Podcasts about bendo

Dans cet épisode de "L'Église d'aujourd'hui", nous accueillons Bendo, dessinateur talentueux et auteur du récent ouvrage Il posa son regard sur lui et l'aima : 40 jours avec la tendresse de Dieu, paru aux éditions Nouvelle Cité en janvier 2025. Ce livre propose un parcours spirituel de 40 jours, enrichi des dessins expressifs de Bendo, invitant les lecteurs à se laisser toucher par la tendresse divine à travers des psaumes, des évangiles, ainsi que des œuvres artistiques et littéraires qui ont marqué l'auteur. Chaque étape offre un espace de réflexion personnelle, faisant de cet ouvrage un véritable compagnon de route pour approfondir sa relation avec Dieu. Un échange inspirant sur la manière dont l'art et la spiritualité peuvent se rencontrer pour nourrir la foi au quotidien. L'Église d'aujourd'hui est une émission qui invite à découvrir les mille visages des chrétiens de nos jours. Elle est présentée par son auteur, Matteo Ghisalberti, et proposée par le diocèse de Monaco. L'émission est diffusée sur RMC le samedi à minuit, après l'After Foot (20h-minuit).

Dans cet épisode je reçois Bendo, une vraie pro du dating et experte des situationships.

In this episode of Shaping Your Pottery, Christina Bendo, a woodfire potter, delves into her journey and expertise in the world of pottery. Christina discusses the commonly held belief in the pottery community that potters must endure extensive and laborious methods to achieve success, which she passionately disagrees with, advocating for more sustainable practices. She shares her own experiences, including her early inspiration from her fifth-grade art teacher, her impactful three-year assistantship with Trista Chapman, and her enriching residency at the International Ceramic Studio in Hungary. Christina emphasizes the importance of sustainable work practices, finding one's voice, and continuously pushing creative boundaries. She also speaks on the value of community, particularly within the wood firing process, and offers advice to budding potters on discovering their unique voices. You can learn more about christina by checking out her instagram https://www.instagram.com/christinabendopottery/The Questions we ask will determine how our pottery will look like that's why I created a Free 15 questions to help you discover your voice template go grab it here www.shapingyourpottery.com/questionsJoin the Clay Games Community to connect with like minded potters and compete in monthly pottery competitions Join Here 00:00 Introduction and Initial Thoughts 00:09 Challenging Traditional Pottery Beliefs 01:46 Sustainable Pottery Practices 03:17 Christina's Pottery Journey 05:36 Assistantship with Trista Chapman 09:49 Residency at the International Ceramic Studio in Hungary 15:40 Developing a Unique Pottery Style 19:25 The Appeal of Wood Firing 29:27 Finding Community in Wood Firing 33:02 Advice for Aspiring Potters 35:40 Final Thoughts and Farewell

Co-host of the Multifamily Mindset Podcast, Zach Rucker, interviews Lenny Bendo of Great Dane Capital. Lenny shares insights on journaling, networking strategies, and personal growth for financial freedom in multifamily real estate. He shares his 482 Multifamily Mindset journey till his first deal.Follow Lenny below: InstagramFacebookInvest with Great Dane Capital here. Follow Host of Multifamily Mindset Podcast, Zach Rucker.FacebookLinkedInDonate HERE to help with relief efforts from the Maui wildfires.Follow Tyler & Dallas on Instagram:►Tyler Deveraux (@tyler_deveraux), CEO of Multifamily Mindset & Managing Partner of Multifamily Capital Partners►Dallas Pruitt (@dalpruitt), Founder of Growth Guide Co.

Alexander Busse y a Darly Bendo son socios de NXTP, fondo de Venture Capital especializado en startups B2B y Software as a Service, cuyo portafolio incluye varios unicornios como Tiendanube, Auth0, Mural, y Betterfly. Pese a la caída de inversión en startups, la digitalización de pequeñas, medianas y grandes empresas es una gran tendencia que sigue acelerándose en Latinoamérica. Por favor ayúdame dejando una reseña en Spotify o Apple Podcasts: https://ratethispodcast.com/startupeableEn este episodio conversamos sobre:   •Qué falta para detonar el mercado de SaaS en Latinoamérica   •Por qué Brasil está tan adelantado en adopción de software, en comparación a México y el resto de la región   •Cómo evaluar invertir en startups SaaS, incluyendo el equipo y mercado   •Y de las diferencias entre vender software a Pymes o grandes empresasNotas del episodio: https://startupeable.com/yaydoo/Para más contenido síguenos en:YouTube  | Sitio Web -Distribuido por Genuina Media

Et si on passait une tête de l'autre côté des caméras ? Comment s'organise un streaming poker ? Nous avons le plaisir de recevoir ce vendredi deux spécialistes de la question de la société Wonderstream.tv : Benjamin Domenget aka Bendo : fondateur de LyonHoldem en 2006, Bendo a roulé sa bosse dans le poker depuis plus de 15 ans allant des missions freelance pour Unibet, à VIP Manager chez PS, commentateur Live entre les tables pour PSLive et depuis 2017 co-fondateur de la société Wonderstream opérant sur 40 festivals poker /an. Benjamin Barros : 40 ans, deux chats, infographiste sur les streaming poker de Wonderstream. Il possède un bracelet Scoop joué en PLO et est fidèle auditeur de nombreux podcasts, il suit le MMA et a une formation en psychologie. La pandémie a révélé un goût pour le Yoga et exacerbé son goût de la création à travers l'écriture.  Staff CP Radio Présentation : Comanche et ShiShi Streaming : Steven Réalisation et montage : Simon Musique : G-Process Club Poker Radio vous est présentée par Winamax, le n°1 du poker en ligne.   Perte d'argent, conflits familiaux, addiction… Les jeux d'argent sont interdits aux moins de 18 ans et peuvent être dangereux. En cas de besoin, contactez le 09 74 75 13 13.

While walking the dog last night, Ione suddenly asks Ben "Do you want to know my TM mantra?"We grapple with the idea of secrets, control and superstition. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

À 47 ans, le dessinateur et artisan encadreur Bendo publie "Un carnet de tendresse". Sur le plateau de KTO, cet homme qui a étudié la philosophie, l'anthropologie, la théologie et l'histoire de l'art, raconte comment, lors d'un voyage en Italie, il est tombé sur un visage du Christ « peint il y a des siècles ». Le coup de foudre ! « Je lui trouve les yeux rieurs, les pommettes encore rouges, un regard espiègle. La peinture a pâli avec le temps mais son regard qui me fixe me dit : va ! ». Ce fut l'étincelle pour ce dessinateur qui nous partage son chemin spirituel dans ce roman graphique né lors de la pandémie : observant « une grande solitude et détresse chez beaucoup de gens », il a publié sur les réseaux sociaux ses dessins autour de Dieu et que l'on retrouve dans ce joli ouvrage.

À 47 ans, le dessinateur et artisan encadreur Bendo publie "Un carnet de tendresse". Sur le plateau de KTO, cet homme qui a étudié la philosophie, l'anthropologie, la théologie et l'histoire de l'art, raconte comment, lors d'un voyage en Italie, il est tombé sur un visage du Christ « peint il y a des siècles ». Le coup de foudre ! « Je lui trouve les yeux rieurs, les pommettes encore rouges, un regard espiègle. La peinture a pâli avec le temps mais son regard qui me fixe me dit : va ! ». Ce fut l'étincelle pour ce dessinateur qui nous partage son chemin spirituel dans ce roman graphique né lors de la pandémie : observant « une grande solitude et détresse chez beaucoup de gens », il a publié sur les réseaux sociaux ses dessins autour de Dieu et que l'on retrouve dans ce joli ouvrage.

Hey y'all, it's Saturday night and we are meeting up at Bendo to listen to our favorite band Truth Squad, and hopefully run into Rolly's dream girl. This week we discuss chapters 13-15, and things will get a little heavy. Trigger warning, as always for Just Listen, for sexual assault and eating disorders.Want to join our community and talk all things Dessen with us? Become a Patreon member now! By becoming a member, you gain access to our Discord channel where we can dive even deeper into all the books and movies with all of you. Join the Gwendolyn Rodgers fan club by following this link patreon.com/hatespinnerbaitpod

Gli ospiti di oggi sono Chiara e Bendo dell'azienda La Rapa Bendata di Serravalle Scrivia, in provincia di Alessandria. In questa intervista abbiamo parlato di relazione fra città e campagna, di agricoltura su piccola scala come strumento per rafforzare comunità e tessere relazioni, di lotta contro lo sfruttamento in agricoltura, e di moltissimo altro ancora!    Link per iscriversi all'evento di sabato 8 aprile “Una Massa di Piccoli Agricoltori Contro l'Agricoltura di Massa”, organizzato da Abitanti (Duipuvrun, Cascina Barbàn e La Rapa Bendata), con ospite JM Fortier. Un evento da non perdere! Instagram de La Rapa Bendata Facebook de La Rapa Bendata Se hai trovato del valore in questa intervista e hai piacere di supportare Micorrize, lo puoi fare in diversi modi: Fai una donazione su PayPal Supporta il podcast su Patreon Segui le pagine social del podcast, lascia un commento e condividi i post, fallo conoscere ad amici e colleghi, lascia 5 stelle su Spotify o una recensione su Apple Podcast. Coltiviamo insieme un'agricoltura migliore! Scrivimi a davide@micorrizepodcast.it o su Instagram. Visita il sito e iscriviti alla newsletter. Alla prossima!

DAMN! They Were Good celebrates the careers of the most exciting and influential fighters in MMA history, and on the third episode of 2023, the MMA Fighting crew remembers the best of former UFC and WEC lightweight champion, Benson Henderson. Beginning his career in 2006, Henderson quickly made a name for himself as one of the most dynamic and exciting fighters in MMA, participating in both the 2009 and 2010 Fights of the Year. Those fights, both in the WEC, set up his most memorable career run, where he served as the UFC lightweight champion from 2012 to 2013, defending the title three times. After losing his belt to Anthony Pettis in 2013, Henderson remained a going concern in the UFC lightweight and welterweight divisions before becoming one of the first major free agents to depart the UFC and head to Bellator, where he would spend the rest of his career, challenging for titles on three separate occasions. One of the lightweight division's many overlooked champions, Henderson's 17-year career came to an end earlier this month when he retired after losing the Usman Nurmagomedov in the first round of the Bellator Lightweight Grand Prix, and so to honor the man affectionately dubbed "Bendo," host Jed Meshew is joined by MMAFighting's Shaheen Al-Shatti and Mike Heck to remember their favorite moments from his incredible career. Follow Jed Meshew @JedKMeshew Follow Shaun Al-Shatti @ShaunAlShatti Follow Mike Heck @MikeHeck_JR Subscribe: http://goo.gl/dYpsgH Check out our full video catalog: http://goo.gl/u8VvLi Visit our playlists: http://goo.gl/eFhsvM Like MMAF on Facebook: http://goo.gl/uhdg7Z Follow on Twitter: http://goo.gl/nOATUI Read More: http://www.mmafighting.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

DAMN! They Were Good celebrates the careers of the most exciting and influential fighters in MMA history, and on the third episode of 2023, the MMA Fighting crew remembers the best of former UFC and WEC lightweight champion, Benson Henderson. Beginning his career in 2006, Henderson quickly made a name for himself as one of the most dynamic and exciting fighters in MMA, participating in both the 2009 and 2010 Fights of the Year. Those fights, both in the WEC, set up his most memorable career run, where he served as the UFC lightweight champion from 2012 to 2013, defending the title three times. After losing his belt to Anthony Pettis in 2013, Henderson remained a going concern in the UFC lightweight and welterweight divisions before becoming one of the first major free agents to depart the UFC and head to Bellator, where he would spend the rest of his career, challenging for titles on three separate occasions. One of the lightweight division's many overlooked champions, Henderson's 17-year career came to an end earlier this month when he retired after losing the Usman Nurmagomedov in the first round of the Bellator Lightweight Grand Prix, and so to honor the man affectionately dubbed "Bendo," host Jed Meshew is joined by MMAFighting's Shaheen Al-Shatti and Mike Heck to remember their favorite moments from his incredible career. Follow Jed Meshew @JedKMeshew Follow Shaun Al-Shatti @ShaunAlShatti Follow Mike Heck @MikeHeck_JR Subscribe: http://goo.gl/dYpsgH Check out our full video catalog: http://goo.gl/u8VvLi Visit our playlists: http://goo.gl/eFhsvM Like MMAF on Facebook: http://goo.gl/uhdg7Z Follow on Twitter: http://goo.gl/nOATUI Read More: http://www.mmafighting.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

DAMN! They Were Good celebrates the careers of the most exciting and influential fighters in MMA history, and on the third episode of 2023, the MMA Fighting crew remembers the best of former UFC and WEC lightweight champion, Benson Henderson. Beginning his career in 2006, Henderson quickly made a name for himself as one of the most dynamic and exciting fighters in MMA, participating in both the 2009 and 2010 Fights of the Year. Those fights, both in the WEC, set up his most memorable career run, where he served as the UFC lightweight champion from 2012 to 2013, defending the title three times. After losing his belt to Anthony Pettis in 2013, Henderson remained a going concern in the UFC lightweight and welterweight divisions before becoming one of the first major free agents to depart the UFC and head to Bellator, where he would spend the rest of his career, challenging for titles on three separate occasions. One of the lightweight division's many overlooked champions, Henderson's 17-year career came to an end earlier this month when he retired after losing the Usman Nurmagomedov in the first round of the Bellator Lightweight Grand Prix, and so to honor the man affectionately dubbed "Bendo," host Jed Meshew is joined by MMAFighting's Shaheen Al-Shatti and Mike Heck to remember their favorite moments from his incredible career. Follow Jed Meshew @JedKMeshew Follow Shaun Al-Shatti @ShaunAlShatti Follow Mike Heck @MikeHeck_JR Subscribe: http://goo.gl/dYpsgH Check out our full video catalog: http://goo.gl/u8VvLi Visit our playlists: http://goo.gl/eFhsvM Like MMAF on Facebook: http://goo.gl/uhdg7Z Follow on Twitter: http://goo.gl/nOATUI Read More: http://www.mmafighting.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Heeey what's up everyone! We are back with another episode of The Just Talk Podcast with Episode 254. Here's the breakdown.Jan and Rich vent out about their jobs, James Gunn dropped the first couple of projects for the new DCU at Warner Bros Discovery, and of course "What Have You Been Up To?"With that said, as always, we thank you all for the listens/downloads and your continuous support. WE APPRECIATE AND LOVE YOU ALL! We hope you enjoy this episode and until next time, we're going silent.Follow Us On IG@thejusttalkpodcastEmail Usthejusttalkpodcast00@gmail.comSubscribe To Us On YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo40E9rCSueQjDxPl21u8Mg

The Fierce Female Network

Heeey what's up everyone! We are back with another episode of The Just Talk Podcast with Episode 253. Here's the breakdown.Rich is engaged finally and it is also Jan's Birthday! The boys talk about the engagement, birthday plans, and of course "What Have You Been Up To?" With that said, as always, we thank you all for the listens/downloads and your continuous support. WE APPRECIATE AND LOVE YOU ALL! We hope you enjoy this episode and until next time, we're going silent.Follow Us On IG@thejusttalkpodcastEmail Usthejusttalkpodcast00@gmail.comSubscribe To Us On YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo40E9rCSueQjDxPl21u8Mg

It's time for another pit stop at the Quick Zip! Join us for episode 20 (our podcast is almost old enough that it won't need a fake ID to drink at Bendo) where Mikelanne teaches us why we should stop apologizing, the weird naming practices of the Southeast, and chapters 12-14.Want to join our community and talk all things Dessen with us? Become a Patreon member now! By becoming a member, you gain access to our Discord channel where we can dive even deeper into all the books and movies with all of you. Join the Gwendolyn Rodgers fan club by following this link patreon.com/hatespinnerbaitpod

Les ofreceremos varias informaciones actuales del ámbito cultural, incluido un recuerdo de la escritora para ninos, Krista Bendová. También nos despediremos de La Latina, Veronika Kapcová y sus periplos por Ecuador.

