trust. The conversation then shifted to Starlink satellite services, with Bob sharing his positive experience using the service despite minor performance issues during house painting. This part of the discussion concluded with my asking Bob for his guess on the political risks facing space commercialization efforts given current uncertainties and realities in the country today.Bob did discuss his perspective as a historian on current societal challenges, presenting both pessimistic and optimistic views of the future. He compared the current political climate to H.G. Wells' time in 1939 and noted that while there are concerning trends, he remains hopeful about society's resilience and ability to correct course. The discussion touched on concerns about data centers, with both David and Joe sharing local experiences about public opposition to data center development, which Bob attributed partly to ignorance and manufactured comments on social media.The team discussed opposition to data center construction, with Joe explaining that while some opposition may be driven by Chinese influence, much of it stems from emotional responses and partisanship rather than rational concerns. Bob emphasized the need for more thoughtful and rational discourse about data centers, distinguishing between legitimate questions about their impact and emotional reactions. Joe clarified that modern data centers use less water than older designs, but the rapid scale of proposed construction (80 gigawatts) far exceeds current grid capacity (40 gigawatts annually), making many planned projects unlikely to be built. Bob concluded that the opposition to data centers on Earth could actually benefit the space industry by driving demand for orbital data centers, which would help develop the rocket industry.The group went on to talk about water requirements for data centers, with Ajay explaining that while traditional nuclear reactors require significant water for cooling, molten salt reactors would not need water for this purpose. The conversation then shifted to political concerns about constitutional issues, with John Hunt warning about potential constitutional collapse and Bob responding with a balanced historical perspective. The conversation ended with technical discussions about SpaceX's Starlink V3 satellites, including their weight and bandwidth capabilities compared to previous versions.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentWe use Zoom phone numbers for program participation.For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:No Program for Friday, May 29, 2026 | Friday 29 May 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonNo program today, Friday, May 26, 2026Broadcast 4596: Zoom: Open Lines Discussion | Sunday 31 May 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines Discussion. Email DrSpace prior to air time for Zoom phone number access. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

By Selva Ozelli Esq, CPA, Author of Sustainably Investing in Digital Assets Globally This is the second article in a series of articles I am writing for Irish Tech News to explore the financial, technical, legal aspects of utilizing space solar energized orbital data centers that are rapidly evolving into "AI Factories, designed specifically to convert massive amounts of electrical power into intelligence, measured in tokens" around the world. The US Space Race My new series is a follow up to an interview ITN conducted with me in 2020 exploring how space solar energy could sustainably energize the tokenization of the global financial markets which is projected to grow to multi-trillion dollars by the end of the decade. The shift toward space-solarized data infrastructure is accelerating in the US rapidly following the historic March 1, 2026, drone strikes on AWS data centers in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain which has extended during April and May. Executed by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), these kinetic strikes marked the first time commercial hyperscale data centers were directly targeted and physically damaged in active warfare. The attacks caused prolonged service disruptions, exposed the vulnerability of terrestrial tech infrastructure, and proved that earth bound data centers are now prioritized military targets. As detailed in the table below US technology and aerospace companies are increasingly looking to space-solarized solutions to address the immense energy and cooling demands of AI, with several key initiatives emerging. US Tech and Aerospace Companies Focused on Space Solarized Data Centers Hyperscale Cloud Company Orbital Edge Computing Orbital Data Center/Number of Satellite Constellation Space Solar LEO Network Rocket Launch Robotics Amazon Web Services (AWS) Y Y, Blue Origin – Blue Ring spacecraft/ Project Sunrise 51,600 Y Y, Amazon LEO Y Y Microsoft Azure Y, Azure Space N, Sold Azure Orbital Ground Station N, Space Azure Solar Cell Tech N N Y Google Cloud Y, Space Llama Y, Project Suncatcher in partnership with Planet Labs a high-profile "moonshot" initiative aimed at building and deploying artificial intelligence (AI) data centers in space/81 Y N Space X Y, Google Deep Mind Meta N, Terrestrial Edge Computing N Y, Metasat & Overview Energy N, High-altitude, solar-powered drones (Aquila project) N Y Starcloud Y Y Partnership with AWS/88,000 Y Y, Starcloud-1 (November 2025): first test satellite containing an Nvidia H100 chip, that survived radiation and function in space. SpaceX Y Space X – Orbital Data Center Y Y/ 1,000,000 Y Starlink Y Y Nividia Y, NVIDIA Space-1 Vera Rubin computing platform Y Y Y Space X Y Atherflux rebranded to Cowboy Space Y Y/ 20,000 Y N N Y Lone Star Y, (2021) First data storage and edge processing test at International Space Station Y, Orbital and Lunar Data Center with NASA Y Y Space X Y Axiom Space Y, In March 2025, Axiom deployed Red Hat Device Edge on the ISS to test terrestrial cloud applications in space, serving as a prototype for ODC Nodes. Y Y Y Space X Y Two Distinct Approaches in Space Solarized Data Center Operations in the US US technology and space companies in a race are aggressively pursuing orbital and space-solarized data centers and are tackling these operations through two distinct methodologies: orbital data processing (in-space edge compute) and space-based terrestrial power harvesting. Both approaches aim to bypass the escalating energy demands, cooling constraints, and land footprint limitations of Earth-based data center infrastructure. The two approaches differ significantly in how they utilize space and solar resources. Here is a summary: Terrestrial vs. Space-Based AI Compute Constraint Terrestrial Data Centers Orbital Data Centers Power Source Strained local power grids Unlimited, direct solar energy Cooling High water and energy consumption Natural cold of space vacuum Space & Regulation Tight zoning laws and land limits No ter...

SPONSORS: - Go to https://www.plaud.ai/curt to get a Plaud device today - Go to https://shortform.com/toe for a free trial and an exclusive $50 OFF on your annual subscription - I personally subscribe to The Economist. TOE listeners get 35% off the annual subscription. No other podcast has this! https://economist.com/TOE Harvey Friedman — the youngest professor in Stanford's history, founder of reverse mathematics, and the mathematician Kurt Gödel chose to sponsor his final paper — has spent 60 years on one question: can ordinary, finite math be trusted? His theorems show that even concrete statements involving nothing more exotic than rational numbers cannot be proved or refuted within ZFC. The foundations of mathematics, Friedman argues, are not settled bedrock but vertiginous — made more mysterious, not less, by his own work. FOLLOW: - Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4e - Substack: https://curtjaimungal.substack.com/subscribe - Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurt - Discord Invite: https://discord.com/invite/kBcnfNVwqs - Crypto: https://nowpayments.io/donation/TOE - PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=XUBHNMFXUX5S4 TIMESTAMPS: - 00:00:00 - Gödel's Incompleteness Misinterpretations - 00:09:48 - Woodin vs. Friedman Foundations - 00:17:28 - Category Theory vs. Logic - 00:24:30 - Borel Determinacy Paradoxes - 00:31:23 - Embedded Maximality Principles - 00:41:18 - Tree(3) and Kruskal's Theorem - 00:47:40 - Finitism and Large Cardinals - 00:53:11 - Divine Consistency and Angels - 01:03:25 - Reverse Mathematics Origins - 01:11:14 - Constructive Logic and Intuitionism - 01:21:17 - Theology and AI Immortality LINKS MENTIONED: - Harvey Friedman Papers: https://u.osu.edu/friedman.8/foundational-adventures/publications/ - Harvey Friedman YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@harveyfriedman4465/videos - Harvey Friedman Chess Club: https://cclchess.com/ - This Man Is About to Blow Up Mathematics [Article]: https://nautil.us/this-man-is-about-to-blow-up-mathematics-236446 - Harvey Lecture at OSU: https://youtu.be/NAGQD-bSXok - Most Abused Theorem in Math [TOE]: https://youtu.be/OH-ybecvuEo - John Norton [TOE]: https://youtu.be/Tghl6aS5A3M - Emily Riehl [TOE]: https://youtu.be/mTwvecBthpQ - What Is Infinity? [TOE]: https://youtu.be/rHtqGrtcB1w - Norman Wildberger [TOE]: https://youtu.be/l7LvgvunVCM - Wolfgang Smith [TOE]: https://youtu.be/lF4S_P_o-g0 - Scott Aaronson [TOE]: https://youtu.be/1ZpGCQoL2Rk - Consciousness Iceberg [TOE]: https://youtu.be/65yjqIDghEk - Edward Frenkel [TOE]: https://youtu.be/n_oPMcvHbAc - Elan Barenholtz [TOE]: https://youtu.be/A36OumnSrWY - Michael Levin [TOE]: https://youtu.be/c8iFtaltX-s - Godel Incompleteness Theorems: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/ - Consistency of Axiom of Choice [Book]: https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.469796/page/18/mode/2up - Independence of Continuum Hypothesis [Paper]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/71858 - Borel Determinacy [Paper]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1971035 - Paris-Harrington Theorem: https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Paris-HarringtonTheorem.html - The God Letter: https://uncertaintist.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/einstein-letter-gutkind-excerpts.pdf - Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica [Book]: https://amazon.com/dp/0486669807?tag=toe08-20 - Categories for the Working Mathematician [Book]: https://amazon.com/dp/1441931236?tag=toe08-20 - On Necessary Use of Abstract Set Theory [Paper]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001870881900219 - Borel Set: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borel_set More links: https://curtjaimungal.substack.com Guests do not pay to appear. #science Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

~ #ELLIOTLive @ AXIOM, Madrid (27/04/26) ~ VIDEO SET: https://youtu.be/G3bYLDRCU70?si=QYKCan_0ssVOQkP1 Full pure House set at AXIOM headquarters in Madrid, and it was good :) Check my next live sets near you! ➔ @elliotdeejay (https://instagram.com/elliotdeejay) ----- Set puro House en los AXIOM headquarters en Madrid, y estuvo genial :) Ven a mis próximos sets en directo cerca de ti! ➔ @elliotdeejay (https://instagram.com/elliotdeejay) ====== The 'ELLIOT Live' series brings you all ELLIOT's live DJ sets at clubs, festivals and other venues. ----- La serie 'ELLIOT Live' te trae todos los DJ sets en directo de ELLIOT en clubs, festivales y otras salas. ====== Send your #GroovyPromo (MP3 320kbps SoundCloud/Dropbox/Drive) & socials to promos@elliotdeejay.com to be featured on #HouseOfGroove! ----- Envía tu #GroovyPromo (MP3 320kbps SoundCloud/Dropbox/Drive) y redes a promos@elliotdeejay.com para sonar en #HouseOfGroove! ====== * Legal disclaimer: None of the songs in this mix have been produced by me. For any copyright issues, please contact me. * Nota legal: Ninguna de las canciones en esta sesión ha sido producida por mí. Para cualquier problema relacionado con derechos de autor, por favor contactar conmigo.