About BenBen Whaley is a staff software engineer at Chime. Ben is co-author of the UNIX and Linux System Administration Handbook, the de facto standard text on Linux administration, and is the author of two educational videos: Linux Web Operations and Linux System Administration. He is an AWS Community Hero since 2014. Ben has held Red Hat Certified Engineer (RHCE) and Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) certifications. He earned a B.S. in Computer Science from Univ. of Colorado, Boulder.Links Referenced: Chime Financial: https://www.chime.com/ alternat.cloud: https://alternat.cloud Twitter: https://twitter.com/iamthewhaley LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/benwhaley/ TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Forget everything you know about SSH and try Tailscale. Imagine if you didn't need to manage PKI or rotate SSH keys every time someone leaves. That'd be pretty sweet, wouldn't it? With Tailscale SSH, you can do exactly that. Tailscale gives each server and user device a node key to connect to its VPN, and it uses the same node key to authorize and authenticate SSH.Basically you're SSHing the same way you manage access to your app. What's the benefit here? Built-in key rotation, permissions as code, connectivity between any two devices, reduce latency, and there's a lot more, but there's a time limit here. You can also ask users to reauthenticate for that extra bit of security. Sounds expensive?Nope, I wish it were. Tailscale is completely free for personal use on up to 20 devices. To learn more, visit snark.cloud/tailscale. Again, that's snark.cloud/tailscaleCorey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn and this is an episode unlike any other that has yet been released on this august podcast. Let's begin by introducing my first-time guest somehow because apparently an invitation got lost in the mail somewhere. Ben Whaley is a staff software engineer at Chime Financial and has been an AWS Community Hero since Andy Jassy was basically in diapers, to my level of understanding. Ben, welcome to the show.Ben: Corey, so good to be here. Thanks for having me on.Corey: I'm embarrassed that you haven't been on the show before. You're one of those people that slipped through the cracks and somehow I was very bad at following up slash hounding you into finally agreeing to be here. But you certainly waited until you had something auspicious to talk about.Ben: Well, you know, I'm the one that really should be embarrassed here. You did extend the invitation and I guess I just didn't feel like I had something to drop. But I think today we have something that will interest most of the listeners without a doubt.Corey: So, folks who have listened to this podcast before, or read my newsletter, or follow me on Twitter, or have shared an elevator with me, or at any point have passed me on the street, have heard me complain about the Managed NAT Gateway and it's egregious data processing fee of four-and-a-half cents per gigabyte. And I have complained about this for small customers because they're in the free tier; why is this thing charging them 32 bucks a month? And I have complained about this on behalf of large customers who are paying the GDP of the nation of Belize in data processing fees as they wind up shoving very large workloads to and fro, which is I think part of the prerequisite requirements for having a data warehouse. And you are no different than the rest of these people who have those challenges, with the singular exception that you have done something about it, and what you have done is so, in retrospect, blindingly obvious that I am embarrassed the rest of us never thought of it.Ben: It's interesting because when you are doing engineering, it's often the simplest solution that is the best. I've seen this repeatedly. And it's a little surprising that it didn't come up before, but I think it's in some way, just a matter of timing. But what we came up with—and is this the right time to get into it, do you want to just kind of name the solution, here?Corey: Oh, by all means. I'm not going to steal your thunder. Please, tell us what you have wrought.Ben: We're calling it AlterNAT and it's an alternative solution to a high-availability NAT solution. As everybody knows, NAT Gateway is sort of the default choice; it certainly is what AWS pushes everybody towards. But there is, in fact, a legacy solution: NAT instances. These were around long before NAT Gateway made an appearance. And like I said they're considered legacy, but with the help of lots of modern AWS innovations and technologies like Lambdas and auto-scaling groups with max instance lifetimes and the latest generation of networking improved or enhanced instances, it turns out that we can maybe not quite get as effective as a NAT Gateway, but we can save a lot of money and skip those data processing charges entirely by having a NAT instance solution with a failover NAT Gateway, which I think is kind of the key point behind the solution. So, are you interested in diving into the technical details?Corey: That is very much the missing piece right there. You're right. What we used to use was NAT instances. That was the thing that we used because we didn't really have another option. And they had an interface in the public subnet where they lived and an interface hanging out in the private subnet, and they had to be configured to wind up passing traffic to and fro.Well, okay, that's great and all but isn't that kind of brittle and dangerous? I basically have a single instance as a single point of failure and these are the days early on when individual instances did not have the level of availability and durability they do now. Yeah, it's kind of awful, but here you go. I mean, the most galling part of the Managed NAT Gateway service is not that it's expensive; it's that it's expensive, but also incredibly good at what it does. You don't have to think about this whole problem anymore, and as of recently, it also supports ipv4 to ipv6 translation as well.It's not that the service is bad. It's that the service is stonkingly expensive, particularly at scale. And everything that we've seen before is either oh, run your own NAT instances or bend your knee and pays your money. And a number of folks have come up with different options where this is ridiculous. Just go ahead and run your own NAT instances.Yeah, but what happens when I have to take it down for maintenance or replace it? It's like, well, I guess you're not going to the internet today. This has the, in hindsight, obvious solution, well, we just—we run the Managed NAT Gateway because the 32 bucks a year in instance-hour charges don't actually matter at any point of scale when you're doing this, but you wind up using that for day in, day out traffic, and the failover mode is simply you'll use the expensive Managed NAT Gateway until the instance is healthy again and then automatically change the route table back and forth.Ben: Yep. That's exactly it. So, the auto-scaling NAT instance solution has been around for a long time well, before even NAT Gateway was released. You could have NAT instances in an auto-scaling group where the size of the group was one, and if the NAT instance failed, it would just replace itself. But this left a period in which you'd have no internet connectivity during that, you know, when the NAT instance was swapped out.So, the solution here is that when auto-scaling terminates an instance, it fails over the route table to a standby NAT Gateway, rerouting the traffic. So, there's never a point at which there's no internet connectivity, right? The NAT instance is running, processing traffic, gets terminated after a certain period of time, configurable, 14 days, 30 days, whatever makes sense for your security strategy could be never, right? You could choose that you want to have your own maintenance window in which to do it.Corey: And let's face it, this thing is more or less sitting there as a network traffic router, for lack of a better term. There is no need to ever log into the thing and make changes to it until and unless there's a vulnerability that you can exploit via somehow just talking to the TCP stack when nothing's actually listening on the host.Ben: You know, you can run your own AMI that has been pared down to almost nothing, and that instance doesn't do much. It's using just a Linux kernel to sit on two networks and pass traffic back and forth. It has a translation table that kind of keeps track of the state of connections and so you don't need to have any service running. To manage the system, we have SSM so you can use Session Manager to log in, but frankly, you can just disable that. You almost never even need to get a shell. And that is, in fact, an option we have in the solution is to disable SSM entirely.Corey: One of the things I love about this approach is that it is turnkey. You throw this thing in there and it's good to go. And in the event that the instance becomes unhealthy, great, it fails traffic over to the Managed NAT Gateway while it terminates the old node and replaces it with a healthy one and then fails traffic back. Now, I do need to ask, what is the story of network connections during that failover and failback scenario?Ben: Right, that's the primary drawback, I would say, of the solution is that any established TCP connections that are on the NAT instance at the time of a route change will be lost. So, say you have—Corey: TCP now terminates on the floor.Ben: Pretty much. The connections are dropped. If you have an open SSH connection from a host in the private network to a host on the internet and the instance fails over to the NAT Gateway, the NAT Gateway doesn't have the translation table that the NAT instance had. And not to mention, the public IP address also changes because you have an Elastic IP assigned to the NAT instance, a different Elastic IP assigned to the NAT Gateway, and so because that upstream IP is different, the remote host is, like, tracking the wrong IP. So, those connections, they're going to be lost.So, there are some use cases where this may not be suitable. We do have some ideas on how you might mitigate that, for example, with the use of a maintenance window to schedule the replacement, replaced less often so it doesn't have to affect your workflow as much, but frankly, for many use cases, my belief is that it's actually fine. In our use case at Chime, we found that it's completely fine and we didn't actually experience any errors or failures. But there might be some use cases that are more sensitive or less resilient to failure in the first place.Corey: I would also point out that a lot of how software is going to behave is going to be a reflection of the era in which it was moved to cloud. Back in the early days of EC2, you had no real sense of reliability around any individual instance, so everything was written in a very defensive manner. These days, with instances automatically being able to flow among different hardware so we don't get instance interrupt notifications the way we once did on a semi-constant basis, it more or less has become what presents is bulletproof, so a lot of people are writing software that's a bit more brittle. But it's always been a best practice that when a connection fails okay, what happens at failure? Do you just give up and throw your hands in the air and shriek for help or do you attempt to retry a few times, ideally backing off exponentially?In this scenario, those retries will work. So, it's a question of how well have you built your software. Okay, let's say that you made the worst decisions imaginable, and okay, if that connection dies, the entire workload dies. Okay, you have the option to refactor it to be a little bit better behaved, or alternately, you can keep paying the Manage NAT Gateway tax of four-and-a-half cents per gigabyte in perpetuity forever. I'm not going to tell you what decision to make, but I know which one I'm making.Ben: Yeah, exactly. The cost savings potential of it far outweighs the potential maintenance troubles, I guess, that you could encounter. But the fact is, if you're relying on Managed NAT Gateway and paying the price for doing so, it's not as if there's no chance for connection failure. NAT Gateway could also fail. I will admit that I think it's an extremely robust and resilient solution. I've been really impressed with it, especially so after having worked on this project, but it doesn't mean it can't fail.And beyond that, upstream of the NAT Gateway, something could in fact go wrong. Like, internet connections are unreliable, kind of by design. So, if your system is not resilient to connection failures, like, there's a problem to solve there anyway; you're kind of relying on hope. So, it's a kind of a forcing function in some ways to build architectural best practices, in my view.Corey: I can't stress enough that I have zero problem with the capabilities and the stability of the Managed NAT Gateway solution. My complaints about it start and stop entirely with the price. Back when you first showed me the blog post that is releasing at the same time as this podcast—and you can visit that at alternat.cloud—you sent me an early draft of this and what I loved the most was that your math was off because of a not complete understanding of the gloriousness that is just how egregious the NAT Gateway charges are.Your initial analysis said, “All right, if you're throwing half a terabyte out to the internet, this has the potential of cutting the bill by”—I think it was $10,000 or something like that. It's, “Oh no, no. It has the potential to cut the bill by an entire twenty-two-and-a-half thousand dollars.” Because this processing fee does not replace any egress fees whatsoever. It's purely additive. If you forget to have a free S3 Gateway endpoint in a private subnet, every time you put something into or take something out of S3, you're paying four-and-a-half cents per gigabyte on that, despite the fact there's no internet transitory work, it's not crossing availability zones. It is simply a four-and-a-half cent fee to retrieve something that has only cost you—at most—2.3 cents per month to store in the first place. Flip that switch, that becomes completely free.Ben: Yeah. I'm not embarrassed at all to talk about the lack of education I had around this topic. The fact is I'm an engineer primarily and I came across the cost stuff because it kind of seemed like a problem that needed to be solved within my organization. And if you don't mind, I might just linger on this point and kind of think back a few months. I looked at the AWS bill and I saw this egregious ‘EC2 Other' category. It was taking up the majority of our bill. Like, the single biggest line item was EC2 Other. And I was like, “What could this be?”Corey: I want to wind up flagging that just because that bears repeating because I often get people pushing back of, “Well, how bad—it's one Managed NAT Gateway. How much could it possibly cost? $10?” No, it is the majority of your monthly bill. I cannot stress that enough.And that's not because the people who work there are doing anything that they should not be doing or didn't understand all the nuances of this. It's because for the security posture that is required for what you do—you are at Chime Financial, let's be clear here—putting everything in public subnets was not really a possibility for you folks.Ben: Yeah. And not only that but there are plenty of services that have to be on private subnets. For example, AWS Glue services must run in private VPC subnets if you want them to be able to talk to other systems in your VPC; like, they cannot live in public subnet. So essentially, if you want to talk to the internet from those jobs, you're forced into some kind of NAT solution. So, I dug into the EC2 Other category and I started trying to figure out what was going on there.There's no way—natively—to look at what traffic is transiting the NAT Gateway. There's not an interface that shows you what's going on, what's the biggest talkers over that network. Instead, you have to have flow logs enabled and have to parse those flow logs. So, I dug into that.Corey: Well, you're missing a step first because in a lot of environments, people have more than one of these things, so you get to first do the scavenger hunt of, okay, I have a whole bunch of Managed NAT Gateways and first I need to go diving into CloudWatch metrics and figure out which are the heavy talkers. Is usually one or two followed by a whole bunch of small stuff, but not always, so figuring out which VPC you're even talking about is a necessary prerequisite.Ben: Yeah, exactly. The data around it is almost missing entirely. Once you come to the conclusion that it is a particular NAT Gateway—like, that's a set of problems to solve on its own—but first, you have to go to the flow logs, you have to figure out what are the biggest upstream IPs that it's talking to. Once you have the IP, it still isn't apparent what that host is. In our case, we had all sorts of outside parties that we were talking to a lot and it's a matter of sorting by volume and figuring out well, this IP, what is the reverse IP? Who is potentially the host there?I actually had some wrong answers at first. I set up VPC endpoints to S3 and DynamoDB and SQS because those were some top talkers and that was a nice way to gain some security and some resilience and save some money. And then I found, well, Datadog; that's another top talker for us, so I ended up creating a nice private link to Datadog, which they offer for free, by the way, which is more than I can say for some other vendors. But then I found some outside parties, there wasn't a nice private link solution available to us, and yet, it was by far the largest volume. So, that's what kind of started me down this track is analyzing the NAT Gateway myself by looking at VPC flow logs. Like, it's shocking that there isn't a better way to find that traffic.Corey: It's worse than that because VPC flow logs tell you where the traffic is going and in what volumes, sure, on an IP address and port basis, but okay, now you have a Kubernetes cluster that spans two availability zones. Okay, great. What is actually passing through that? So, you have one big application that just seems awfully chatty, you have multiple workloads running on the thing. What's the expensive thing talking back and forth? The only way that you can reliably get the answer to that I found is to talk to people about what those workloads are actually doing, and failing that you're going code spelunking.Ben: Yep. You're exactly right about that. In our case, it ended up being apparent because we have a set of subnets where only one particular project runs. And when I saw the source IP, I could immediately figure that part out. But if it's a K8s cluster in the private subnets, yeah, how are you going to find it out? You're going to have to ask everybody that has workloads running there.Corey: And we're talking about in some cases, millions of dollars a month. Yeah, it starts to feel a little bit predatory as far as how it's priced and the amount of work you have to put in to track this stuff down. I've done this a handful of times myself, and it's always painful unless you discover something pretty early on, like, oh, it's talking to S3 because that's pretty obvious when you see that. It's, yeah, flip switch and this entire engagement just paid for itself a hundred times over. Now, let's see what else we can discover.That is always one of those fun moments because, first, customers are super grateful to learn that, oh, my God, I flipped that switch. And I'm saving a whole bunch of money. Because it starts with gratitude. “Thank you so much. This is great.” And it doesn't take a whole lot of time for that to alchemize into anger of, “Wait. You mean, I've been being ridden like a pony for this long and no one bothered to mention that if I click a button, this whole thing just goes away?”And when you mention this to your AWS account team, like, they're solicitous, but they either have to present as, “I didn't know that existed either,” which is not a good look, or, “Yeah, you caught us,” which is worse. There's no positive story on this. It just feels like a tax on not knowing trivia about AWS. I think that's what really winds me up about it so much.Ben: Yeah, I think you're right on about that as well. My misunderstanding about the NAT pricing was data processing is additive to data transfer. I expected when I replaced NAT Gateway with NAT instance, that I would be substituting data transfer costs for NAT Gateway costs, NAT Gateway data processing costs. But in fact, NAT Gateway incurs both data processing and data transfer. NAT instances only incur data transfer costs. And so, this is a big difference between the two solutions.Not only that, but if you're in the same region, if you're egressing out of your say us-east-1 region and talking to another hosted service also within us-east-1—never leaving the AWS network—you don't actually even incur data transfer costs. So, if you're using a NAT Gateway, you're paying data processing.Corey: To be clear you do, but it is cross-AZ in most cases billed at one penny egressing, and on the other side, that hosted service generally pays one penny ingressing as well. Don't feel bad about that one. That was extraordinarily unclear and the only reason I know the answer to that is that I got tired of getting stonewalled by people that later turned out didn't know the answer, so I ran a series of experiments designed explicitly to find this out.Ben: Right. As opposed to the five cents to nine cents that is data transfer to the internet. Which, add that to data processing on a NAT Gateway and you're paying between thirteen-and-a-half cents to nine-and-a-half cents for every gigabyte egressed. And this is a phenomenal cost. And at any kind of volume, if you're doing terabytes to petabytes, this becomes a significant portion of your bill. And this is why people hate the NAT Gateway so much.Corey: I am going to short-circuit an angry comment I can already see coming on this where people are going to say, “Well, yes. But it's a multi-petabyte scale. Nobody's paying on-demand retail price.” And they're right. Most people who are transmitting that kind of data, have a specific discount rate applied to what they're doing that varies depending upon usage and use case.Sure, great. But I'm more concerned with the people who are sitting around dreaming up ideas for a company where I want to wind up doing some sort of streaming service. I talked to one of those companies very early on in my tenure as a consultant around the billing piece and they wanted me to check their napkin math because they thought that at their numbers when they wound up scaling up, if their projections were right, that they were going to be spending $65,000 a minute, and what did they not understand? And the answer was, well, you didn't understand this other thing, so it's going to be more than that, but no, you're directionally correct. So, that idea that started off on a napkin, of course, they didn't build it on top of AWS; they went elsewhere.And last time I checked, they'd raised well over a quarter-billion dollars in funding. So, that's a business that AWS would love to have on a variety of different levels, but they're never going to even be considered because by the time someone is at scale, they either have built this somewhere else or they went broke trying.Ben: Yep, absolutely. And we might just make the point there that while you can get discounts on data transfer, you really can't—or it's very rare—to get discounts on data processing for the NAT Gateway. So, any kind of savings you can get on data transfer would apply to a NAT instance solution, you know, saving you four-and-a-half cents per gigabyte inbound and outbound over the NAT Gateway equivalent solution. So, you're paying a lot for the benefit of a fully-managed service there. Very robust, nicely engineered fully-managed service as we've already acknowledged, but an extremely expensive solution for what it is, which is really just a proxy in the end. It doesn't add any value to you.Corey: The only way to make that more expensive would be to route it through something like Splunk or whatnot. And Splunk does an awful lot for what they charge per gigabyte, but it just feels like it's rent-seeking in some of the worst ways possible. And what I love about this is that you've solved the problem in a way that is open-source, you have already released it in Terraform code. I think one of the first to-dos on this for someone is going to be, okay now also make it CloudFormation and also make it CDK so you can drop it in however you want.And anyone can use this. I think the biggest mistake people might make in glancing at this is well, I'm looking at the hourly charge for the NAT Gateways and that's 32-and-a-half bucks a month and the instances that you recommend are hundreds of dollars a month for the big network-optimized stuff. Yeah, if you care about the hourly rate of either of those two things, this is not for you. That is not the problem that it solves. If you're an independent learner annoyed about the $30 charge you got for a Managed NAT Gateway, don't do this. This will only add to your billing concerns.Where it really shines is once you're at, I would say probably about ten terabytes a month, give or take, in Managed NAT Gateway data processing is where it starts to consider this. The breakeven is around six or so but there is value to not having to think about things. Once you get to that level of spend, though it's worth devoting a little bit of infrastructure time to something like this.Ben: Yeah, that's effectively correct. The total cost of running the solution, like, all-in, there's eight Elastic IPs, four NAT Gateways, if you're—say you're four zones; could be less if you're in fewer zones—like, n NAT Gateways, n NAT instances, depending on how many zones you're in, and I think that's about it. And I said right in the documentation, if any of those baseline fees are a material number for your use case, then this is probably not the right solution. Because we're talking about saving thousands of dollars. Any of these small numbers for NAT Gateway hourly costs, NAT instance hourly costs, that shouldn't be a factor, basically.Corey: Yeah, it's like when I used to worry about costing my customers a few tens of dollars in Cost Explorer or CloudWatch or request fees against S3 for their Cost and Usage Reports. It's yeah, that does actually have a cost, there's no real way around it, but look at the savings they're realizing by going through that. Yeah, they're not going to come back and complaining about their five-figure consulting engagement costing an additional $25 in AWS charges and then lowering it by a third. So, there's definitely a difference as far as how those things tend to be perceived. But it's easy to miss the big stuff when chasing after the little stuff like that.This is part of the problem I have with an awful lot of cost tooling out there. They completely ignore cost components like this and focus only on the things that are easy to query via API, of, oh, we're going to cost-optimize your Kubernetes cluster when they think about compute and RAM. And, okay, that's great, but you're completely ignoring all the data transfer because there's still no great way to get at that programmatically. And it really is missing the forest for the trees.Ben: I think this is key to any cost reduction project or program that you're undertaking. When you look at a bill, look for the biggest spend items first and work your way down from there, just because of the impact you can have. And that's exactly what I did in this project. I saw that ‘EC2 Other' slash NAT Gateway was the big item and I started brainstorming ways that we could go about addressing that. And now I have my next targets in mind now that we've reduced this cost to effectively… nothing, extremely low compared to what it was, we have other new line items on our bill that we can start optimizing. But in any cost project, start with the big things.Corey: You have come a long way around to answer a question I get asked a lot, which is, “How do I become a cloud economist?” And my answer is, you don't. It's something that happens to you. And it appears to be happening to you, too. My favorite part about the solution that you built, incidentally, is that it is being released under the auspices of your employer, Chime Financial, which is immune to being acquired by Amazon just to kill this thing and shut it up.Because Amazon already has something shitty called Chime. They don't need to wind up launching something else or acquiring something else and ruining it because they have a Slack competitor of sorts called Amazon Chime. There's no way they could acquire you [unintelligible 00:27:45] going to get lost in the hallways.Ben: Well, I have confidence that Chime will be a good steward of the project. Chime's goal and mission as a company is to help everyone achieve financial peace of mind and we take that really seriously. We even apply it to ourselves and that was kind of the impetus behind developing this in the first place. You mentioned earlier we have Terraform support already and you're exactly right. I'd love to have CDK, CloudFormation, Pulumi supports, and other kinds of contributions are more than welcome from the community.So, if anybody feels like participating, if they see a feature that's missing, let's make this project the best that it can be. I suspect we can save many companies, hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. And this really feels like the right direction to go in.Corey: This is easily a multi-billion dollar savings opportunity, globally.Ben: That's huge. I would be flabbergasted if that was the outcome of this.Corey: The hardest part is reaching these people and getting them on board with the idea of handling this. And again, I think there's a lot of opportunity for the project to evolve in the sense of different settings depending upon risk tolerance. I can easily see a scenario where in the event of a disruption to the NAT instance, it fails over to the Managed NAT Gateway, but fail back becomes manual so you don't have a flapping route table back and forth or a [hold 00:29:05] downtime or something like that. Because again, in that scenario, the failure mode is just well, you're paying four-and-a-half cents per gigabyte for a while until you wind up figuring out what's going on as opposed to the failure mode of you wind up disrupting connections on an ongoing basis, and for some workloads, that's not tenable. This is absolutely, for the common case, the right path forward.Ben: Absolutely. I think it's an enterprise-grade solution and the more knobs and dials that we add to tweak to make it more robust or adaptable to different kinds of use cases, the best outcome here would actually be that the entire solution becomes irrelevant because AWS fixes the NAT Gateway pricing. If that happens, I will consider the project a great success.Corey: I will be doing backflips like you wouldn't believe. I would sing their praises day in, day out. I'm not saying reduce it to nothing, even. I'm not saying it adds no value. I would change the way that it's priced because honestly, the fact that I can run an EC2 instance and be charged $0 on a per-gigabyte basis, yeah, I would pay a premium on an hourly charge based upon traffic volumes, but don't meter per gigabyte. That's where it breaks down.Ben: Absolutely. And why is it additive to data transfer, also? Like, I remember first starting to use VPC when it was launched and reading about the NAT instance requirement and thinking, “Wait a minute. I have to pay this extra management and hourly fee just so my private hosts could reach the internet? That seems kind of janky.”And Amazon established a norm here because Azure and GCP both have their own equivalent of this now. This is a business choice. This is not a technical choice. They could just run this under the hood and not charge anybody for it or build in the cost and it wouldn't be this thing we have to think about.Corey: I almost hate to say it, but Oracle Cloud does, for free.Ben: Do they?Corey: It can be done. This is a business decision. It is not a technical capability issue where well, it does incur cost to run these things. I understand that and I'm not asking for things for free. I very rarely say that this is overpriced when I'm talking about AWS billing issues. I'm talking about it being unpredictable, I'm talking about it being impossible to see in advance, but the fact that it costs too much money is rarely my complaint. In this case, it costs too much money. Make it cost less.Ben: If I'm not mistaken. GCPs equivalent solution is the exact same price. It's also four-and-a-half cents per gigabyte. So, that shows you that there's business games being played here. Like, Amazon could get ahead and do right by the customer by dropping this to a much more reasonable price.Corey: I really want to thank you both for taking the time to speak with me and building this glorious, glorious thing. Where can we find it? And where can we find you?Ben: alternat.cloud is going to be the place to visit. It's on Chime's GitHub, which will be released by the time this podcast comes out. As for me, if you want to connect, I'm on Twitter. @iamthewhaley is my handle. And of course, I'm on LinkedIn.Corey: Links to all of that will be in the podcast notes. Ben, thank you so much for your time and your hard work.Ben: This was fun. Thanks, Corey.Corey: Ben Whaley, staff software engineer at Chime Financial, and AWS Community Hero. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice along with an angry rant of a comment that I will charge you not only four-and-a-half cents per word to read, but four-and-a-half cents to reply because I am experimenting myself with being a rent-seeking schmuck.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.