There's a theorem being tested about how AI reaches general intelligence. Carina Hong's answer: through mathematics. Carina is the founder of Axiom, and in less than a year of building, her team's AI has scored a perfect 120/120 on the Putnam mathematical competition — a test where more than 50% of brilliant undergraduates score zero. More concretely, Axiom Prover has reached 98.93% on a Lean software verification benchmark that leading alternatives solve at 11–12%. In this conversation with Matt McIlwain, Carina explains her central thesis: that math and code are the two pillars of the digital world, and that any AI infrastructure missing a formal verification layer is structurally incomplete. She walks through the history of verified AI research at Google, DeepMind, OpenAI, and Meta, and explains why each effort stalled just as commercial pressure mounted. She describes what makes hardware and software verification the natural first commercial market, and what Axiom discovered when they tested their prover against circuits that industry-standard formal checkers could not verify. For founders and operators trying to understand what's actually changing in AI capability, and for anyone building in adjacent infrastructure spaces, this is a map of where the frontier is and where it's heading. Transcript: https://www.madrona.com/agi-needs-formal-reasoning-carina-hong-is-building-it-at-axiom Chapters:  (00:00) – Introduction (02:01) – How to Define AGI Right Now — and Why There Are Two Competing Definitions (04:17) – Math Is AGI (06:12) – Math Data Scarcity: Why a Disadvantaged Domain Accelerates Progress (08:13) – Formal vs. Informal Math: Why AI Researchers Treat This Like a Religion (13:44) – Google, OpenAI, DeepMind, and Meta All Abandoned Formal Math Research (21:20) – The Putnam Story: First AI Perfect Score (28:13) – Hardware Verification as the Commercial Frontier: What Axiom Found Testing Real Circuits (31:22) – 98.93% vs. 11–12%: What the Benchmark Gap Reveals About Formal Provers (34:22) – Math and Code as the Two Pillars of the Digital World (37:00) – Team Building Around a Shared Dream: Recruiting for Mathematical Superintelligence (38:03) – What Autonomous Proof Generation Looks Like

Vamos conversar sobre o relatório Lightning Economics (Zeus e Axiom, 2026) que propõe o conceito de rendimento nativo como uma nova forma de monetizar reservas corporativas de Bitcoin sem abrir mão da custódia. Através da Rede Lightning, empresas podem atuar como operadoras de infraestrutura, gerando receita operacional por meio da velocidade do capital e da cobrança de taxas de roteamento. O estudo destaca que este modelo permite que o Bitcoin funcione simultaneamente como reserva de valor e meio de troca, preservando propriedades fundamentais como a descentralização e a segurança. Diferente de empréstimos centralizados ou derivativos, essa estratégia mantém a unidade denominacional, onde o capital investido e o retorno obtido permanecem em BTC. BTC é o produto e a recompensa. A análise conclui que a profissionalização dos nós da rede Lightning é essencial para otimizar lucros e transformar os satoshis das empresas de Tesouraria Bitcoin de um ativo estático em capital produtivo escalável.https://x.com/ZeusLN/status/2048401719831486727https://zeusln.com/lightning-economicsBitcoin é Reserva de Valor ou Meio de Troca?https://youtu.be/0pqzfJ6wE88Diego Kolling sobre investimentos Lightninghttps://youtu.be/FQKCtH94l5kGravado no bloco 947128________________APOIE O CANALhttps://bitcoinheiros.com/apoie/⚡ln@pay.bitcoinheiros.comPara agendar uma CONSULTA PRIVADA com o Dov: https://consultorio.bitcoinheiros.com/Consulta pública: https://ask.arata.se/bitdov00:00 Introdução00:33 Economia da Lightning Network: Relatório Zeus e Axiom05:35 O Risco da Terceirização na Custódia de Bitcoin08:38 Os Perigos de Buscar Rendimentos Passivos com Bitcoin11:36 Por que os Rendimentos na Lightning Network são Melhores?16:39 Como Gerar Lucro em bitcoin na Lightning Network23:23 Existe Risco de Perder Bitcoin em Canais Lightning?25:53 Quais são os Custos para Gerenciar um Canal Lightning?29:03 A Engrenagem de Lucros na Rede Lightning40:26 Expectativa de Lucro: Lightning Network vs. Outros Mercados49:59 É Seguro para Grandes Tesourarias Investirem na Lightning Network?Escute no Fountain Podcasts (https://fountain.fm/join-fountain)para receber e enviar satoshinhos no modelo Value4ValueSIGA OS BITCOINHEIROS:Site: https://www.bitcoinheiros.comTwitter: https://www.x.com/bitcoinheirosAllan - https://www.x.com/allanraicherDov - https://x.com/bitdovBecas - https://x.com/bksbk6Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/bitcoinheirosFacebook: https://www.fb.com/bitcoinheirosPodcast: https://anchor.fm/bitcoinheirosMedium: https://medium.com/@bitcoinheirosCOMO GUARDAR SEUS BITCOINS?Bitcoinheiros recomendam o uso de carteiras Multisig com Hardware Wallets de diferentes fabricantes ou próprias.Para ver as carteiras de hardware que recomendamos, acesse https://www.bitcoinheiros.com/carteirasVeja os descontos e clique nos links de afiliados para ajudar o canalPor exemplo, para a COLDCARD - https://store.coinkite.com/promo/bitcoinheirosCom o código "bitcoinheiros" você ganha 5% de desconto na ColdCardPlaylist "Canivete Suíço Bitcoinheiro"https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgcVYwONyxmg-KH5bwzMU4sdyMbVMPqwbPlaylist "Carteiras Multisig de Bitcoin"https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgcVYwONyxmi74PiIUSnGieNIPqmtmdjWISENÇÃO DE RESPONSABILIDADE:Este conteúdo foi preparado para fins meramente informativos.NÃO é uma recomendação financeira nem de investimento.As opiniões apresentadas são apenas opiniões.Faça sua própria pesquisa.Não nos responsabilizamos por qualquer decisão de investimento que você tomar ou ação que você executar inspirada em nossos vídeos.P.S. para os buscadoresSomos bitcoinheiros, não bitconheiros, nem bitconheros, bitcoinheros, biticonheiros, biticonheros ou biticoinheros.O Dov é bitcoinheiro, não bitconheiro, nem bitconhero, bitcoinhero, biticonheiro, biticonhero ou biticoinhero.É Bitcoin, não Bitcon e nem Biticoin :)