On s'intéresse aujourd'hui au big Dehmo, l'ancien membre de la "Mafia Zeutrei", plus communément appelée "la MZ". Depuis sa carrière solo, l'artiste n'a cessé de progresser et il a encore la faim et l'envie de prouver, à mon plus grand enchantement. Bonne chronique à vous.

In this conversation, Semon Rezchikov and I talk about what other disciplines can learn from mathematics, creating and cultivating collaborations, working at different levels of abstraction, and a lot more! Semon is currently a postdoc in mathematics at Harvard where he specializes in symplectic geometry. He has an amazing ability to go up and down the ladder of abstraction — doing extremely hardcore math while at the same time paying attention to *how* he's doing that work and the broader institutional structures that it fits into. Semon is worth listening to both because he has great ideas and also because in many ways, academic mathematics feels like it stands apart from other disciplines. Not just because of the subject matter, but because it has managed to buck many of the trend that other fields experienced over the course of the 20th century.   Links Semon's Website Transcript [00:00:35]  Welcome back to idea machines. Before we get started, I'm going to do two quick pieces of housekeeping. I realized that my updates have been a little bit erratic. My excuse is that I've been working on my own idea machine. That being said, I've gotten enough feedback that people do get something out of the podcast and I have enough fun doing it that I am going to try to commit to a once a month cadence probably releasing on the pressure second [00:01:35] day of. Second thing is that I want to start doing more experiments with the podcast. I don't hear enough experiments in podcasting and I'm in this sort of unique position where I don't really care about revenue or listener numbers. I don't actually look at them. And, and I don't make any revenue. So with that in mind, I, I want to try some stuff. The podcast will continue to be a long form conversation that that won't change. But I do want to figure out if there are ways to. Maybe something like fake commercials for lesser known scientific concepts, micro interviews. If you have ideas, send them to me in an email or on Twitter. So that's, that's the housekeeping. This conversation, Simon Rezchikov and I talk about what other disciplines can learn from mathematics, creating and cultivating collaborations, working at different levels of abstraction. is currently a post-doc in mathematics at Harvard, where he specializes in symplectic geometry. He has an amazing ability to go up, go up and down the ladder of [00:02:35] abstraction, doing extremely hardcore math while at the same time, paying attention to how he's doing the work and the broader institutional structures that affect. He's worth listening to both because he has great ideas. And also because in many ways, academic mathematics feels like it stands apart from other disciplines, not just because of the subject matter, but because it has managed to buck many of the trends that other fields experience of the course of the 20th century. So it's worth sort of poking at why that happened and perhaps. How other fields might be able to replicate some of the healthier parts of mathematics. So without further ado, here's our conversation. [00:03:16] Ben:  I want to start with the notion that I think most people have that the way that mathematicians go about a working on things and be thinking about how to work on things like what to work on is that you like go in a room and you maybe read some papers and you think really hard, and then [00:03:35] you find some problem. And then. You like spend some number of years on a Blackboard and then you come up with a solution. But apparently that's not that that's not how it actually works.  [00:03:49] Semon: Okay. I don't think that's a complete description. So definitely people spend time in front of blackboards. I think the length of a typical length of a project can definitely. Vary between disciplines I think yeah, within mathematics. So I think, but also on the other hand, it's also hard to define what is a single project. As you know, a single, there might be kind of a single intellectual art through which several papers are produced, where you don't even quite know the end of the project when you start. But, and so, you know, two, a two years on a single project is probably kind of a significant project for many people. Because that's just a lot of time, but it's true that, you know, even a graduate student might spend several years working on at least a single kind of larger set of ideas because the community does have enough [00:04:35] sort of stability to allow for that. But it's not entirely true that people work alone. I think these days mathematics is pretty collaborative people. Yeah. If you're mad, you know, in the end, you're kind of, you probably are making a lot of stuff up and sort of doing self consistency checks through this sort of formal algebra or this sort of, kind of technique of proof. It makes you make sure helps you stay sane. But when other people kind of can think about the same objects from a different perspective, usually things go faster and at the very least it helps you kind of decide which parts of the mathematical ideas are really. So often, you know, people work with collaborators or there might be a community of people who were kind of talking about some set of ideas and they may be, there may be misunderstanding one another, a little bit. And then they're kind of biting off pieces of a sort of, kind of collective and collectively imagined [00:05:35] mathematical construct to kind of make real on their own or with smaller groups of people. So all of those  [00:05:40] Ben: happen. And how did these collaborations. Like come about and  [00:05:44] Semon: how do you structure them? That's great. That's a great question. So I think this is probably several different models. I can tell you some that I've run across. So during, so sometimes there are conferences and then people might start. So recently I was at a conference and I went out to dinner with a few people, and then after dinner, we were. We were talking about like some of our recent work and trying to understand like where it might go up. And somebody, you know, I was like, oh, you know, I didn't get to ask you any questions. You know, here's something I've always wanted to know from you. And they were like, oh yes, this is how this should work. But here's something I don't know. And then somehow we realized that you know, there was some reasonable kind of very reasonable guests as to what the answer is. Something that needed to be known would be so I guess now we're writing a paper together, [00:06:35] hopefully that guess works. So that's one way to start a collaboration. You go out to a fancy dinner and afterwards you're like, Hey, I guess we maybe solved the problem. There is other ways sometimes people just to two people might realize they're confused about the same thing. So. Collaboration like that kind of from somewhat different types of technical backgrounds, we both realized we're confused about a related set of ideas. We were like, okay, well I guess maybe we can try to get unconfused together.  [00:07:00] Ben: Can I, can I interject, like, I think it's actually realizing that you are confused about the same problem as someone who's coming at it from a different direction is actually hard in and of itself. Yes. Yes. How, how does, like, what is actually the process of realizing that the problem that both of you have is in fact the same problem? Well,  [00:07:28] Semon: you probably have to understand a little bit about the other person's work and you probably have to in some [00:07:35] way, have some basal amount of rapport with the other person first, because. You know, you're not going to get yourself to like, engage with this different foreign language, unless you kind of like liked them to some degree. So that's actually a crucial thing. It's like the personal aspect of it. Then you know it because maybe you'll you kind of like this person's work and maybe you like the way they go about it. That's interesting to you. Then you can try to, you know, talk about what you've recently been thinking about. And then, you know, the same mathematical object might pop up. And then that, that sort of, that might be you know, I'm not any kind of truly any mathematical object worth studying, usually has incarnations and different formal languages, which are related to one another through kind of highly non-obvious transformation. So for example, everyone knows about a circle, but a circle. Could you could think of that as like the set of points of distance one, you could think of it as some sort of close, not right. You can, you can sort of, there are many different concrete [00:08:35] intuitions through which you can grapple with this sort of object. And usually if that's true, that sort of tells you that it's an interesting object. If a mathematical object only exists because of a technicality, it maybe isn't so interesting. So that's why it's maybe possible to notice that the same object occurs in two different peoples. Misunderstandings. [00:08:53] Ben: Yeah. But I think the cruxy thing for me is that it is at the end of the day, it's like a really human process. There's not a way of sort of colliding what both of, you know, without hanging out.  [00:09:11] Semon: So people. And people can try to communicate what they know through texts. So people write reviews on. I gave a few talks recently in a number of people have asked me to write like a review of this subject. There's no subject, just to be clear. I kind of gave a talk with the kind of impression that there is a subject to be worked on, but nobody's really done any work on it that you're [00:09:35] meeting this subject into existence. That's definitely part of your job as an academic. But you know, then that's one way of explaining, I think that, that can be a little bit less, like one-on-one less personal. People also write these a different version of that is people write kind of problems. People write problem statements. Like I think these are interesting problems and then our goal. So there's all these famous, like lists of conjectures, which you know, in any given discipline. Usually when people decide, oh, there's an interesting mathematical area to be developed. At some point they have a conference and somebody writes down like a list of problems and the, the conditions for these problems are that they should kind of matter. They should help you understand like the larger structure of this area and that they should, the problems to solve should be precise enough that you don't need some very complex motivation to be able to engage with them. So that's part of, I think the, the trick in mathematics. You know, different people have very different like internal understandings of something, but you reduce the statements or [00:10:35] the problems or the theorems, ideally down to something that you don't need a huge superstructure in order to engage with, because then people will different, like techniques or perspective can engage with the same thing. So that can makes it that depersonalizes it. Yeah. That's true. Kind of a deliberate, I think tactic.  And  [00:10:51] Ben: do you think that mathematics is. Unique in its ability to sort of have those both like clean problem statements. And, and I think like I get the sense that it's, it's almost like it's higher status in mathematics to just declare problems. Whereas it feels like in other discipline, One, there are, the problems are much more implicit. Like anybody in, in some specialization has, has an idea of what they are, but they're very rarely made lightly explicit. And then to pointing out [00:11:35] problems is fairly low status, unless you simultaneously point out the problem and then solve it. Do you think there's like a cultural difference?  [00:11:45] Semon: Potentially. So I think, yeah, anyone can make conjectures in that, but usually if you make a conjecture, it's either wrong or on. Interesting. It's a true for resulting proof is boring. So to get anyone to listen to you, when you make problem, you state problems, you need to, you need to have a certain amount of kind of controllers. Simultaneously, you know, maybe if you have a cell while you're in, it's clear. Okay. You don't understand the salary. You don't understand what's in it. It's a blob that does magic. Okay. The problem is understand the magic Nath and you don't, you can't see the thing. Right? So in some sense, defining problems as part of. That's very similar to somebody showing somebody look, here's a protein. Oh, interesting. That's a very [00:12:35] similar process. And I do think that pointing out, like, look, here's a protein that we don't understand. And you didn't know about the existence of this protein. That can be a fairly high status work say in biology. So that might be a better analogy. Yeah.  [00:12:46] Ben: Yeah, no, I like that a lot that math does not have, you could almost say like the substrate, that the context of reality.  [00:12:56] Semon: I mean it's there, right? It's just that you have to know what to look for in order to see it. So, right. Like, you know, number theorists, love examples like this, you know, like, oh, everybody knows about the natural numbers, but you know, they just love pointing out. Like, here's this crazy pattern. You would never think of this pattern because you don't have this kind of overarching perspective on it that they have developed over a few thousand years.  [00:13:22] Ben: It's not my thing really been around for a few thousand years. It's  pretty  [00:13:25] Semon: old. Yeah.  [00:13:27] Ben: W w what would you,  [00:13:30] Semon: this is just curiosity. What, what would  [00:13:32] Ben: you call the first [00:13:35] instance of number theory in history?  [00:13:38] Semon: I'm not really sure. I don't think I'm not a historian in that sense. I mean, certainly, you know, the Bell's equation is related to like all kinds of problems in. Like I think grease or something. I don't exactly know when the Chinese, when the Chinese remainder theorem is from, like, I I'm, I'm just not history. Unfortunately, I'm just curious. But I do think the basic server very old, I mean, you know, it was squared of two is a very old thing. Right. That's the sort of irrationality, the skirt of two is really ancient. So it must predate that by quite a bit. Cause that's a very sophisticated question.  [00:14:13] Ben: Okay. Yeah. So then going, going back to collaborations I think it's a surprising thing that you've told me about in the past is that collaborations in mathematics are like, people have different specializations in the sense that the collaborations are not just completely flat of like everybody just sort of [00:14:35] stabbing at a place. And that you you've actually had pretty interesting collaborations structures.  [00:14:43] Semon: Yeah. So I think different people are naturally drawn to different kinds of thinking. And so they naturally develop different sort of thinking styles. So some people, for example, are very interested in someone had there's different kinds. Parts of mathematics, like analysis or algebra or you know, technical questions and typology or whatnot. And some people just happen to know certain techniques better than others. That's one access that you could sort of classify people on a different access is about question about sort of tasting what they think is important. So some people. Wants to have a very kind of rich, formal structure. Other people want to have a very concrete, intuitive structure, and those are very different, those lead to very different questions. Which, you know, that's sort of something I've had to navigate with recently where there's a group of people who are sort of mathematical physicists and they kind of like a very rich, formal structure. And there's other [00:15:35] people who do geometric analysis. Kind of geometric objects defined by partial differential equations and they want something very concrete. And there are relations between questions about areas. So I've spent some time trying to think about how one can kind of profitably move from one to the other. But did Nash there's that, that sort of forces you to navigate a certain kind of tension. So. Maybe you have different access is whether people like these are the here's one, there's the frogs and birds.com. And you know, this, this is a real, this is a very strong phenomenon and mathematics is this, this  [00:16:09] Ben: that was originally dice. [00:16:11] Semon: And maybe I'm not sure, but it's certainly a very helpful framework. I think some people really want to take a single problem and like kind of stab at it. Other people want to see the big picture and how everything fits. And both of these types of work can be useful or useless depending on sort of the flavor of the, sort of the way the person approached it. So, you know, often, you know, often collaborations have like one person who's obviously more kind of hot and kind [00:16:35] of more birdlike and more frog like, and that can be a very productive.  [00:16:40] Ben: And how do you make your, like let's, let's let's date? Let's, let's frog that a little bit. And so like, what are the situations. W what, what are the, both like the success and failure modes of birds in the success and failure modes of  [00:16:54] Semon: frocks. Great, good. This is, I feel like this is somehow like very clearly known. So the success so-so what frogs fail at is they can get stuck on a technical problem, which does not matter to the larger aspect of the larger university. Hmm. And so in the long run, they can spend a lot of work resolving technical issues which are then like, kind of, not really looked out there because in the end they, you know, maybe the, you know, they didn't matter for kind of like progress. Yeah. What they can do is they can discover something that is not obvious from any larger superstructure. Right. So they can sort of by directly [00:17:35] engaging with kind of the lower level details of mathematical reality. So. They can show the birds something they could never see and simultaneously they often have a lot of technical capacity. And so they can, you know, there might be some hard problem, which you know, no one, a large perspective can help you solve. You just have to actually understand that problem. And then they can remove the problem. So that can learn to lead opened kind of to a new new world. That's the frog. The birds have an opposite success and failure. Remember. The success mode is that they point out, oh, here's something that you could have done. That was easier. Here's kind of a missing piece in the puzzle. And then it turns out that's the easy way to go. So you know, get mathematical physicists, have a history of kind of being birds in this way, where they kind of point out, well, you guys were studying this equation to kind of study the typology of format of holes instead of, and you should study, set a different equation, which is much easier. And we'll tell you all this. And the reason for this as sort of like incomprehensible to mathematician, but the math has made it much easier to solve a lot of problems. That's kind of the [00:18:35] ultimate bird success. The failure mode is that you spend a lot of time piecing things together, but then you only work on problems, which are, which makes sense from this huge perspective. And those problems ended up being uninteresting to everyone else. And you end up being trapped by this. Kind of elaborate complexity of your own perspective. So you start working on kind of like an abstruse kind of, you know, you're like computing some quantity, which is interesting only if you understand this vast picture and it doesn't really shed light on anything. That's simple for people to understand. That's usually not good. If you develop a new formal world that sort of in, maybe it's fine to work on it on this. But it is in the, and partially validated by solving problems that other people could ask without any of this larger understanding. That's  [00:19:26] Ben: yeah. Like you can actually be too,  [00:19:31] Semon: too general, almost. That's very often a [00:19:35] problem. So so you know, one thing that one bit of mathematics that is popular among non mathematicians for interesting reasons is category. So I know a lot of computer scientists are sort of familiar with category theory because it's been applied to programming languages fairly successfully. Now category theory is extremely general. It is, you know, the, the mathematical kind of joke description of it is that it's abstract nonsense. So, so that's a technical term approved by abstract now. this is a tech, there are a number of interesting technical terms like morally true, and the proof by abstract nonsense and so forth, which have, I think interesting connotation so approved by abstract nonsense is you have some concrete question where you realize, and you want to answer it and you realize that its answer follows from the categorical structure of the question. Like if you fit this question into the [00:20:35] framework of categories, There's a very general theorem and category theory, which implies what you wanted, what that tells you in some sense of that. Your question was not interesting because it had no, you know, it really wasn't a question about the concrete objects you were looking at at all. It was a question about like relations between relations, right? So, you know, the. S. So, you know, there's this other phrase that the purpose of category theory is to make the trivial trivially trivial. And this is very useful because it lets you skip over the boring stuff and the boring stuff could actually, you get to get stuck on it for a very long time and it can have a lot of content. But so category theory in mathematics is on one hand, extremely useful. And on the other hand can be viewed with a certain amount of. Because people can start working on kind of these very upstream, categorical constructions some more complicated than the ones that appear in programming languages, which, you know, most mathematicians can't make heads or tails of what they're about. And some of those [00:21:35] are kind of not necessarily developed in a way to be made relevant to the rest of mathematics and that there is a sort of natural tension that anyone is interested in. Category theory has to navigate. How far do you go into the land of abstract nonsense? So, you know, even as the mathematicians are kind of viewed as like the abstract nonsense people by most people, even within mathematics is hierarchy continues and is it's factal yeah. The hierarchy is preserved for the same reasons.  [00:22:02] Ben: And actually that actually goes back to I think you mentioned when you're, you're talking about the failure mode of frogs, which is that they can end up working on things that. Ultimately don't matter. And I want to like poke how you think about what things matter and don't matter in mathematics because sort of, I think about this a lot in the context of like technologies, like people, people always think like technology needs to be useful for, to like some, [00:22:35] but like some end consumer. But then. You often need to do things to me. Like you need to do some useless things in order to eventually build a useful thing. And then, but then mathematics, like the concept of usefulness on the like like I'm going to use this for a thing in the world. Not, not the metric, like yeah. But there's still things that like matter and don't matter. So  [00:23:01] Semon: how do you think about, so it's definitely not true that people decide which mathematics matters based on its applicability to real-world concerns. That might be true and applied with medics actually, which has maybe in as much as there's a distinction that it's sort of a distinction of value and judgment. But in mathematics, So I said that mathematical object is more real in some sense, when it can be viewed from many perspectives. So there are certain objects which therefore many different kinds of mathematicians can grapple with. And there are certain questions which kind of any mathematician can [00:23:35] understand. And that is one of the ways in which people decide that mathematics is important. So for example you might ask a question. Okay. So this might be some, so here's a, here's a question which I would think is important. I'm just going to say something technical, but I can kind of explain what it means, you know, understand sort of statements about the representation theory of of the fundamental group of a surface. Okay. So what that means is if you have any loop in a surface, then you can assign to that loop a matrix. Okay. And then if you kind of compose. And then the condition of that for this assignment is that if you compose the loops, but kind of going from one after the other, then you assign that composed loop the product of his two matrices. Okay. And if you deformed the loop then the matrix you assign is preserved under the defamation. Okay. So that's the, that's the sort of question was, can you classify these things? Can you understand them? They turn out to be kind of relevant to differential equations, to partial, to of all different kinds to physics, to kind of typology. Hasn't got a very bad. So, you know, progress on that is kind of [00:24:35] obviously important because it turns out to be connected to other questions and all of mathematics. So that's one perspective, kind of the, the, the simplest, like the questions that any mathematician would kind of find interesting. Cause they can understand them and they're like, oh yeah, that's nice. Those are that's one way of measuring importance and a different one is about the. Sort of the narrative, you know, mathematics method, you just spend a lot of time tying making sure that kind of all the mathematics is kind of in practice connected with the rest of it. And there are all these big narratives which tie it together. So those narratives often tell us a lot of things that are go far beyond what we can prove. So we know a lot more about numbers. Than we can prove. In some sense, we have much more evidence. So, you know, one, maybe one thing is the Remont hypothesis is important and we kind of have much more evidence for the Riemann hypothesis in some sense, then we have for [00:25:35] any physical belief about our world. And it's not just important to, because it's kind of some basic question it's important because it's some Keystone in some much larger narrative about the statistics of many kinds of number, theoretic questions. So You know, there are other more questions which might sound abstruse and are not so simple to state, but because they kind of would clarify a piece of this larger conceptual understanding when all these conjectures and heuristics and so forth. Yeah. You know, like making it heuristic rigorous can be very valuable and that heuristic might be to that statement might be extremely complex. But it means that this larger understanding of how you generate all the heuristics is correct or not correct. And that is important. There's also a surprise. So people might have questions about which they expect the answer to be something. And then you show it's not that that's important. So if there are strong expectations, it's not that easy to form expectations in mathematics, but,  [00:26:30] Ben: but as you were saying that there, there are these like narrative arcs. [00:26:35] Do something that is both like correct and defies the narrative. [00:26:39] Semon: That's an interesting, that means there must be something there, or maybe not. Maybe it's only because there was some technicality and like, you know, the technicality is not kind of, it doesn't enlighten the rest of the narrative. So that's some sort of balance which people argue about and is determined in the end, I guess, socially, but also through the production of, I don't know, results and theorems and expect mathematical experiments and so forth. [00:27:04] Ben: And to, to, so I'm gonna, I'm going to yank us back to, to the, the, the collaborations. And just like in the past, we've talked about like how you actually do like program management around these collaborations. And it felt like I got the impression that mathematics actually has like pretty good standards for how this is. What  [00:27:29] Semon: do you mean by program management? Meaning  [00:27:31] Ben: like like you're like, like how, like [00:27:35] how you were basically just managing your collaborators, like you you're talking about like how, what was it? It was like, you need to like wrangle people for, for. I, or yeah, or like, yeah. So you've got like, just like how to manage your collaborators. [00:27:51] Semon: So I guess  [00:27:54] Ben: we were developing like a theory on that.  [00:27:56] Semon: Yeah, I think a little bit. So on one hand, I guess in mathematics and math, every, so in the sciences, there's usually somebody with money and then they kind of determined what has. Is  [00:28:08] Ben: this, is this a funder or is this like  [00:28:10] Semon: a, I would think the guy pie is huge. So yeah, in the sciences, maybe the model is what like funding agencies, PI is and and lab members, right. And often the PIs are setting the direction. The grant people are kind of essentially putting constraints on what's possible. So they steer the direction some much larger way, but they kind of can't really see the ground to all right. And [00:28:35] then a bunch of creative work happens at lowest level. But you know, you're very constrained by what's possible in your lab in mathematics. There aren't really labs, right. You know, there are certainly places where people know more. Other places about certain parts of mathematics. So it's hard to do certain kinds of mathematics without kind of people around you who know something because most of the mathematics isn't written down. And  [00:28:58] Ben: that, that statement is shocking in and of itself.  [00:29:01] Semon: The second is also similar with the sciences, right? Like most things people know about the natural world aren't really that well-documented that's why it pays to be sometimes lower down the chain. You might find something that isn't known. Yeah. But so because of that, people kind of can work very independently and even misunderstand one another, which is good because that leads to like the misunderstanding can then lead to kind of creative, like developments where people through different tastes might find different aspects of the same problem. Interesting. And the whole thing is then kind of better that way. And then  [00:29:34] Ben: [00:29:35] like resolving, resolving. The confusion in a legible way,  [00:29:40] Semon: it sort of pushes the field. So that's, but also because everyone kind of can work on their own, you know, coordination involves, you know, a certain amount of narrative alignment. And so you have to understand like, oh, this person is naturally suited to this kind of question. This person is naturally suited to this kind of question. So what are questions where both people are. First of all, you would need both people to make progress on it. That gives you competitive advantage, which is important, extremely important in kind of any scientific landscape. And secondly if you can find a question of overlap, then, you know, there's some natural division of labor or some natural way in which both people can enlighten the other in surprising ways. If you can do everything yourself and you have some other person, like write it up, that's sort of not that phonic club. So yeah, so there's, and then there's like, kind of on a [00:30:35] larger, but that's like kind of one on a single project collaboration to do larger collaboration. You have to kind of, you know, give you have to assign essentially you have to assign social value to questions, right? Like math, unlike sort of the math is small enough that it can just barely survive. It's credit assigning system almost entirely on the basis of the social network of mathematicians. Oh, interesting. Okay. It is certainly important to have papers refereed because like it's important for somebody to read a paper and check the details. So the journals do matter, but a lot happen. So, you know, it doesn't have the same scaling. The biology or machine learning has in part, because it's a small,  [00:31:20] Ben: do you know, like roughly how many mathematicians. I can, I can look this  [00:31:25] Semon: up. I mean, it depends on who you count as a mathematician. So that's the technique I'm asking you. The reason, the reason I'm asking [00:31:35] that is because of course there's the American mathematical society and they publish, like, this is the number of mathematicians. And the thing is like, they count like quite a lot of people. So you actually have the decision actually dramatically changes your answer. I would say there are on the order of the. Tens of thousands of mathematicians. Like if you think about like the number of attendees of the ICM, the international Congress of mathematicians, like, and then, you know, the thing is a lot of people, so it depends on like pure mathematicians, how pure, you know, that's going to go up and down. But that's sort of the right order of magnitude. Okay. Cause which is a very small given that  [00:32:12] Ben: a compared to, to most other disciplines then, especially compared to even. Science as a whole like research  [00:32:20] Semon: has a whole. Yeah. So yeah, I think like if you look at like, you know, all the, if you say like, well look at the Harvard Kennedy school of business, and then they have an MBA program, which is my impression is it's serious. [00:32:35] And then you also look at like all the math pieces. Graduates and like the top 15 kind of us schools are kind of like, you know, I think the MBAs are like several times lecture. Yes. So that's, maybe I was surprised to learn that  [00:32:50] Ben: that's also good. Instead of  [00:32:51] Semon: like, you can look at the output rate, the flow rate, that's a very easy way to decide. Yeah. But yeah, so you have to, yeah. So kind of you, there's like kind of, depending on how, if you can let go. There are certain you have to, if you want to work with people, you have to find you, there's not, you can't really be a PI in mathematics, but if you are good at talking to people, you can encourage people to work on certain questions. So that over time kind of a larger set of questions get answered, and you can also make public statements to the and which are in some ways, invitations, like. If you guys do these [00:33:35] things, then it'll be better for you because they fit into a larger context. So therefore your work is more significant that you're actually doing them a service by explaining some larger context. And simultaneously by sort of pointing out that maybe some problem is easy or comparatively, easy to some people that you, you might not do. So that helps you if then they solve the problem because you kind of made a correct prediction of like, there is good mathematic. Yeah. So this is some complicated social game that, you know, mathematicians are not like, you know, they're kind of strange socially, but they do kind of play this game and the way in which they play this game depends on their personal preferences and how social they are. [00:34:13] Ben: And actually speaking of the social nature of mathematics I get the impression that mathematics sort of as a discipline is. It feels much closer to what one might think of as like old academia then many other disciplines in the sense that my, my impression is [00:34:35] that your, your tenure isn't as much based on like how much grant money you're getting in. And It's, it's not quite as much like a paper mill up and out  [00:34:46] Semon: gay. Yeah. There's definitely pressure to publish. There, the expected publishing rate definitely depends on the area. So, you know, probability publishers more, in some ways it's a little bit more like applied mathematics, which has more of a kind of paper mill quality to it. I don't want to overstate that. But so there is space for people to write just a few papers if they're good and have got a job. Yeah. And so it's definitely true as I think in the rest of the sciences, that kind of high quality trumps quantity. Right. Then, you know, but modular, the fact that you do have, you do have to produce a certain amount of work in order to stay in academia and You know, in the end, like where you end up is very much determined on the significance of your work. Right. And if you're very productive, consistently, certainly helps with people are kind of not as [00:35:35] worried. But yeah, it's definitely not determined based on grant money because essentially there's not that much grant money to go around. So that makes it have more of this old-school flavor. And it's also true that it's still not, it's genuinely not strange for people to graduate with like just their thesis to graduate from a PhD program. And they can do very well. So long as they, during grad school learn something that other people don't know and that matters. That seems that that's helpful, but so that allows for, yeah, this. You know, th this there's this weird trick that mathematicians play, where like proofs are kind of supposedly a universal language that everyone can read. And that's not quite true, but it tries to approximate that ideal. But everyone has sort of allowed to go on their own little journey and the communities does spend a lot of work trying to defend that. What,  [00:36:25] Ben: what sort of, what, what does that work  [00:36:27] Semon: actually look like? Well, I think it's true that it is actually true that grad students are not required to like publish a paper a year. Yeah, [00:36:35] that's true. And that's great that people, I think, do defend that kind of position and they are willing to put their reputation on the line and the kind of larger hiring process to defend that SAC separately. It's true that, you know, You know, work that is not coming out of one of the top three people or something is can still be considered legitimate. You know, because like total it's approved, it's approved. No one can disagree with it. So if some random person makes some progress, you know, it's actually very quickly. If, if people can understand it, it's very quickly kind of. And this allows communities to work without quite understanding one or other for awhile and maybe make progress that way, which can be  [00:37:18] Ben: helpful. Yeah. And and most of the funding for math departments actually comes from teaching. Is that  [00:37:26] Semon: yeah, I think that a lot of it comes from teaching. A certain chunk of it comes from grants. Like basically people use grants to, in order to teach less. Yeah. That's more or [00:37:35] less how it works. You know, of course there's this, as in, you know, mathematics has this kind of current phenomenon where, you know, rich individuals like fund a department or something or they fund a prize. But by and large, it seems to be less dependent on these gigantic institutional handouts from say the NSF or the NIH, because that the expenses aren't quite yet. But it does also mean that like, it is sort of constrained and you know, it can't, you know, like big biology has like, kind of so much money, maybe not enough, not as much as it needs. I mean, these grant acceptance rates are extremely low.  [00:38:13] Ben: If it's, for some reason, it's every mathematician magically had say order of magnitude more funding  [00:38:21] Semon: when it matters. Yeah. So it's not clear that they would know what to do with that. There is, I thought a lot about the question of, to what degree does the mathematics is some kind of social enterprise and that's maybe true of every research [00:38:35] program, but it's particularly true in mathematics because it's sort of so dependent on individual creativity. So I've thought a lot about to what degree you could scale the social enterprise and in what directions it could scale because it's true that kind of producing mathematicians is essentially an expensive and ad hoc process. But at the same time, Plausibly true that people might be able to do research of a somewhat different kind just in terms of collaborations or in terms of like what they felt to do free to do research on if they had access to different kind of funding, like math itself is cheap, but the. Kind of freedom to say, okay, well, these next two years, I'm going to do this kind of crazy different thing. And that does not have to fit with my existing research program that could, that you have to sort of fight for. And that's like a more basic stroke thing about the structure of kind of math academia. I feel like  [00:39:27] Ben: that's, that's like structurally baked into almost the entire world where there's just a ton of it's, it's [00:39:35] very hard to do something completely different than the things that you have done. Right? People, people, boat, people. Our book more inclined to help you do things like what you've done in the past. And they are inclined to push against you doing different things. Yeah,  [00:39:50] Semon: that's true.  [00:39:50] Ben: And, and sort of speaking of, of money in the past, you've also pointed out that math is terrible at capturing the value that it creates in this.  [00:40:02] Semon: Well, yeah. You know, math is, I mean, it may be hard to estimate kind of human capital value. Like maybe all mathematicians should be doing something else. I don't really know how to reason about that, but it's definitely objectively very cheap. Just in the sense of like all the funding that goes into mathematics is very little and arguably the  [00:40:21] Ben: sort of downstream, like basically every, every technical anything we have is to some extent downstream. Mathematics  [00:40:32] Semon: th there is an argument to be made of that kind. You know, [00:40:35] I don't think one should over I think, you know, there are extreme versions of this argument, which I think are maybe not helpful for thinking about the world. Like you shouldn't think like, ah, yes, computer science is downstream of the program. Like this turning thing. Like, I don't really know that it's fair to say that, but it is true that whenever mathematicians produce something that's kind of more pragmatically useful for other people, it tends to be. It tends to be easy to replicate and it tends to be very robust. So there are lots of other ideas of this kind and, you know, separately, even a bunch of the value of mathematics to the larger world seems to me to not even be about specific mathematical discoveries, but to be about like the existence of this larger language and culture. So, you know, neural network people now, you know, they have all of these like echo variant neural networks. Yeah. You know, that's all very old mathematics. But it's very helpful to have kind of that stuff feel like totally, like you need to have those kinds of ideas be completely explored [00:41:35] before a totally different community can really engage with them. And that kind of complete kind of that sort of underlying cultural substrate actually does allow for different kinds of things, because doing that exploration takes a few people a lot of time. So in that sense, then it's very hard to like you know, yeah. What you do well, most mathematicians do things which will have no relevance to the larger world. Although it may be necessary for the progress of the sort of more useful basal things. Like the idea of a manifold came out of like studying elliptic functions historically and manifolds are very useful idea. And I looked at functions are or something. I mean, they're also useful, but they maybe less well known. Certainly I think a typical scientist does not know about them. Yeah. It came out, but it did come out of like studying transformation laws for elliptic functions, which is a pretty abstruse sounding thing. So, but because of that, there's just, there's no S it's very hard to find a way for mathematicians to kind of like dip into the future. And because like, you can have a startup. You know, like it's not going to be industrially useful, but it is [00:42:35] clearly on this sort of path in a way that you kind of, it's very hard to imagine removing a completely. Yeah.  [00:42:42] Ben: So, no, I like it also because it's, again, it's, it's sort of this extreme example of some kind of continuum where it's like, everybody knows that math is really important, but then everybody also knows that it's not a. Immediately  [00:43:02] Semon: applicable. Yeah. And there's this question of, how do you kind of make the navigation that continuum smoother and that has you know, that's like a cultural issue and like an institutional issue to some degree, you know, it's probably true that new managers do know lots of stuff, empirically they get hired and then they get, they like, their lives are fine. So it seems that, you know, people recognize that but the, you know, various also in part too, because mathematicians try to kind of preserve this sort of space for [00:43:35] people to explore. There is a lot of resistance in the pure mathematics community for people to try to like try random stuff and collaborate with people. And, you know, there is probably some niche for you know, Interactions between mathematically minded people and kind of things which are more relevant to the contemporary world or near contemporary world. And that niches one where it's navigation was a little bit obscure. It's not There aren't, there are some institutions around it, but it's, it doesn't seem to me to be like completely systematized. And that's in part because of the resistance of the pure mathematics community. Like historically, I mean, you know, it's true that like statistics, departments kind of used to be part of pure mathematics departments and then they got kicked out, probably they left and they were like, we can make more money than you. No, seriously. I don't know. I mean, there's like, I don't know the history of Berkeley stats department isn't famously one of the first ones that have this. I don't know the detailed history, but there was definitely some kind of conflict and it was a cultural conflict. Yeah. So these sorts of cultural [00:44:35] issues are things that I guess anyone has a saying, and I, I'm kind of very curious how they will evolve in the coming 50 years. Yeah.  [00:44:42] Ben: To, to change the subject just a bit again the, can you, can you dig into how. Do you call them retreats? Like when, when the, the thing where you get a bunch of mathematicians and you get them to all live in a place  [00:44:56] Semon: for like, so there's this interesting well that's, there are things with a couple CS there. Of course they're there. That's maybe. So there are kind of research programs. So that's where some Institute has flies together. Post-docs maybe some grad students, maybe some sort of senior faculty and they all spend time in one area for a couple of months in order to maybe make progress on some kind of idea of a question. So, yeah. That is something that there are kind of dedicated institutes to doing. In some sense, this is one of the places where like kind of external [00:45:35] funding has changed the structure of mathematics. Cause like the Institute of advanced study is basically one of these things. Yes. This Institute at Princeton where like basically a few old people, I mean, I'm kind of joking, but you know, there's a few kind of totemic people like people who have gone there because they sort of did something famous and they sit there. And then what the Institute has done yesterday actually does in mathematics is it has these semester, longer year long programs. We're just house funding for a bunch of people to space. Been there spent a year there or half a year there, where to fly in there for a few weeks, a few times in the year. And that gets everyone together in one area and maybe by interacting, they can kind of figure out what's going on in some theoretical question, a different thing that people have done in much more short term is there's like a, kind of an interesting conference format, which is like, reminds me a little bit of like unconferences or whatnot, but it's actually kind of very serious where people choose you know, hot topic. In a [00:46:35] kind of contemporary research and then they like rent out a giant house and then they have, I don't know, 20 people live in this house and maybe cook together and stuff. And then, you know, everyone there's like every learning center is like a week long learning seminar where there's some people who are like real experts in the area, a bunch of people who don't know that much, but would like to learn. And then everyone has to give a talk on subjects that they don't know. And then there's serious people. The older people can go and point out where some, if there is a confusion and yeah, everyone. So there's like talks from nine to five and it's pretty exhausting. And then afterwards, you know, everyone goes on a hike or sits in the hot tub and talks about life and mathematics and that can be extremely productive and very fun. And it's also extremely cheap because it's much cheaper to rent out a giant house than it is to rent out a bunch of hotels. So. If you're willing to do that, which most mathematicians are and a story,  [00:47:25] Ben: like, I don't know if I'm misremembering this, but I remember you telling me a story where like, there were, there were two people who like needed [00:47:35] to figure something out together and like they never would have done it except for the fact that they just were like sitting at dinner together every night for, for some number of nights. [00:47:45] Semon: I. I mean, there are definitely apocryphal stories of that kind where eventually people realize that they're talking about the same thing. I can't think of an example, right? I think I told you, you asked me, you know, is there an example of like a research program where it's clear that some major advance happened because two people were in the same area. And I gave an example, which was a very contemporary example, which is far outside of my area of expertise, but which is this. You know, Peter Schultz Lauren far kind of local geometric language and stuff where basically there was at one of these at this Institute in Berkeley. They had a program and these two people were there and Schultz was like a really technically visionary guy and Fargo talked very deeply about certain ideas. And then they realized that basically like the sort of like fart, his dream could actually be made. And I think before that [00:48:35] people didn't quite realize like how far this would go. So that's kinda, I just gave you that as an example and that happens on a regular basis. That's maybe the reason why people have these programs and conferences, but it's hard to predict because so, you know, I don't really, like, I wish I could measure a rate. Yes.  [00:48:50] Ben: You just need that marination. It's actually like, okay. Oh, a weird thought that just occurred to me. Yeah. That this sort of like just getting people to hang out and talk is unique in mathematics because you do not need to do cause like you can actually do real work by talking and writing on a whiteboard. And that like, if you wanna to replicate this in some other field, you would actually need that house to be like stocked with laboratory. Or something so that people could actually like, instead of just talking, they could actually like poke at whatever  the  [00:49:33] Semon: subject is. That would [00:49:35] be ideal, but that would be hard because experiments are slow. The thing that you could imagine doing, or I could imagine doing is people are willing to like, share like very preliminary data, then they could kind of both look at something and figure out oh, I have something to say about your final. And I, that I don't know to what degree that really happens at say biology conferences, because there is a lot of competitive pressure to be very deliberate in the disclosure of data since it's sort of your biggest asset. Yeah.  [00:50:05] Ben: And is it, how, how does mathematics not fall into that trap?  [00:50:11] Semon: That is a great question. In part there is. So I'm part, there are somewhat strong norms against that, like, because the community is small enough. If it's everyone finds out like, oh yeah, well this person just like scooped kind of, yeah. There's a very strong norm against scooping. That's lovely. It's okay. In certain contexts, like if, if, if it's clear for everyone, like somebody [00:50:35] could do this and somebody does the thing and it's because it was that it's sort of not really scooping. Sure. But if you, if there is really You know, word gets around, like who kind of had which ideas and when people behave in a way that seems particularly adversarial that has consequences for them. So that's one way in which mathematics avoids that another way is that there's just like maybe it's, it's actually true that different people have kind of different skills. It is a little bit less competitive structurally because it isn't like everyone is working at the same kind of three problems. And everyone has like all the money to go and like, just do the thing. And  [00:51:16] Ben: it's like small enough that everybody can have a specialization such that there are people like you, you can always do something that someone else can't.  [00:51:24] Semon: Often there are people, I mean, that, that might depend on who you are. But yeah, often people with. It's more like it's large enough for that to be the case. Right? Like you [00:51:35] can develop some intuition about some area where yeah. Other people might be able to kind of prove what you're proving, but you might be much better at it than them. So people will be like, yeah, why don't you do it? That's helpful. Yeah. It's that's useful. I mean, it certainly can happen that in the end, like, oh, there's some area on everyone has the same tools and then it does get competitive and people do start. Sorry. I think in some ways it has to do with like a diversity of tools. Like if, if every different lab kind of has a tool, which like the other labs don't have, then there's less reason to kind of compete. You know, then you might as well kind of, but also that has to do with the norms, right? Like your, the pressure of being the person on the ground is that's a very harsh constraint. That's not. Premiere. I mean that my understand, I guess, that is largely imposed by the norms of the community itself in the sense that like a lot of like an NIH grants are actually kind of determined by scientific committees [00:52:35] or committees of scientists. So,  [00:52:38] Ben: I mean, you could argue about that, right? Because  [00:52:41] Semon: don't,  [00:52:42] Ben: is it, is it like, I mean, yes, but then like, those committees are sort of mandated by the structure of the funding agencies. Right. And so is it which, and there's of course a feedback loop and they've been so intertwined for decades that I'm clear which way that causality runs. [00:53:02] Semon: Yeah. So I remember those are my two guesses for how it's like one, there's just like a very strong norm against this. And you don't, you just don't, you know, if you're the person with the idea. And then you put the other person on the paper because they like were helpful. You don't lose that much. So it's just, you're not that disincentivized from doing it. Like in the end, people will kind of find out like, who did what work to some degree, even though officially credit is shared. And that means that, you know, everyone can kind of get. [00:53:35]  [00:53:35] Ben: It seems like a lot of this does is depend on, on  [00:53:38] Semon: scale. Yeah. It's very scale because you can actually find out. Right. And that's a trade-off right. Obviously. So, but maybe not as bad a trade off in mathematics, because it's not really clear what you would do with a lot more scale. On the other hand, you don't know, like, you know, if you look at, say a machine learning, this is a subject that's grown tremendously. And in part, you know, they have all these crazy research directions, which you, I think in the end kind of can only happen because they've had so many different kinds of people look at the same set of ideas. So when you have a lot of people looking at something and they're like empowered to try it, it is often true that you kind of progress goes faster. I don't really know why that would be false in mathematics.  [00:54:23] Ben: Do you want to say anything about choosing the right level of Metta newness? Hmm.  [00:54:28] Semon: Yeah. You're thinking about, I guess this is a, this is like a question [00:54:35] for, this is like a personal question for everyone almost. I mean, everyone who has some freedom over what they work on, which is actually not that many people you know, You in any problem domain, whether that's like science, like science research or whether that's like career or whatnot, or even, you know, in a company there's this kind of the, the bird frog dichotomy is replicated. What Altitude's. Yeah. So for example, you know, in math, in mathematics, you could either be someone who. Puts together, lots of pieces and spend lots of time understanding how things fit together. Or you can be someone who looks at a single problem and makes hard progress at it. Similarly, maybe in biology, you can also mean maybe I have a friend who was trying to decide whether she should be in an individual contributor machine learning research company, or. And that for her in part is Metta non-metro choice. So she [00:55:35] really likes doing kind of like explicit work on something, being down to the ground as a faculty, she would have to do more coordination based work. But that, like, let's see, you kind of have more scope. And also in many cases you are so in many areas, but not in all doing the. Is a higher status thing, or maybe it's not higher status, but it's better compensated. So like on a larger scale, obviously we have like people who work in finance and may in some ways do kind of the most amount of work and they're compensated extremely well by society. And but you need people you need, you know, very kind of talented people to work with. Yeah, problems down to the ground because otherwise nothing will happen. Like you can't actually progress by just rearranging incentive flows and having that kind of both sides of this be kind of the incentives be appropriately structured is a very, very challenging balancing act because you need both kinds of people. But you know, you need a larger system in which they work and there's no reason for that [00:56:35] system. A B there's just no structural reason why the system would be compensating people appropriately, unless like, there are specific people who are really trying to arrange for that to be the case. And that's you know, that's very hard. Yeah. So everyone kind of struggles with this. And I think because in sort of gets resolved based on personal preference. Yeah.  [00:56:54] Ben: I think, I think that's, yeah. I liked that idea that the. Unless sort of by default, both like status and compensation will flow to the more Metta people. But then that ultimately will be disastrous if, if, if taken to its logical conclusion. And so it's like, we need to sort of stand up for the trend.  [00:57:35] 