Get unlimited access: https://summerswole.com

Sponsor LinkTo check out our special NordVPN offer for Astronomy Daily listeners: Click HereAstronomy Daily — S05E90 | Wednesday, April 22, 2026 In today's episode, Anna and Avery cover six stories spanning the fading power of humanity's most distant probe, fresh evidence for ancient life on Mars, a landmark black hole measurement, a SpaceX reusability milestone, a sobering assessment of the Artemis spacesuit programme, and tonight's moon and Jupiter conjunction.   Story 1 — Voyager 1 Powers Down the LECP Instrument •       NASA's JPL shut down Voyager 1's Low-energy Charged Particles experiment (LECP) on April 17, 2026, to conserve dwindling power. •       The decision followed an unexpected power drop during a routine roll manoeuvre in late February that nearly triggered an automatic emergency shutdown. •       Seven of Voyager 1's ten original instrument sets are now offline. Only the magnetometer and plasma wave subsystem remain active. •       Engineers are developing 'the Big Bang' — a plan to swap older components with lower-power alternatives — to extend operations into the 2030s. Testing on Voyager 2 is planned for May/June 2026; Voyager 1 to follow no sooner than July. •       Source: NASA JPL — https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasa-shuts-off-instrument-on-voyager-1-to-keep-spacecraft-operating/   Story 2 — Curiosity Rover Finds Organic Molecules on Mars •       Published April 21 in Nature Communications, the study describes the first use of the TMAH chemical experiment on another planet. •       More than 20 organic molecules were detected in clay-rich sandstone from the Glen Torridon region of Gale Crater, preserved for over 3.5 billion years. •       Discoveries include a nitrogen-bearing molecule structurally similar to DNA precursors — never before confirmed on Mars — and benzothiophene. •       The experiment cannot determine whether molecules are biological, geological, or meteoritic in origin. Future missions including Rosalind Franklin and Dragonfly will build on the technique. •       Source: phys.org — https://phys.org/news/2026-04-mars-rover-compounds.html   Story 3 — Black Hole Jets in Cygnus X-1 •       Curtin University-led study published April 16 in Nature Astronomy directly measures the instantaneous power of black hole jets for the first time. •       The jets in the Cygnus X-1 system carry energy equivalent to 10,000 suns and travel at approximately half the speed of light (150,000 km/s). •       Researchers used the companion star's stellar winds to 'bend' the jets, allowing calculation of their real-time power — a technique compared to watching wind deflect a fountain. •       About 10% of the energy released as matter falls into the black hole is carried away by the jets — confirming a long-held theoretical assumption. •       The measurement will help calibrate future observations from the Square Kilometre Array Observatory, currently under construction in WA. •       Source: ScienceDaily — https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/04/260416071949.htm   Story 4 — SpaceX 600th Rocket Landing •       SpaceX completed its 600th successful Falcon booster landing on April 19, 2026, during the Starlink 17-22 mission from Vandenberg SFB. •       Booster B1097 landed on drone ship 'Of Course I Still Love You' for its eighth successful recovery. The milestone arrived just 7 months after the 500th landing. •       The tally includes 496 drone ship landings and 104 ground landings, per SpaceX VP Kiko Dontchev. •       SpaceX's Starlink constellation now numbers over 10,275 satellites in orbit. •       Source: Space.com — https://www.space.com/space-exploration/launches-spacecraft/spacex-starlink-17-22-b1097-vsfb-ofisly-600th-falcon-landing   Story 5 — Artemis Spacesuit Crisis •       NASA's Office of Inspector General report (released April 20) warns that next-generation Artemis spacesuits may not be ready until 2031 — three years after the stated 2028 target. •       The xEVAS programme began as a two-company competition (Axiom Space + Collins Aerospace). Collins has effectively been removed after missing milestones. Axiom is now the sole contractor for the lunar surface suit. •       OIG analysis: based on an 8.7-year historical average from contract award to first flight for comparable NASA programmes, Axiom's 2022 award points to a 2031 delivery. •       NASA Administrator Isaacman has publicly maintained confidence in the 2028 date. Axiom plans a suit demonstration in 2026 on the ISS or during an Artemis mission. •       A separate risk: if the ISS variant of the suit slips past 2030, the Station could run out of operational EVA suits before decommissioning. •       Additional Artemis delays: SpaceX lunar Starship at least 2 years late; Blue Origin Blue Moon at least 8 months late (per separate March OIG report). •       Source: SpaceDaily — https://spacedaily.com/sd-n-the-spacesuit-gap-why-artemis-iiis-2028-landing-date-is-already-slipping/   Story 6 — Skywatching: Moon & Jupiter Conjunction •       Tonight (April 22), the half moon sits approximately 3 degrees from Jupiter in the constellation Gemini, near the stars Castor and Pollux. •       Visible to the naked eye in the western/northwestern sky after sunset. Binoculars will reveal Jupiter's four Galilean moons. •       Southern Hemisphere viewers: look northwest after dark; viewing window narrows the further south you are. •       Source: Space.com — https://www.space.com/stargazing/the-moon-and-jupiter-steal-the-show-after-sunset-on-april-22Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/astronomy-daily-space-news-updates--5648921/support.Sponsor Details:Ensure your online privacy by using NordVPN. To get our special listener deal and save a lot of money, visit www.bitesz.com/nordvpn. You'll be glad you did!Become a supporter of Astronomy Daily by joining our Supporters Club. Commercial free episodes daily are only a click way... Click HereThis episode includes AI-generated content.