Entrevistamos a Agustín García Socio Fundador de Bendo y a Cinthia Chapa Asesora, Capacitadora y Líder de Grupos... Charlamos en vivo por Telegram Streamings, sobre todo lo que tienes que saber sobre esta gran empresa mexicana, que está dando la mano a todos los que quieran crear su propio negocio SIN INVERTIR NI UN CENTAVO!, conoce como los Empresarios en México están creando oportunidades, abriendo puertas y creando comunidad!, Aprende las ventajas que tienes como Emprendedor al formar parte de la Familia Bendo, como son los procesos de pedido y pago, envíos, pago de comisiones, como funciona la app, etc... Ponte cómod@ y disfruta de nuestro podcast!!

Este podcast es muy especial porque podremos charlar con Agustín García Socio Fundador de Bendo y Cinthia Chapa que han creado un gran proyecto que está creciendo rápidamente y da oportunidad de desarrollo a cualquier persona que quiera convertirse en Emprendedor y porque no?, En Empresario! Conectate en vivo con nosotros, transmitiremos en nuestro canal de Emprendimiento en Telegram @Mexpreneurs https://t.me/+f_u3o1abmediNmVh te esperamos! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/marianamacias-lifecoachmx/message

En este episodio platico con Agustín García cofundador de la plataforma Bendo y platicamos sobre la posibilidad de tener ingresos extras en ventas. Contáctame en redes sociales, en Instagram: @atovar.castro y en el periódico El Financiero: www.elfinanciero.com.mx/opinion/alberto-tovar

Un artiste exceptionnel

Bendo se prête au jeu du blind test

Scott and Dan look back on a non-UFC weekend of combat sports — both real and scripted — that featured Ryan Bader's successful heavyweight title defense at Bellator 273. The CSJ discuss a fifth round that had some believing Bader lost, plus yet another Benson Henderson split decision. Speaking of which, the boys squeeze in an Appeal Edition of Past Judgment that reexamines Bendo's split win over Gilbert Melendez in 2013.

Matty Hong is a professional rock climber, photographer, and filmmaker. We talked about what it was like to grow up in a climbing family, about making the first repeat of ‘Flex Luthor' 5.15b as well as a history of the route and his thoughts on the grade, training for sport climbing projects on his home wall, climbing waterfalls in Japan, and balancing photography and filmmaking with climbing.Check out Chalk Cartel:chalkcartel.comUse code "NUGGET" at checkout for 20% off your next order!Check out PhysiVantage:physivantage.com (link includes 15% off coupon)Use code "NUGGET15" at checkout for 15% off your next order!We are supported by these amazing BIG GIVERS:Bryan Fast, Leo Franchi, Michael Roy, David Lahaie, Robert Freehill, and Jeremiah JohnsonBecome a Patron:patreon.com/thenuggetclimbingShow Notes:  thenuggetclimbing.com/episodes/matty-hongNuggets:0:05:51 – How Matty listens to podcasts0:08:53 – Growing up in a climbing family, and his connection with his parents0:13:10 – What his parents have instilled in him as a climber, and keeping the ego in check0:15:23 – Early milestones in Matty's climbing0:18:41 – Loving all of the challenges and variety to be found in climbing0:20:41 – Second-guessing the path, being grateful for climbing, and having a beginner's mindset with photography and filmmaking0:24:43 – Trying ‘Flex Luthor' for a year, and the history of the route0:30:26 – Meeting Matty up at the Fortress, and his process on ‘Flex Luthor'0:40:45 – Patron question from Landolini: How likely is it that Tommy climbed 9b (5.15b)?0:48:51 – Matty's thoughts on grading0:51:55 – Matty's most memorable climbing achievements0:53:53 – Climbing waterfalls in Japan with Yuji Hirayama1:01:31 – Thoughts on adventure climbing, and his trip to India1:06:19 – Matty's campus board and home wall1:09:29 – How Matty trained for ‘Flex Luthor' on his home wall, and his relaxed approach to training1:19:46 – Patron question from Adriel: Any tips for using bouldering as training for sport climbing? (And more about his training for Flex)1:24:02 – Why Matty thinks sport climbing in a gym (vs. bouldering) is a waste of time1:25:54 – Sport climbing is a strategy-based puzzle1:28:37 – Goals and challenges1:31:09 – Patron question from Ben: Do you have any bouldering or trad goals?1:35:08 – Patron question from One_rocky_boi: How does Matty balance photography and filmmaking with climbing?1:43:14 – The camera as a gift1:45:03 – Matty's proudest photos, and the challenges in filmmaking1:49:39 – What's next?1:54:11 – Nocturne Op 62 No 1 in B (Performed by Matty Hong)

The Owl and the Pussy-Cat BY EDWARD LEAR I The Owl and the Pussy-cat went to sea    In a beautiful pea-green boat, They took some honey, and plenty of money,    Wrapped up in a five-pound note. The Owl looked up to the stars above,    And sang to a small guitar, "O lovely Pussy! O Pussy, my love,     What a beautiful Pussy you are,          You are,          You are! What a beautiful Pussy you are!"   II Pussy said to the Owl, "You elegant fowl!    How charmingly sweet you sing! O let us be married! too long we have tarried:    But what shall we do for a ring?" They sailed away, for a year and a day,    To the land where the Bong-Tree grows And there in a wood a Piggy-wig stood    With a ring at the end of his nose,              His nose,              His nose,    With a ring at the end of his nose.   III "Dear Pig, are you willing to sell for one shilling    Your ring?" Said the Piggy, "I will." So they took it away, and were married next day    By the Turkey who lives on the hill. They dined on mince, and slices of quince,    Which they ate with a runcible spoon; And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand,    They danced by the light of the moon,              The moon,              The moon, They danced by the light of the moon.

Young Thug, Drake, Travis Scott, 42 Dugg, Lil Baby,Lil Durk, Armani White, Lakeyah, Moneybagg Yo, DJ Drama, Casino Jizzle, Gucci Mane, BigWalkDog, Lil Wayne, Rich The Kid, Money Mu, Lil Durk, Jucee Froot, Rubi Rose, Erica Banks, Co Cash, Yo Gotti, Chlöe, NCG Kenny B, BiC Fizzle, Gucci Mane, Quavo, Remy Ma, Don Toliver, Rory Fresco, Yung Tory, Lil Durk, Murda Beatz, Yungeen Ace, Yung Miami, Big Scarr, Baby Keem, Qrunitup , BigWalkDog, DJ X.O., Foogiano, YoungBoy Never Broke Again, Hotboy Wes, Free Smoke, Lil Gotit, Lilpj, Lil Double 0, Future, Boslen, Dro KenjiDigga D, Savo & Horrid1, FBG Goat, Future, Don Toliver, Baby Keem, Black Zacc, Hotboy Wes, BigWalkDog, Big Scarr, Fedd The God, Juicy J, Wiz Khalifa, YoungBoy Never Broke Again, Meek Mill, Nardo Wick, G Herbo, Lil Durk, 21 Savage, KenTheMan, BiC Fizzle, Gucci Mane & Cootie, Icewear Vezzo, Gunna, Future, Jilly, LightSkinKeisha, Trina, NoCap, Lil Durk, Logic, Lil Wayne, ASAP Ferg, Meek Mill , FaZe Kaysan , Moneybagg Yo, Ashanti, Rich Gang, Young Thug, Babyface Ray, Big Sean, Hit-Boy, Aaron C, Larry,Leto, Le Juiice, 26keuss, Kodes, Guy2bezbar, Fresh LaDouille, MIG, Tiakola, Djimi Finge, Cliff Hoodzy, Gambino La MG, Marginal, BLK140, Gotti Maras, Mac Tyer,Freeze Corleone, Cesar ,Dawa O Mic, Esteban, La F, Timal, Gazo, Dirty Swift, Davassy, Chich, Kanoé, Chicaille Argenté, Bendo, Liim's, Luv Resval, Niska, GLK YoungThug #Drake #TravisScott #Dugg #Baby # LilDurk #ArmaniWhite #Lakeyah #MoneybaggYo #DJDrama #CasinoJizzle #Mane #BigWalkDog #LilWayne #Kid #MoneyMu #LilDurk #Froot #RubiRose #EricaBanks #Cash #Gotti #Chlöe #KennyB #BiCFizzle #GucciMane #Quavo #RemyMa #DonToliver #RoryFresco #YungTory #LilDurk #MurdaBeatz #YungeenAce #YungMiami #BigScarr #BabyKeem #Qrunitup#BigWalkDog #DJXO #Foogiano #YoungBoyNeverBrokeAgain #HotboyWes #FreeSmoke #LilGotit #Lilpj #LilDouble0 #Future #Boslen #DroKenjiDiggaD #Savo #Horrid1 #FBGGoat #Future #DonToliver #BabyKeem #BlackZacc #HotboyWes #BigWalkDog #BigScarr #FeddTheGod #JuicyJ #WizKhalifa #MeekMill #NardoWick #GHerbo #LilDurk #21Savage #KenTheMan #BiCFizzle #GucciMane #Cootie #IcewearVezzo #Gunna #Future #Jilly #LightSkinKeisha #Trina #NoCap #Lil Durk #Logic #LilWayne #ASAPFerg #MeekMill#FaZeKaysan#MoneybaggYo #Ashanti #RichGang #YoungThug #BabyfaceRay #BigSean #Hit-Boy #AaronC #Larry # Leto #LeJuiice #26keuss #Kodes #Guy2bezbar #FreshLaDouille #MIG #Tiakola #DjimiFingeR #CliffHoodzy #GambinoLaMG #Marginal #BLK140 #GottiMaras #MacTyer #FreezeCorleone #CesarDawaOMic #Esteban #LaF #Timal #Gazo #DirtySwift #Davassy #Chich #Kanoé #ChicailleArgenté #Bendo #Liims #LuvResval #Niska #GLK

durée : 00:59:24 - First Mike Radio Show - Cette semaine dans le First Mike Radio Show, découvrez les nouveautés de rap français et des remix et des sons inédits avec Davassy, Zesau, Gazo, R.E.D.K. & Alonzo, La M, Boleman & Junior Bendo, Larry...

durée : 00:59:28 - First Mike Radio Show - Cette semaine dans le First Mike Radio Show, découvrez les nouveautés de rap français et des remix et des sons inédits avec Pharawon &LD, 13 Karra, Tuerie, Boleman & Junior Bendo...

Neste episódio conversamos sobre o pós jogo Palmeiras x São Paulo e também sobre Corinthians x São Bendo.