Research shows that sales professionals at aligned companies are more than twice as likely to exceed their goals than those misaligned companies. So, how do you build an aligned company that prepares marketing and sales teams to work together and win together? Riley Rogers: Hi, and welcome to the Win/Win Podcast. I’m your host, Riley Rogers. Join us as we dive into changing trends in the workplace and how to navigate them successfully. Here to discuss this topic is Holly Foxworth, vice President of Marketing and Communications at Axiom Medical. Thank you so much for joining us today, Holly. I’m super excited to dig into the work that you’re doing. Holly Foxworth: Thank you for having me, Riley. I’m really excited to be here. RR: For our audience, would you mind giving us a little bit of a line of sight into who you are, who Axiom is, your background, and the work you do today? HF: So as you had mentioned, my name is Holly Foxworth and I am the Vice President of Marketing and Communications here at Axiom. I’ve been at Axiom for 15 years now, which in marketing years, that probably sounds like eternity, but my background actually was in emergency and trauma medicine. That was what I did prior to marketing, but it’s been amazing how I’ve been able to bring those concepts from my nursing background into what it is that we do now. I take a lot of pride in saying that, you know, I used to treat injuries, but now I have the opportunity to really be able to prevent them before they ever occur. RR: I love that. And a very full circle moment, I can imagine. I spoke with a guest a while back who introduced me to the concept of a squiggly career, which is you start somewhere and then it kind of takes you into a place you might not have expected and then you wind up, you know, I spent a decade as a medical professional, and now I’m here as a marketing leader. So how did that journey lead to your current role, and then how does that clinical experience shape your work in marketing and communications as you’re, you know, working to prevent these injuries before they happen? HF: So it started obviously in the ER as I’ve mentioned, and then transferring into occupational health, and that’s what we do here at Axiom Medical. I always like to say that everything that I rely on in marketing all comes back to my foundation from the ER because nobody has time for fluff there. That’s an environment where you have to be very alert to what’s going on. You need to pay attention and you need to be able to. Communicate quickly, very quickly, very clearly. And so that is also one of the same concepts that we need to have in marketing as well. RR: One thing that I do imagine is probably pretty unique about the kind of marketing that you do is the environment that you’re working in. Axiom is there for people during very sensitive, complicated human moments in the workplace. So how does that complicate the kind of communication you’re trying to do and the way you’re trying to go to market? HF: It definitely is a different approach because most people are selling aspirations and we are selling intervention, and when I say intervention, I am referring to human lives that are being impacted there. The way our business works is that when an employee is injured, then they would contact us, they’d speak with one of our nurses, and then we would go from there to help them with some first aid measures and things like that. Those were really sensitive moments, so that may be when someone’s having a physical crisis. It could also be a mental health type of challenge as well. It’s not solely just physical, so you have to be really sensitive to the audience that you’re speaking to and make for sure that that tone of empathy comes through very, very clearly. From a business perspective, you have to learn how to speak to your buyers, which, you know, my buyer is not actually the employees that are injured. My buyers are my HR people, my safety managers, CFOs, risk managers, things like that. So you have to be able to translate that language into something that they can understand. RR: So it is really kind of a fine line to walk between how I communicate the business value of this and then how I communicate: “This will be valuable to you” to an end user. That’s really interesting and probably requires quite a bit of nuance. And more than that, the ability to communicate that nuance to your sales team so they can deliver that. And I know beyond industry, beyond company, a challenge that pretty much everyone tends to encounter is the challenge of aligning marketing and sales. So, how have you built that partnership at Axiom? HF: I love this question because you know, most organizations, whenever you look at sales and marketing, sometimes they talk about alignment, but very few actually make it to that place where you can align, and we’ve made some real progress in that area. At Axiom, we have a very close marketing and sales team, and part of that alignment came from technology, so it was technology-driven. Whenever you talk about alignment, everyone thinks that. It’s an issue that comes up between people or that it’s a problem with what your processes are now. This is an infrastructure issue. You need to all be on the same page and be able to access the same type of information so that we’re all speaking the same language. So, that’s really, really been helpful in terms of strategy, especially for go-to-market, to rely on that technology. RR: I think sometimes when you talk about alignment, it feels like this kind of abstract, spooky thing where you can say you’re doing it, but you’re not actually doing it. You know, we are aligned, but nobody really feels it. So, I’d love to double click a little bit more into that technology piece, how it’s helping you, and more than that, how you found the right tool for the job. HF: Like, I’m sure every other business, we’ve been through the stages, we’ve been through the mess where, you know, it’s like you don’t need a new file cabinet. The new file cabinet is not the solution here. So having that technology not only has helped with the alignment, but it’s also helped with our brand strategy. It helps that they can speak the same language that we are and whenever we went from that first step from just being in, in files that we kept, we went to a little bit of a smaller vendor and, and that worked for a while. As we matured as an organization, we knew that we needed a partner that was gonna be able to scale with us and scale their technology. That’s why we brought in Highspot. I wouldn’t say it just saves time for our sales individuals, but from a marketing standpoint, it’s gold because we can actually measure things. Now, I, for one, am excited to go, you know, next week I go in the boardroom and I’m excited to be able to go in and say that, you know, marketing contributed half a million dollars to, to pipeline for the quarter, you know, or whatever that may be. That’s the real difference in what we previously had and what we have now. RR: I, I would be very interested in kind of a high-level view of, you know, we’re hearing time savings for sellers, more visibility for marketers. What are some of the ways that the platform really comes into play in the day-to-day? Like what are those levers you’re pulling when you’re saying, you know, this is actually driving alignment? HF: So what we’ve relied on a lot, and I’ll get into Digital Rooms in just a bit, but one of the other things that’s been really helpful are the Sales Plays. Being able to go to market with one Sales Play that everyone has access to is gold. It means the difference between success and failure. And so we now have that opportunity not only on the new logo side, but also on the account management side, so that they know what to show at what stage in the customer life cycle. RR: I love that post-sales use case too. I think a lot of times when you talk about a Sales Play, it feels very pre-sales, but to have that supporting customer success is amazing as well. You mentioned the Digital Room piece. I would be curious, how are you using them today? HF: So, we were a Highspot customer right before they came out with additional rooms. So we had the pleasure of being, you know, some of the first to utilize those. And so at that point it was like: “Wait a minute, we’re doing this all wrong.” There’s no reason why we should be sending 95,000 emails with all these attachments and nobody’s keeping up with that and nobody’s viewing it, and we have no insight into whether it’s working or not. That was the biggest change for us. Now, whenever there’s an opportunity that’s created, we create a Digital Room, and that Digital Room follows that client throughout their entire lifecycle. So it goes from new logo sales where they’ll load in all the information they’ve spoken about. The customer has access to all of those resources. Everything from wallet cards to posters, you know, all of our collateral and how it is that their employees need to get in touch with us, to sending them over then to implementation. And having the Digital Room has made that so much easier because we can keep everything in one place. And that customer is already familiar with that Digital Room because they started it in the very beginning with our sales reps, so they continue that through with the implementation. They’re no longer sending out these long spreadsheets for people to fill out and send back to them. Everything’s in one centralized location, and then as that account is handed off to either client success or IT designated account representative, then they take the ownership of that account so it changes. In the, in the fact that we have visibility now into everything that has gone on in that account from acquisition all the way through expansion. And that’s a really big deal. And not just that, we’ve had actual clients write into us and tell us how impressed they were with our Digital Room concept. And we had one that had wrote us and said that it was the best presentation and transfer of information that they had ever seen. It was gold to us. And that’s why I say it was a game-changer, because it was. It changed everything from that point on. RR: When you hear that feedback from your buyers, you know you’re doing something right. And to the previous point of alignment, you know, we talked about how you’re using the tool to drive marketing and sales alignment, but. In this way, you’re also using it to drive pre-sales and post-sales alignment. So that entire process is smoothed out a little bit and very, to your point, challenging, we’ll say, process of implementation is a lot easier. You know, we heard a little bit about how buyers responded to the introduction of Digital Rooms. What about your sellers? How was that received when you first started using these and rolling them out? HF: We first rolled it out to new logo sales and marketing. That was where the main focus was, and then kind of expanded from that point, and then we’ve just continued on since then. It just changes everything that we do. RR: One thing too, that is kind of useful, from a marketing side when we’re thinking about Digital Rooms is the fact that as this Room lives throughout the entire cycle, you are getting so much engagement data flooding into your system. That’s great for sellers because they know what’s happening in their deal. It can shape their next steps, they know what to do, but it’s also great for you because it gives you that kind of directional vision as to what’s working and maybe what’s not working as well. As you mentioned, part of your goals are that measurement piece where you can go into the board meeting and say: “I feel confident in my impact.” So, how are you approaching measurement today and how does Highspot, some of that engagement data, some of that influence revenue data kind of fit into how you’re looking at your work? HF: It gives us complete visibility. It’s the difference between knowing that we’re just producing content and throwing it across the fence and hoping that it works to now being able to now say: “Okay, this that we created, we can now measure that, and this has impacted deals. A, B, C, and D.” We have individual Scorecards for if there’s initiative that we’re wanting to run, whether there’s a Play, whatever it may be. We can run individual Scorecards on teams, we can run it on individual sales reps. We can also associate that with our revenue cycles. So, it tells us not only what’s working, but it also tells us where the gaps are because we get reporting back, telling us what internal staff are searching for inside of Highspot, and if there’s something there that they’re looking for that we haven’t created collateral for, then that gives us an indication that gives us the green light to say: “Hey, maybe we need to take a look at this and this is something that we need to add to through our bank of collateral.” RR: That’s such a great use case too, because oftentimes, you know, you frame it as the: “I know it works. I know it’s not working.” But you can’t know what you don’t know. Right? And so when you don’t have that line of sight into the field of what they wish they had, there’s no way to provide it. Be super curious about an example where you found a gap and were like: “Oh, I can’t believe we didn’t know we needed this.” HF: It happened last week as a matter of fact. We had our report that came from Highspot that showed what terms they’re searching for and all that for the first time is said “clinic,” and I saw that and I thought: “Are you kidding me?” We have never put anything together about specifically about clinics, you know, and that’s such a key piece of what, what we do, because we vet very specific clinics to make for sure that they have the same philosophy as we do, and that they’re gonna treat these injured workers that we may have to refer to them in the same fashion that is our expectation. And so whenever I saw “clinic” on there, it made me think that is so important. And I don’t think that we’ve ever created anything that’s been client-facing specifically that’s been about what that vetting process looks like for a clinic. So yeah, we had a really, really recent use case for that one. RR: That’s such a funny story. So from day-to-day things like this where you’re like: “Oh, this would be a very useful asset” to we’re hearing great things from buyers about how Digital Rooms are easing the sales cycle, all of these things coming together, it sounds like there’s a lot of success going on. In all of this time, as you’ve been building and evolving your Highspot environment, when you look back, what improvements stand out the most? What wins are you proudest of? HF: The biggest wins that I’m proudest of are that we now have a strategy that sticks. We have a strategy that follows us throughout the entire organization. Everyone’s on the same page. Being able to have that platform, and I don’t know that I mentioned it before, but we not only rolled this out to our sales team, we also rolled that out to our operations team, our nurse client liaisons. So everybody in our organization has access to Highspot. So that I would say is our biggest win is to be able to get everybody on the same page and all moving in the same direction. RR: Yeah, absolutely. And then I would love to know also, as a marketing leader, we talked about some of that visibility. What has that been doing for you, as you’re thinking about impact? HF: When people think of marketing, sometimes they think of activities or they think of, we’re just producing things. No, we’re a revenue engine. We are a revenue engine. So now we have the information that supports that, and we can walk into a boardroom and confidently show that we’ve contributed in this specific way and this many deals. It takes us from that passive kind of involvement to really just driving the whole go-to-market strategy. RR: And it really helps you reaffirm that not only do we have a seat at the table, but we deserve it. Because to your point, we are moving a lot in, in the revenue cycle, quarter over quarter, and it’s sometimes hard to prove, but once you can, it’s really, really powerful. So, as we’re closing out. I’d like to kind of go a little bit back to the beginning. You built a career translating very deep industry expertise into marketing leadership. As other folks in specialized fields are looking to move into strategic roles, what advice would you share? HF: Don’t sand down your edges. Don’t try to conform to what a traditional marketer is. You have expertise, especially from, whether that’s from a technical background or it’s a clinical background, that is a huge asset in terms of marketing because you have the ability to bring something new to the table that other marketers may not already have. RR: I love that phrase: “Don’t sand down your edges.” I feel like we get a lot of advice on the Win/Win Podcast and all of it is wonderful, but that is one I have not heard before, and that is a very powerful perspective. I think all your accumulated experiences make you a stronger, impactful professional, and you can translate that kind of wherever you want it to go. Perfect place to close on. Holly, thank you so much for joining us today. It’s been a really enlightening, interesting session to hear a little bit more about you and the work you’re doing at Axiom. HF: You bet. Well, thank you for having me on Riley. I appreciate all you do and, and all that the Highspot team does as well. RR: Amazing. To our audience, thank you for tuning into this episode of the Win/Win Podcast. Be sure to tune in next time for more insights on how you can maximize go-to market success with Highspot.

In this episode, the Axiom team debriefs a framework from behavioral researcher Vanessa Van Edwards on the three levels of human connection — moving from the throwaway questions that generate noise to the deeper ones that reveal how someone truly sees themselves — and talks through how business owners can apply it with their teams.IN THIS EPISODE, YOU'LL LEARN:• Why most questions don't build connection• How to move past small talk• Which questions create real engagement• Why listening matters as much as askingDOWNLOAD THE LEADERSHIP GUIDE:‍ ‍183 - The Three Levels of ConnectionResources mentioned:• Vanessa Van Edwards — Science of People• Debra Fine — The Fine Art of Small TalkHELP US IMPROVE THE SHOW: Take our 30 second SurveyHave a question for the show? Email us at contact@axiomstrategic.comCONNECT WITH AXIOM• Website• LinkedIn• Instagram• Facebook• YouTubeABOUT AXIOM STRATEGIC: Axiom Strategic helps business owners and leaders build mission-driven businesses by aligning culture, leadership, operations, sales, and financials.

On America at Night with McGraw Milhaven, Brig. Gen. John Teichert joined the program to discuss the latest developments involving Iran and what they could mean for regional stability and U.S. national security. Next, Dr. Dorit Donoviel, Executive Director of the Translational Research Institute for Space Health (TRISH), discussed the human toll of the Artemis program, explaining how researchers are using data from recent commercial missions—including Axiom flights and the Fram2 polar orbit mission—to better understand how to keep astronauts healthy during longer missions such as Artemis III and future journeys to Mars. Finally, author Kostya Kennedy talked about his book “The Ride: Paul Revere and the Night That Saved America,” exploring the dramatic events of the famous midnight ride and why the story remains a defining moment in American history. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Space Show Presents Bob Zimmerman, Tuesday, 3-24-26!Quick Summary:This space show program focused primarily on NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman's comprehensive restructuring of the Artemis lunar program, which includes three phases of lunar surface operations, the pausing of the Lunar Gateway project, and increased reliance on private sector partnerships. Bob Zimmerman provided detailed analysis of the new plan, noting its logical structure and focus on engineering rather than just science, while expressing some concerns about NASA's potential over-involvement in private sector operations. The discussion also covered NASA's plans for a nuclear-powered Mars mission, the status of commercial space station development, and current progress on lunar spacesuits and rovers. Other topics included China's and India's space station programs, the potential for lunar water ice at the poles, and the broader implications for commercial space development and launch capabilities.Detailed Summary:Our guest, Bob Zimmerman, focused on discussing NASA's recent announcements, particularly regarding the Artemis program and plans for a nuclear reactor on Mars. Bob shared his experience watching an 8-hour NASA TV broadcast about these plans. The group also discussed a potential Friday show featuring Frank White, who is seeking funding to go to space on a Blue Origin rocket, and mentioned an upcoming Sunday interview with the CEO of TransAstra, who is working on asteroid retrieval projects.Bob discussed his review of NASA presentations, focusing on Jared Isaacman's restructuring of the Artemis lunar program. He explained that the program has been reorganized into three phases: initial infrastructure establishment, foundational components, and long-term human occupancy. The new plan pauses the Luna Gateway project and aims to phase out SLS, with private sector involvement in launch facilities. He noted that the first manned mission is planned for 2028, and the third phase is expected to begin around 2033.Bob detailed NASA's plans to phase out SLS and transition to private sector alternatives like SpaceX's Starship and Blue Origin's New Glenn. He explained NASA's approach to restructure the ISS program through an “evolutionary assembly” design involving a core module with multiple docking ports, which could benefit companies like Axiom. He also covered NASA's plans for nuclear propulsion to Mars, though he expressed skepticism about the ambitious timeline to launch by the end of 2028, noting this would be largely a government-led project.Bob discussed NASA's new approach under Administrator Isaacman, emphasizing the focus on using private sector resources more efficiently rather than wasting money on previous programs like SLS and Luna Gateway. He explained that Congress had already approved the reconfiguration through the NASA authorization bill, giving Isaacman significant freedom to implement changes. Our guest expressed growing admiration for Isaacman's political strategy in gaining congressional support while moving the program away from inefficiencies, though he noted concerns about potential budgetary issues and congressional interference.Our Wisdom Team discussed NASA's lunar exploration plans and budget allocation. Ajay and Bob agreed that while the overall $25 billion NASA budget was sufficient, previous waste on projects like Orion had created opportunities for reallocation toward more productive initiatives. Bob noted that while the third phase plans were preliminary and might change, the overall approach was intelligent and step-by-step, with NASA recognizing that early stages could evolve significantly. The discussion also covered Intuitive Machines' lunar lander redesign and Jared Isaacman's ambitious plan for 30 unmanned lunar landers over three years, though Robert expressed skepticism about meeting this timeline given past commercial landing failures.Bob discussed the potential minimal opposition to a new lunar program that relies on private sector development rather than NASA projects. He noted that while the South Pole was mentioned as a potential landing site, NASA is also considering alternatives, particularly easier locations near the equator for early missions. He also expressed concerns about the upcoming Artemis II mission, describing it as out of sequence and potentially risky, while emphasizing that the new program announced appears to prioritize engineering over science.Robert discussed NASA's new lunar program, emphasizing its focus on engineering rather than science, which represents a significant cultural shift. He noted that while the program builds on existing concepts, the overall structure is more coherent and designed to inspire public interest in space exploration. He expressed concerns about NASA's potential over-involvement in private sector projects, worrying this could lead to empire building and reduce private sector innovation. The team debated whether NASA's involvement in oversight roles was necessary for congressional reporting or could potentially stifle private sector development.The group discussed the upcoming Artemis II flight, scheduled for April 1st with a six-day launch window through April 6th. Bob explained that while lunar missions have relatively short windows, they are more flexible than Mars missions which only occur every two years. The discussion also touched on the technical considerations for lunar launches, including optimal lighting conditions for landing site visibility and the need to avoid nighttime during extended missions. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about TransAstra planned asteroid mission, which our guest noted was in early stages and preliminary in nature.Robert and Ajay discussed the technical details of nuclear propulsion systems, clarifying the differences between nuclear thermal and nuclear electric propulsion. Robert expressed skepticism about the timeline for the SR1 mission, noting that deploying helicopters on Mars would be a significant challenge. The conversation then shifted to the presence of water ice at the Moon's South Pole, with Robert sharing recent data suggesting lower quantities than previously expected. Ajay suggested that looking below the surface might provide more information, and the discussion ended with David asking about the commercial activities planned for lunar bases.Zimmerman explained that NASA's lunar base program is primarily government-funded and not focused on profitability, but its goal is to stimulate private sector involvement in space, potentially leading to commercial activities like data centers or manufacturing. He discussed the potential of AI data centers in space, noting that while many such projects may fail due to over-investment, the demand for launch services will drive significant innovation in the rocket industry. He emphasized that the paradigm shift in space travel came with the successful landing of a rocket's first stage, which has paved the way for reusable rockets and lower costs, ultimately benefiting the development of space stations and other commercial activities in space.Bob provided an overview of global space station developments, highlighting China's government-run program, India's efforts to build its own station with potential private enterprise involvement, and Russia's ambitious but potentially delayed plans. He discussed NASA's five competing American space station projects and their potential integration with a core module concept proposed by Isaac Man. The group also addressed lunar exploration progress, including the development of spacesuits by Axiom and rovers by various private companies, with NASA considering how to coordinate these technologies for future lunar missions.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Upcoming ShowsBroadcast 4519:(New Time) Zoom Bob Zimmerman | Tuesday 24 Mar 2026 600PM PTGuests: Robert ZimmermanZoom: Bob Zimmerman is back with fresh news, updates and perspective on Bob can deliver.Broadecast 4520 Hotel Mars - New info on DART Mission Success | Wednesday 25 Mar 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars and new info on Dart Mission successFriday, March 27: TBD | Friday 27 Mar 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonTBDBroadcast 5022 Zoom: Joel Sercel of TransAstra | Sunday 29 Mar 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Joel SercelJoel discusses the TransAstra and we will talk with him about major commercial space news and development.Space Show weekly schedule pending. See Upcoming Show Menu on the right side of our home page, www.thespaceshow.com. The weekly newsletter will be posted on Substack when completed. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

In this special episode of LawTech Talks, produced in partnership with Axiom, we explore what law departments actually want from their providers right now and how those teams are being pushed beyond standalone AI tools and towards more connected, governed workflow models. Host Jerome Doraisamy speaks with Axiom chief technology officer CJ Saretto and Harvey Australian country head Ashleigh Whittaker about what in-house teams are asking for when it comes to collaboration with providers, why traditional workflows make collaboration difficult, and what law departments should be looking for as they rethink collaboration models. Saretto and Whittaker also delve into Shared Spaces, best use cases and why it's so important, Axiom's role in helping clients move from AI experimentation to real workflow adoption, how law departments should think about the balance between AI, human judgement, and provider support, and what it all says about the future legal operating model. To learn more about Axiom, click here.

On this Salcedo Storm Podcast:Take a breather and get back to first principles. 

International equities have recently generated meaningful outperformance relative to U.S. equities, suggesting a material shift after an extended period of U.S. dominance. Host John Bryson is joined by Dean Bumbaca, CFA, portfolio manager at Axiom Investors, to discuss why international markets could continue to gain momentum and how global exposure can help investors capture these dynamic opportunities. Dean shares insights into the most attractive investment opportunities as the global economy restructures. The conversation also touches on the AI trade, equity valuations, and the consequences of a weaker U.S. dollar for investors with U.S.-focused portfolios. 1 How would you describe Axiom's investment approach? Dean: At Axiom, we view the predominant, most durable factor that drives alpha in equity markets to be positive surprise. Our entire process is designed to spot inflections in businesses that will ultimately result in positive earnings surprises, coupled with an improving competitive advantage and deepening moats. We embrace buy and monitor, where new information proves or disproves our hypothesis. 2 Why should investors consider international equities in 2026? Dean: U.S. market outperformance through the end of 2024 was fueled by the strength of the U.S. economy and the country's edge in design. We believe the global economy is beginning to shift from the design era to a build era, where outsized growth comes from capital heavy enterprises. The winners of this phase are in Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and parts of Europe, where advanced manufacturing remains concentrated. 3 What are the specific regional opportunities available in international markets? Dean: We have a large and increasing position in Japan. With the country's dominance in materials science and scaled manufacturing, our companies are seeing strong demand for high performance specialty materials used in aeroengines and nuclear reactors. On top of that, the government has made structural changes to enhance shareholder return, improve return on equity, and valuation multiples. We also see meaningful upside in defense and aerospace. Defense demand is supported by rising government budgets, while aerospace should benefit from stronger international travel, which increases aircraft utilization and drives higher maintenance needs. In addition, we expect positive earnings momentum in European financials, supported by credible cost takeout programs that should translate into substantial capital returns over the coming years.

The Aave DAO collapsed — but might that be good for Aave? (But bad for the token?) Plus, how the feud between the U.S. government and Anthropic helped the AI company. Thank you to our sponsors! ⁠⁠⁠Fuse: The Energy Network ⁠⁠ – Shift your energy use and earn rewards. ⁠⁠⁠MultiChain Advisors -⁠⁠⁠ The Growth & Capital Markets Partner You Need The Aave civil war appears to be at an end with key members of the DAO rage quitting and leaving Aave Labs standing as the sole protocol contributor.  Uneasy Money hosts Kain Warwick, Luca Netz, and Taylor Monahan explain why the Aave DAO's messy collapse is a death knell for the DAO system. Ironically, they wonder — could this be good for Aave, but bad for the token? The crew also wades into ZachXBT's recent Axiom investigation and how the on-chain detective has become “a vigilante for hire.”  They also cover all the insider trading claims and fights around prediction markets involving the Iran War and Mr. Beast, and “Kalshi jail.” Kain suspects another reason for the U.S. government's rift with Anthropic. Luca, an Anthropic investor, says he wished Dario had taken the government's deal, but that Sam Altman needs to “take the Zuck playbook.” Meanwhile, is Anthropic nerfing OpenClaw? Hosts: ⁠⁠⁠Kain Warwick⁠⁠⁠, Founder of Infinex and Synthetix ⁠⁠⁠Taylor Monahan⁠⁠⁠, Security Expert ⁠⁠⁠Luca Netz, CEO of Pudgy Penguins Links: Unchained: ⁠⁠⁠⁠Aave Governance Fight Escalates Ahead of $51 Million Funding Vote Uneasy Money: Why the AI Singularity May Already Be Out of Our Hands How Aave Labs and the DAO Should Split Ownership of the Brand – Uneasy Money ZachXBT Alleges Axiom Employee Misused Internal Data Uneasy Money: Why Peter Steinberger and Non-Crypto People Hate the Crypto Mob Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Gm! In this episode, we discuss recent trends in the Solana ecosystem, including declining onchain revenue, continued inflows into Solana-related ETFs, and growth in tokenized equities. We also cover liquidity and structural challenges in onchain equity markets, RWA expansion on Kamino, and the Axiom insider trading controversy. Enjoy! -- Follow Lightspeed: ⁠https://twitter.com/Lightspeedpodhq⁠ Follow Toma: https://x.com/toma_adv Follow Carlos: https://x.com/0xcarlosg Follow Danny: https://x.com/defi_kay_ Join the Lightspeed Telegram: ⁠https://t.me/+QHlbNTNS4gc1ZTVh -- Join us at DAS (Digital Asset Summit) in New York City this March!  Use the link below to learn more, and use code LIGHTSPEED200  to get $200 off your ticket! See you there! Learn more + get your ticket here: https://blockworks.co/event/digital-asset-summit-nyc-2026 -- Get top market insights and the latest in crypto news. Subscribe to Blockworks Daily Newsletter: https://blockworks.co/newsletter/ -- Timestamps: (0:00) Introduction (3:17) Solana Monthly Update (8:18) Tokenized Equities Explained (20:11) Onchain Stock Liquidity (24:16) RWAs on Kamino (38:51) Axiom Insider Trading (52:31) Closing Comments -- Disclaimers: Lightspeed was kickstarted by a grant from the Solana Foundation. Nothing said on Lightspeed is a recommendation to buy or sell securities or tokens. This podcast is for informational purposes only, and any views expressed by anyone on the show are solely our opinions, not financial advice. Danny, and our guests may hold positions in the companies, funds, or projects discussed.

Anastasia Boyko joins us this week for a wide-angle conversation about AI adoption, leadership, and the uncomfortable truth behind “we are watching what peer firms do.” A Yale-trained tax lawyer with experience spanning Axiom, legal education, and innovation leadership, Boyko argues that precedent-driven instincts are turning into a liability when the underlying rules of the market are shifting in real time.The episode opens with lessons from the Women + AI 2.0 Summit at Vanderbilt and the “AI competence penalty” narrative. Boyko's central principle for law firm leaders is simple, stop copying the competition and start operating with intention. Strategic planning matters more than tool shopping, especially when uncertainty makes leaders freeze, over-index on fear, or chase noise instead of outcomes.From there, the conversation sharpens into client reality. Boyko shares what she is hearing from in-house leaders, and it is not comforting for firms. Legal departments are working to reduce dependence on outside counsel, business partners inside companies often accept “good enough,” and the models keep improving. The risk is not losing to a peer firm; it is losing the client relationship because the work stops feeling necessary.A major theme is talent and the apprenticeship gap. Boyko argues firms underinvest in people, even as they spend aggressively on software stacks. AI can help junior lawyers with coaching and confidence, but it does not replace mentorship, judgment-building, or context. The skills that matter now include client advisory, operational thinking, critical judgment, and the ability to solve problems across a complex system, not only perform discrete tasks in a vacuum.The episode closes on legal education and the future value of the JD. Boyko urges students to be selfish about learning AI, especially when faculty guidance comes from avoidance or philosophy rather than experimentation. Looking ahead, she predicts the JD's value shifts upward, away from rote production and toward proactive advisory work, relationships, anticipatory counsel, and wisdom-driven judgment. In other words, fewer fire drills, more looking around corners.PLI - How to Navigate Law School PodcastPower Paradox webinarListen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | Substack[Special Thanks to ⁠Legal Technology Hub⁠ for their sponsoring this episode.]⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.comMusic: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

February ends with peak FUD. Ryan and David unpack why crypto is stuck in historic “Extreme Fear” even without a major blowup, and why markets feel like they've entered an uncertainty bubble. They break down the Supreme Court striking Trump's tariffs, Trump immediately finding new legal doors to bring them back, and the looming $150B+ refund fight. Then the “Citrini Crash”: AI doomer scenarios going viral, spooking stocks, and leaving investors terrified that AI will be either not good enough or far too good. Plus: fresh allegations that Jane Street helped accelerate Terra's collapse, Meta's stablecoin reboot for its billions of users, ZachXBT's Axiom insider trading exposé, Hyperliquid's new DC policy push, Robinhood's retail venture fund, Coinbase's 24/5 stocks rollout, and the Pentagon's ultimatum to Anthropic over AI guardrails. ---

Did someone insider trader ZachXBT's insider trading investigation? After blockchain sleuth ZachXBT teased an investigation into a crypto firm, insiders seemingly bet heavily on Axiom before the news broke. With wallets netting 7x returns and Axiom admitting they were contacted beforehand, did the subjects of the investigation profit from their own exposure? CoinDesk's Jennifer Sanasie hosts "CoinDesk Daily." - This episode was hosted by Jennifer Sanasie. “CoinDesk Daily” is produced by Jennifer Sanasie and edited by Victor Chen.

Matt and Nic are back with another week of news and deals. In this episode:  Kalshi has detected and banned two accounts for insider trading Is Polymarket going to have to add KYC? Is there a tradeoff between informational efficiency and market fairness The OCC de facto bans stablecoin yield in its rulemaking around GENIUS Meta is considering partnering with a stablecoin issuer Stripe is bullish in their annual report ZachXBT determines that Axiom employees have been abusing the platform Terraform labs accuses Jane Street of insider trading WSJ reports that Binance overlooked Iranian sanctions violations Justin Drake unveils a post-quantum roadmap for Ethereum Matt Corallo says Nic is wrong about Bitcoin and quantum Content mentioned: Larry Cermak: How Crypto Actually Works: The Missing Manual  

Phil Iscove and Emily St. James continue their Pixar 2000s miniseries with a deep dive into WALL·E, Andrew Stanton's 2008 animated sci-fi romance about a lonely trash-compacting robot left behind on Earth.Joined by Justin and Laura Khoo, they break down the film's near-silent first act, Ben Burtt's groundbreaking sound design, the Axiom's consumerist dystopia, and why WALL·E may be Pixar's most political film. They also discuss its environmental themes, visual storytelling, and how it fits alongside Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and Cars in Pixar's golden era.Is WALL·E the studio's boldest experiment? Its purest love story? Or both?Follow the Hosts & GuestsPodcast Like It'sInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeitsPhil IscoveInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscoveEmily St. JamesInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjamsJustin KhooInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/juskhooLaura KhooInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/laurajeanettekhoo Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode we cover Block's 40% workforce reduction amid AI-driven efficiency gains and market reactions, OpenAI's raise at $730 billion and delayed public market access to major AI firms and Axiom's insider trading scandal. Thanks for tuning in! As always, remember this podcast is for informational purposes only, and any views expressed by anyone on the show are solely their opinions, not financial advice. -- Follow Blockworks Research: https://x.com/blockworksres Follow Danny: https://x.com/defi_kay_ Follow Boccaccio: https://x.com/salveboccaccio -- Join us at DAS (Digital Asset Summit) in New York City this March! Use the link below to learn more, and use code 0X200 to get $200 off your ticket! See you there! Learn more + get your ticket here: https://blockworks.co/event/digital-asset-summit-nyc-2026 -- Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3foDS38 Subscribe on Apple: https://apple.co/3SNhUEt Subscribe on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3NlP1hA Get top market insights and the latest in crypto news. Subscribe to Blockworks Daily Newsletter: https://blockworks.co/newsletter/ -- Timestamps: (0:00) Introduction (6:07) AI Layoffs (22:17) AI Raises (37:58) Axiom (52:41) Closing Thoughts -- Check out Blockworks Research today! Research, data, governance, tokenomics, and models – now, all in one place Blockworks Research: https://www.blockworksresearch.com/ Free Daily Newsletter: https://blockworks.co/newsletter -- Disclaimer: Nothing said on 0xResearch is a recommendation to buy or sell securities or tokens. This podcast is for informational purposes only, and any views expressed by anyone on the show are solely our opinions, not financial advice. Boccaccio, Danny, and our guests may hold positions in the companies, funds, or projects discussed.

Tune in live every weekday Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM Eastern to 10:15 AM.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Buy our NFT⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join our Discord⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out our Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out our YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠DISCLAIMER: The views shared on this show are the hosts' opinions only and should not be taken as financial advice. This content is for entertainment and informational purposes.

Testing for the spacesuits that will be worn by NASA's Artemis III crew is underway.

ABOUT THE EPISODEListen in as David Schrock & Stephen Wellum interview Kyle Claunch on his COA Longform Essay, "Axioms of Theology Proper: Guiding Lights for the Doctrine of God"Timestamps00:35 – Intro03:40 – How Did Dr. Claunch's Interest for the Doctrine of God Begin to Grow?07:25 – What Were Some of the Things Moving in Academia Towards a Retrieval of Classical Theism?13:28 – Retrieving While Not Throwing out the Baby with the Bathwater19:42 – Axiom 1: The Doctrine of Creation from Ex Nihilo22:36 – How Important is the Order to the Axioms?24:43 – Axioms 2&3: Supreme Goodness, Immanence & Negation29:00 – The Perfections and Imperfections in Humanity in Creation33:30 – Axiom 5 and Analogical Speech37:57 – Wrong Ways of Analogical Speech Leads to Wrong Thinking on the Doctrine of God42:11 – Axioms 6, 7, & 8: God's Attributes50:13 – What Attribute Is Hardest to Grasp for Students?55:54 – Axioms 9 & 10: Our God is Triune59:42 – God's Attributes Only Make Sense With His Triune Nature1:06:10 – Outro Resources to Click“Axioms of Theology Proper: Guiding Lights for the Doctrine of God” – Kyle Claunch“God the Father: Namesake of all Fatherhood” – Kyle Claunch“Why are We Trinitarian, and Why Does it Matter?” – Kyle ClaunchTheme of the Month: The God Who Is There: Contemplating the Doctrine of GodGive to Support the Work Books to ReadSumma Theologiae (Vol. 1) – Thomas AquinasDictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology, 2nd ed. – Richard A. MullerProslogion in Anselm of Canterbury: The Major Works – ed. Brian Davies and G.R. EvansInstitutes of Eclenctic Theology – Francis Turretin ed. James T. Dennison, Jr.Orations – Gregory of Nazianzus

Crew-12 is prepping for a Friday launch. NASA selects AXIOM for a fifth private mission to the ISS. China is a step closer to a lunar mission. Could the supermassive black hole in the middle of the Milky Way really be dark matter?Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/made-of-stars--4746260/support.

Bob Zimmerman of Behind the Black discusses Axiom's upcoming ISS missions, various European startups, and critiques crony capitalism regarding government subsidies for Starlink's rural internet access.1958

1910 CARTHAGE1.Jeff Bliss reports on allegations that Mayor Bass altered an after-action report regarding the Pacific Palisades fire to hide resource deployment failures during the disaster response in Los Angeles.2.Jeff Bliss notes Governor Newsom promotes high-speed rail despite a nearby fire and no track laid, while facing skepticism about his presidential potential and California's ongoing infrastructure struggles.3.Gene Marks discusses high small business confidence, the resilience of plumbing trades, and how new AI agents from Anthropic are rendering traditional software coding obsolete in the tech industry.4.Gene Marks warns administrative roles face AI threats while employers prioritize AI literacy, advising businesses to update Google profiles to avoid losing significant annual revenue from outdated listings.5.Henry Sokolski of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center warns of heightened risks as the New START treaty expires without replacement, citing unchecked Russian and Chinese weapons and debates over resuming nuclear testing.6.Henry Sokolski notes amidst expired treaties, the US reintroduces extended deterrence language and recommits to the NPT, though non-proliferation enforcement remains inconsistent and challenging against determined adversaries.7.Richard Epstein of the Hoover Institution argues the proposed retroactive billionaire wealth tax is unconstitutional, economically damaging, and likely to drive wealth out of California despite strong union support.8.Richard Epstein suggests intense political polarization explains why scandals like the Epstein files or Trump'scontroversies deepen divides rather than ending careers, normalizing political deviance across the spectrum.9.Professor Eve McDonald explains how Hannibal, emulating the myth of Hercules, daringly marched elephants and troops across the treacherous Alps to surprise Rome with an invasion of Italy.10.Professor Eve McDonald describes how Hannibal utilizes superior cavalry and terrain to encircle and annihilate a larger Roman force at Cannae, though he lacks the manpower to subsequently take Rome.11.Professor Eve McDonald recounts how young Scipio Africanus adopts Hannibal's tactics, conquering Spain and invading Africa to force Hannibal's return and final defeat at the Battle of Zama.12.Professor Eve McDonald concludes that after a brutal siege and total destruction in 146 BC, Carthage is eventually refounded by Augustus, becoming a vital Roman city and Christian center.13.Lorenzo Fiori reports on the opening ceremony excitement, improved snow conditions in the Alps, and Prime Minister Meloni's strong leadership presence at the Milan Winter Olympics.14.Jim McTague notes steady but quiet business activity in Lancaster, describes local approval for a new data center, and reports on overlooked global cod shortages affecting seafood markets.15.Bob Zimmerman of Behind the Black discusses Axiom's upcoming ISS missions, various European startups, and critiques crony capitalism regarding government subsidies for Starlink's rural internet access.16.Bob Zimmerman details findings of water and organics on an interstellar comet, discusses the unknowns of space reproduction, and dismisses sensationalism regarding Jupiter's diameter measurements in recent headlines.

Formal verification already consumes years of human effort.In this episode, Lukas Biewald talks with Carina Hong, Founder & CEO of Axiom, about why verification is becoming the real bottleneck in high stakes AI systems.They discuss how Axiom uses AI to take on the tedious checking that stretches verification cycles across years, starting with formal mathematics and extending to hardware and software.Carina also explains why Axiom's approach to auto-formalization mirrors spec driven models like Kiro from AWS.Connect with us here:Carina Hong: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carina-hong/Axiom: https://www.linkedin.com/company/axiommath/Lukas Biewald: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lbiewald/Weights & Biases: https://www.linkedin.com/company/wandb/

The Space Show Presents Sarah Scoles, Friday, 1-30-26Quick Summary”Our program initially focused on discussing the status and challenges of the Breakthrough Starshot project, including its cancellation and implications for interstellar travel research through Sarah's Oct 2025 Scientific American story. Participants explored the technical and financial aspects of space exploration, including the development of laser propulsion technology, the importance of mechanical engineering in different gravity environments, and the role of commercial space companies in pharmaceutical development and national security. The group also discussed space budget allocation, the challenges of evaluating space companies, and the geopolitical implications of space exploration, with participants expressing optimism about space's potential contributions to global progress.SummaryDavid and Sarah discussed the status of the Breakthrough Starshot project, which Sarah had recently written about in Scientific American. David noted that several previous guests who had been involved with Breakthrough, including Worden, Phil Lubin, and Zach Manchester, had been unable to return for updates. Sarah's article revealed that the project had become dormant, which came as a surprise to David, who had been discussing it as a real possibility for years on his Space Show program.In introduced the Wisdom Team for this program including Dr. James Benford, who argued that the Breakthrough Starshot project was successful in achieving its Phase 1 objectives, which involved investing in high-risk, high-reward research to de-risk technology and identify potential showstoppers. Others highlighted the importance of designing equipment that functions in microgravity or zero-gravity environments, a topic that is often overlooked in space exploration discussions. Later in the program the team discussed the need for mechanical engineering specialists tailored to different gravity conditions, such as those on Mars, and considered the possibility of writing an article on this topic.David discussed the cancellation of Breakthrough's interstellar flight project and its impact on the show's guests, noting that Pete Worden and others had not been Space Show guests in the past few years. He introduced Sarah Scoles, a science journalist who wrote an article about the project's demise in Scientific American. Sarah explained that Breakthrough's plan to send wafer-sized spacecraft to Alpha Centauri at a quarter the speed of light had been abandoned, highlighting the risks of billionaire-funded science projects. David and Sarah discussed the reasons behind the project's cancellation and its implications for future interstellar missions.Sarah's article explored the demise of Breakthrough Starshot, a $100 million project aimed at developing laser propulsion technology for interstellar travel. Despite significant progress in laser and spacecraft technology, the project faced challenges such as high costs and technical difficulties, leading to its quiet discontinuation. Jim Benford, a key figure in the project, clarified that the concept predates Breakthrough Starshot and has a long history, including his own laboratory work on microwave sails in the 1990s. He criticized the article for not consulting with major project participants and emphasized the secretive nature of the Breakthrough team.Jim discussed the Starshot project's Phase 1, which aimed to assess the feasibility of interstellar travel using a sail propelled by a laser. The phase was successful in determining that there are no showstoppers to the concept, which is technically and financially viable. The project addressed four key challenges, including building a coherent laser array, finding a suitable material for the sail, ensuring stable beam riding, and transmitting data over vast distances. Phase 2, which would involve laboratory and in-orbit demonstrations, is now seeking funding to continue the work, with an estimated cost of $100 million.The group discussed Sarah's article about Breakthrough Starshot, with Jim and David expressing appreciation for her thorough coverage of the project's four main challenges and progress made. Jim, who is 85 years old, explained that Breakthrough Starshot's communication issues have been a significant problem, particularly regarding the final report that was completed over a year ago but has not been released. Jim announced he would be writing a two-part series on Centauri Dreams about Breakthrough Starshot, with the first part focusing on Sarah's article and the second part providing a technical review of the project's achievements.The group continued discussing Sarah's recent article about the Breakthrough Starshot project, with Sarah defending her reporting approach and acknowledging she spoke to key researchers but not top executives due to their secrecy. Jim explained that Yuri Milner, the project's financier, is secretive and avoids public attention, which contributes to the organization's poor internal and external communications. Marshall inquired about the appropriate budget allocation for R&D project publicity, and Jim shared that Kevin Parkin had modeled the system's costs, estimating $10 billion for construction if laser costs decrease, with half the budget going to the beamer and the rest split between the aperture and power.Sarah discussed her overall experience covering space and technology, highlighting the rapid development of low Earth orbit satellite constellations for communications and Earth observation. She noted that companies are increasingly using space data for various applications, including national security and weather monitoring. David inquired about Sarah's views on the progress of space development, particularly in areas like human spaceflight and the shift of commercial space companies towards defense and national security work.The group discussed the current state of space companies and their funding. David expressed concern about the high failure rate of entrepreneurial space ventures, noting that many companies may not be able to sustain themselves due to technological limitations or financial constraints. Joe agreed, emphasizing that founders often focus more on technology than fundraising. The discussion also touched on the challenges of distinguishing between credible and fraudulent space companies at conferences, with Sarah and David sharing their approaches to evaluating potential stories or investments.Sarah discussed her experience covering space news, including her interest in space policy and UAP topics. Ajay brought up Russia's development of a nuclear-powered missile, which sparked a debate between Ajay and Jim about the feasibility and implications of such a weapon. John suggested that Russia's development might be a response to the U.S. pulling out of the ABM Treaty and deploying its own missile defense system.The group discussed the development and implications of nuclear-powered cruise missiles, with Ajay emphasizing their strategic significance regardless of whether they have a “Golden Dome” capability. Marshall raised concerns about evaluating economic claims and technical feasibility of such projects, leading to a discussion about methods to verify claims, including Sarah's approach as a physics-major journalist and Phil's description of the Atlantis Project's evidence ledger system for crowdsourced peer review. The conversation concluded with David inquiring about Sarah's media work, learning that she primarily focuses on print media and is developing a podcast called “What I Left Out” about journalists' omitted article content.The group discussed the state of medical research and drug development in space, with David expressing skepticism about private space stations replacing the ISS's national lab. Sarah shared her experience writing about the major private space station projects, noting limited transparency and detailed information from the companies. Jim and Ajay agreed with David's concerns about the technical challenges of building and maintaining private space stations, particularly regarding power requirements and vibration control. The conversation concluded with a brief discussion about fusion research, where Sarah noted that while fusion companies often receive significant funding, technical progress remains uncertain.The group discussed the status of commercial space tourism, with David noting that true commercial space tourism is still 2 years away as it requires tickets to be sold without specific reservations. Joe shared his investments in Axiom and Voyager, highlighting VAST as an interesting single-purpose space station company that aims to launch in 2027 and is entirely privately funded without federal money. Jim shared his expertise on fusion, predicting that Tri-Alpha Energy will succeed with a 100-megawatt reactor in the early 2030s, while most tokamak-based fusion companies are unlikely to succeed. The discussion concluded with Sarah expressing interest in space stations for pharmaceutical development, while Marshall mentioned potential uses for satellite maintenance and astronomy.The program addressed the allocation of space budgets between commercial and scientific endeavors, with Sarah and Jim agreeing that commercial space activities, including pharmaceutical development in orbit, are important alongside scientific research. David highlighted the geopolitical implications of space exploration and emphasized the need for a balanced approach that considers both commercial and scientific interests. The discussion concluded with Jim and David expressing optimism about space's potential to contribute to global peace and progress, while acknowledging challenges posed by political leaders and educational systems.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4498: Zoom Dr. Greg Autry | Tuesday 03 Feb 2026 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Greg AutryZoom: Dr. Autry on policy, economics, commercial and space missions/projectsBroadcast 4499 Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 04 Feb 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4500: Zoom Overview Energy with Dr. Paul Jaffe | Friday 06 Feb 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Paul JaffeZoom: Dr. Jaffe with others talks about Overview EnergyBroadcast 4501 Zoom Dr. Scott Solomon | Sunday 08 Feb 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Scott SolomonZoom: Settlement, humans in space, reproduction and more Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Our WWE SmackDown review as Simon Miller recaps:0:00 The Vision interrupts Cody Rhodes, Randy Orton, Sami Zayn and Jey Uso3:35 Carmelo Hayes vs. Rey Fenix4:26 Backstage promos6:19 Charlotte Flair & Alexa Bliss vs. Liv Morgan and Roxanne Perez8:12 Axiom vs. Johnny Gargano9:49 Gunther vows to end AJ Styles' career11:32 Ilja Dragunov vs. The Miz12:19 MFT's and Wyatt Sicks promo12:57 Cody Rhodes, Randy Orton, Sami Zayn & Jey Uso vs. The VisionGet Norton VPN: https://norton.ow5a.net/c/221109/3757569/4405?subid1=WCWrestling Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Intelligence is a gift, but is it also a trap?In this Holmesian deep dive, we dissect how smart people, the quick thinkers, articulate explainers, and mental athletes, fall for the most obvious nonsense. From the argument advantage trap to narrative addiction and memory distortion, we expose the hidden flaws behind fast minds. Sherlock Holmes warned us: “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data.”This episode is about that mistake, and why the smarter you are, the more likely you are to make it. Join our community at Axiom and put your skills to the test. Access the free tier or go deeper with exclusive paid challenges: https://www.omniscient-insights.com/axiom https://www.omniscient-insights.com/community-home MERCH -- https://the-deductionist.myspreadshop.co.uk/all E-SCAPE GAME -- https://www.youtube.com/@thedeductionistteam Everything else you need -- https://linktr.ee/bencardall Music provided by https://robertjohncollinsmusic.com/` #cognitivebiases #smartpeople #sherlockholmes #criticalthinking #clearthinking #intellectualfun #psychologypodcast #behavioralscience #Holmesian

Allen Farrington is an investor at Axiom BTC Capital and a writer known for sharp, contrarian takes on bitcoin and adjacent topics like bitcoin venture capital, fiat “plumbing,” and stablecoins. With Axiom, Allen uniquely focuses on clients' returns not coming from financial engineering, but from productive deployment of capital to solve real world problems.In this episode, Allen joins The Bitcoin Frontier to share how bitcoin exposes the fiat distortions inside venture capital, why clear lines between saving and investing change founder and limited partner (LP) behavior, and what a bitcoin-first stack means for payments and stablecoins. We dig into local capital allocation on a sound-money standard, free/open-source dynamics and moats, and why lightning + ecash may be the endgame for stablecoins.SUPPORT THE PODCAST: → Subscribe → Leave a review → Share the show with your friends and family → Send us an email: podcast@unchained.com → Learn more about Unchained: https://unchained.com/?utm_source=you... → Book a free call with a bitcoin expert: https://unchained.com/consultation?ut...TIMESTAMPS:0:00 – Intro & disclaimer; setting up VC in a world of finite money2:12 – Bitcoin as “fixing the plumbing”: unwinding fiat distortions vs fantasizing about the end state4:45 – How artificially low rates monetize other assets and push allocators out the risk curve7:28 – Pension funds, liabilities, and why flows into venture decouple from fundamentals9:46 – “Thousand-x or bust”: why LP incentives shape VC behavior (and fund crypto)12:02 – Saving vs investing: why buying bitcoin ≠ venture investing (and Axiom's thesis)16:05 – Local investing on a sound-money standard and higher opportunity costs for founders20:52 – Measuring in bitcoin terms: hurdle rates, returns, and what “outperforming bitcoin” really means27:15 – Trusted third parties are security holes… so where do businesses add value? (non-custodial services)32:06 – Moats in a FOSS world: compete by delivering value, not lock-in36:50 – “Zero to One,” monopolies, and why ruthless excellence beats user exploitation41:10 – Open vs closed source: the healthy tension in bitcoin-native companies44:22 – Allen's “half-baked” stablecoin thesis: why new “stablecoin blockchains” are a dead end47:06 – The Genius Act: fully reserved dollars, surveillance tradeoffs, and limited real-world impact so far48:55 – Lightning as settlement layer for fiat tokens; taproot assets / RGB today, ecash tomorrow55:00 – Could fully reserved rails hollow out small banks? Centralization pressures and unintended consequences56:44 – Closing: where to find Allen and Axiom BTCWHERE TO FOLLOW US: → Unchained X: https://x.com/unchained → Unchained LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/unchainedcom   → Unchained Newsletter: https://unchained.com/newsletter → Allen Farrington's Twitter: https://x.com/allenf32    → Timot Lamarre's Twitter: https://x.com/TimotLamarre → Jose Burgos (Director of Media Production): https://x.com/DeFBeD

Carina Hong dropped out of Stanford's PhD program to build "mathematical superintelligence" — and just raised $64M to do it. In this episode, we explore what that actually means: an AI that doesn't just solve math problems but discovers new theorems, proves them formally, and gets smarter with each iteration. Carina explains how her team solved a 130-year-old problem about Lyapunov functions, disproved a 30-year-old graph theory conjecture, and why math is the secret "bedrock" for everything from chip design to quant trading to coding agents. We also discuss the fascinating connections between neuroscience, AI, and mathematics.Lean more about Axiom: https://axiommath.ai/ Subscribe to The Neuron newsletter: https://theneuron.ai

The Dadley Boyz chat about what happened on this week's episode of Friday Night SmackDown, including...More WarGames MAYHEM!U.S. Title Open Challenge!Penta vs. Finn Balor!Charlotte Flair & Rhea Ripley bury the hatchet!DIY steal Axiom's mask?!ENJOY!Follow us on Twitter:@AdamWilbourn@MSidgwick@WhatCultureWWEFor more awesome content, check out: whatculture.com/wwe Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.