Ben: Hey let's talk about some like celebrities you like, or someone you know.Hana: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. My favorite singer is Taylor Swift.Ben: Really?Hana: Mm-hmm.Ben: Wow, why do you like Taylor Swift?Hana: First I like her songs, but mainly I like her look you know. That red lips and white skin and blonde hair. Kind of typical American.Ben: Albino, yeah.Hana: When I saw her for the first time I was like, "Wow, she's gorgeous."Ben: Wait you mean, you saw her picture on the internet or in the news or you saw her in concert?Hana: No, I think it was on YouTube. Again, YouTube.Ben: YouTube, okay.Hana: Yes she was, at that time she was still singing like country music but yeah I thought she's amazing.Ben: I have an interesting fact about her actually.Hana: What?Ben: So apparently, she is from right outside of my hometown actually.Hana: Oh wow.Ben: Yeah that's where she was born and then she was doing music around there first and she got kind of big somehow. I don't know how. I'm not really interested in her.Hana: Okay.Ben: She's cute but I don't really like her music. But yeah that's where she got started somewhereby my hometown apparently.Hana: I mean she's like the typical woman figure you know? Girly style and nice skin and her movement and her songs is like girl, all American girl.Ben: That's true.Hana: So that's why I like her. How about you?Ben: I have a lot of bands that I like but I recently saw this movie that I really like. Do you know the actor, Edward Norton.Hana: No.Ben: He's getting really popular. He's been popular for awhile. He does all different types of movies like crime dramas, like action, thrillers, science fiction. He's very, how would you say, he can do many different types of roles.Hana: Right.Ben: So I recently saw, it's an old movie of his but it's called Fight Club. It's him and Brad Pitt. Have you heard of it?Hana: Maybe.Ben: Fight Club, yeah.Hana: I think I've seen it. I don't really remember.Ben: It's old. It's from like 1998, 1999 but it's still a really good film I think. I think if I was to talk about a celebrity that I liked definitely Edward Norton. His acting is really good I think.Hana: Is he English or is he American? Where's he from?Ben: He's from the U.S. Yeah he's American for sure. Yeah what about you? Do you have any actors or actresses that you like?Hana: Yes, my favorite actor is, oh gosh, I can't remember his name. You know the guy from-Ben: Maybe I can help you.Hana: Notting Hill. The guy from the Love Actually.Ben: Oh, he's that British guy.Hana: The British guy with you know the eyes.Ben: Hugh Grant.Hana: Hugh Grant yes. That's the guy. Yeah, I like him.Ben: Why? Can I ask? He's kind of like a romantic comedy star but why do you like his acting?Hana: He looks sweet.Ben: Okay so he looks sweet.Hana: I'm like Brad Pitt or other celebrity male celebrities, he's not like super handsome. He looks kind of ordinary guy and kind of makes me feel like nice.Ben: Okay.Hana: The clothes I guess.Ben: Yeah, yeah that's true. I don't think I've ever seen a movie with him.Hana: Have you ever seen? No?Ben: No, I'm just not like a ... You said he's in Love Actually, he's like a romantic comedy guy, right?Hana: Yes, yeah. I like-Ben: Romantic comedies. Oh really? What's your favorite romantic comedy?Hana: I can't think of any now. Probably romantic, yeah, Love Actually. Okay I can't think of anything now but how about you?Ben: How about me what?Hana: Do you like romantic comedies?Ben: No, not really. But there is one I do like it's called My Best Friend's Wedding.Hana: Okay.Ben: I believe Julia Roberts is in that one.Hana: Yeah.Ben: Do you know who she is?Hana: Yeah. She is famous, yeah.Ben: Yeah that's kind of a good ... That's like a 90's classic romantic comedy I think. Have you seen it?Hana: I think I have.Ben: Okay.Hana: Yeah, yeah I think so.

Ben: Hey let's talk about some like celebrities you like, or someone you know.Hana: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. My favorite singer is Taylor Swift.Ben: Really?Hana: Mm-hmm.Ben: Wow, why do you like Taylor Swift?Hana: First I like her songs, but mainly I like her look you know. That red lips and white skin and blonde hair. Kind of typical American.Ben: Albino, yeah.Hana: When I saw her for the first time I was like, "Wow, she's gorgeous."Ben: Wait you mean, you saw her picture on the internet or in the news or you saw her in concert?Hana: No, I think it was on YouTube. Again, YouTube.Ben: YouTube, okay.Hana: Yes she was, at that time she was still singing like country music but yeah I thought she's amazing.Ben: I have an interesting fact about her actually.Hana: What?Ben: So apparently, she is from right outside of my hometown actually.Hana: Oh wow.Ben: Yeah that's where she was born and then she was doing music around there first and she got kind of big somehow. I don't know how. I'm not really interested in her.Hana: Okay.Ben: She's cute but I don't really like her music. But yeah that's where she got started somewhereby my hometown apparently.Hana: I mean she's like the typical woman figure you know? Girly style and nice skin and her movement and her songs is like girl, all American girl.Ben: That's true.Hana: So that's why I like her. How about you?Ben: I have a lot of bands that I like but I recently saw this movie that I really like. Do you know the actor, Edward Norton.Hana: No.Ben: He's getting really popular. He's been popular for awhile. He does all different types of movies like crime dramas, like action, thrillers, science fiction. He's very, how would you say, he can do many different types of roles.Hana: Right.Ben: So I recently saw, it's an old movie of his but it's called Fight Club. It's him and Brad Pitt. Have you heard of it?Hana: Maybe.Ben: Fight Club, yeah.Hana: I think I've seen it. I don't really remember.Ben: It's old. It's from like 1998, 1999 but it's still a really good film I think. I think if I was to talk about a celebrity that I liked definitely Edward Norton. His acting is really good I think.Hana: Is he English or is he American? Where's he from?Ben: He's from the U.S. Yeah he's American for sure. Yeah what about you? Do you have any actors or actresses that you like?Hana: Yes, my favorite actor is, oh gosh, I can't remember his name. You know the guy from-Ben: Maybe I can help you.Hana: Notting Hill. The guy from the Love Actually.Ben: Oh, he's that British guy.Hana: The British guy with you know the eyes.Ben: Hugh Grant.Hana: Hugh Grant yes. That's the guy. Yeah, I like him.Ben: Why? Can I ask? He's kind of like a romantic comedy star but why do you like his acting?Hana: He looks sweet.Ben: Okay so he looks sweet.Hana: I'm like Brad Pitt or other celebrity male celebrities, he's not like super handsome. He looks kind of ordinary guy and kind of makes me feel like nice.Ben: Okay.Hana: The clothes I guess.Ben: Yeah, yeah that's true. I don't think I've ever seen a movie with him.Hana: Have you ever seen? No?Ben: No, I'm just not like a ... You said he's in Love Actually, he's like a romantic comedy guy, right?Hana: Yes, yeah. I like-Ben: Romantic comedies. Oh really? What's your favorite romantic comedy?Hana: I can't think of any now. Probably romantic, yeah, Love Actually. Okay I can't think of anything now but how about you?Ben: How about me what?Hana: Do you like romantic comedies?Ben: No, not really. But there is one I do like it's called My Best Friend's Wedding.Hana: Okay.Ben: I believe Julia Roberts is in that one.Hana: Yeah.Ben: Do you know who she is?Hana: Yeah. She is famous, yeah.Ben: Yeah that's kind of a good ... That's like a 90's classic romantic comedy I think. Have you seen it?Hana: I think I have.Ben: Okay.Hana: Yeah, yeah I think so.

Ben: Hey let's talk about some like celebrities you like, or someone you know.Hana: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. My favorite singer is Taylor Swift.Ben: Really?Hana: Mm-hmm.Ben: Wow, why do you like Taylor Swift?Hana: First I like her songs, but mainly I like her look you know. That red lips and white skin and blonde hair. Kind of typical American.Ben: Albino, yeah.Hana: When I saw her for the first time I was like, "Wow, she's gorgeous."Ben: Wait you mean, you saw her picture on the internet or in the news or you saw her in concert?Hana: No, I think it was on YouTube. Again, YouTube.Ben: YouTube, okay.Hana: Yes she was, at that time she was still singing like country music but yeah I thought she's amazing.Ben: I have an interesting fact about her actually.Hana: What?Ben: So apparently, she is from right outside of my hometown actually.Hana: Oh wow.Ben: Yeah that's where she was born and then she was doing music around there first and she got kind of big somehow. I don't know how. I'm not really interested in her.Hana: Okay.Ben: She's cute but I don't really like her music. But yeah that's where she got started somewhereby my hometown apparently.Hana: I mean she's like the typical woman figure you know? Girly style and nice skin and her movement and her songs is like girl, all American girl.Ben: That's true.Hana: So that's why I like her. How about you?Ben: I have a lot of bands that I like but I recently saw this movie that I really like. Do you know the actor, Edward Norton.Hana: No.Ben: He's getting really popular. He's been popular for awhile. He does all different types of movies like crime dramas, like action, thrillers, science fiction. He's very, how would you say, he can do many different types of roles.Hana: Right.Ben: So I recently saw, it's an old movie of his but it's called Fight Club. It's him and Brad Pitt. Have you heard of it?Hana: Maybe.Ben: Fight Club, yeah.Hana: I think I've seen it. I don't really remember.Ben: It's old. It's from like 1998, 1999 but it's still a really good film I think. I think if I was to talk about a celebrity that I liked definitely Edward Norton. His acting is really good I think.Hana: Is he English or is he American? Where's he from?Ben: He's from the U.S. Yeah he's American for sure. Yeah what about you? Do you have any actors or actresses that you like?Hana: Yes, my favorite actor is, oh gosh, I can't remember his name. You know the guy from-Ben: Maybe I can help you.Hana: Notting Hill. The guy from the Love Actually.Ben: Oh, he's that British guy.Hana: The British guy with you know the eyes.Ben: Hugh Grant.Hana: Hugh Grant yes. That's the guy. Yeah, I like him.Ben: Why? Can I ask? He's kind of like a romantic comedy star but why do you like his acting?Hana: He looks sweet.Ben: Okay so he looks sweet.Hana: I'm like Brad Pitt or other celebrity male celebrities, he's not like super handsome. He looks kind of ordinary guy and kind of makes me feel like nice.Ben: Okay.Hana: The clothes I guess.Ben: Yeah, yeah that's true. I don't think I've ever seen a movie with him.Hana: Have you ever seen? No?Ben: No, I'm just not like a ... You said he's in Love Actually, he's like a romantic comedy guy, right?Hana: Yes, yeah. I like-Ben: Romantic comedies. Oh really? What's your favorite romantic comedy?Hana: I can't think of any now. Probably romantic, yeah, Love Actually. Okay I can't think of anything now but how about you?Ben: How about me what?Hana: Do you like romantic comedies?Ben: No, not really. But there is one I do like it's called My Best Friend's Wedding.Hana: Okay.Ben: I believe Julia Roberts is in that one.Hana: Yeah.Ben: Do you know who she is?Hana: Yeah. She is famous, yeah.Ben: Yeah that's kind of a good ... That's like a 90's classic romantic comedy I think. Have you seen it?Hana: I think I have.Ben: Okay.Hana: Yeah, yeah I think so.

For this week's episode of The Has Beens with Jfreed, Yanjeezy and Miks. We had another special guest, our friend Bendo aka the real Sneaker Pharmacist. In this episode, we discussed the current sneaker culture as well as the latest hyped release of the Air Dior 1s. Jfreed also schooled on us high school sports recruitment politics. We also various topics from JR Smith, Presidential candidate Kanye West and TI vs 50 potential battle, Pop smoke music and Boob tubes.

Sean answers your Marvel questions!4:37 Alex WardHey Sean! I have a couple Fox X-Men questions before that iteration of the franchise is gone forever. 1) Is there any part of you that's excited to see Dark Phoenix just knowing it's the last time we'll see this version of the characters? While the marketing has been lackluster, they truly have the freedom to do anything with these characters, knowing this is the last time they'll be working with these characters. Does the "nothing left to lose" idea excite you about this movie at all? Also, do you think there will be anything in this film that will sort of indirectly nod toward a "goodbye" message or something, sort of how TLJ had a lot of meta-messages to the audiences? I.e. "Let the past die; kill it if you have to."9:40 Alex WardDid you see the interview with Sophie Turner where she (bravely) admits that she won a recent role over a better actress simply due to the fact that she had more followers on social media? Do you think this was Dark Phoenix? What do you think about this concept of casting, and do you think star power is something studios like Fox, as opposed to Disney, are overly concerned with, and maybe that contributes to their wavering success?13:43 Woo S! KimI have been doing some research Sean on some of the more cosmic beings in Marvel Comics do you think in “The Eternals,” “Fantastic Four,” “Guardians of The Galaxy,” or if Mr. McKay does get to his Silver Surfer film will there ever be references and will we ever see The Fulcrum or The One Above All in the MCU? My biggest issue with either of these is people that aren't hardcore geeks will obviously think and or say “Where were these two when Thanos turned half the universe to ash?”15:24 Woo S! KimThinking back to 2012-2013 what did you think was more likely to happen as a result of the success of Marvel Studios, Spider-Man coming home first like most people did and in a way that's how that went down or X-Men and Fantastic Four? Did you ever think back in the day what is happening now, was going to happen potentially this quickly?17:40 Woo S! KimWhat I have seen from people on the internet and this is not a spoiler that Phil Coulson's appearance in “Captain Marvel” was well received, how likely of a possibility do you believe that Coulson will be brought back into the MCU films and if he does, the character may not even hint at Agents of SHIELD, my feeling is Kevin Feige really likes the character of Phil Coulson and the performer Clark Gregg because there is no real story reason to bring Coulson into “Captain Marvel,” what are your thoughts?21:13 AlexSean, what do you make of Kinberg's lastest comments about the Disney-Fox deal and its possible implications on the future of the franchise? Kinberg pointed out he's pals with Feige so I wonder if Feige would bring him on board the MCU X-Men as a producer or do you think there's no chance in hell Mr. Kinberg is touching the property  in anyway again  after Dark Phoenix? 23:38 AlexKevin Feige has said that Captain Marvel is the strongest person in the MCU. But do you ever see that changing thanks to the Fox-deal and the numerous other powerful characters that Marvel will be getting back after it closes like Silver Surfer &  Galactus?25:10 AlexWhat aspect of the Fantastic Four and X-Men comics that you never loved  and hope the MCU either avoids or improves on?26:39 AlexSean, would you say the marketing for Dark Phoenix has been the strangest and worst you've seen in superhero movies(or does that honor still go to Fan4stic) and do you think the Disney-Fox deal has played a factor in how Fox has chosen to market the film? It really feels to me that this movie is never going to come out. I mean can you think from the top of your head an example of a director confirming a death that people already suspected immediately after the trailer comes out. It's really quite baffling.30:59 David RosenHi Sean, I've been thinking about the Oscars and Black Panther's no win for Best Picture. As you talked about in the lead up to the Oscars, the fact that BP won a number of other awards which were voted on by people who also happened to be voting members of the Academy, like the SAG award for Best Ensemble for example, led you to believe that BP had a very good chance of winning Best Picture. Do you think it's possible that either 1) those voters voted for BP for those awards because maybe they had a feeling that as good as it was, in other Academy voters' minds, it's still a comic book movie and therefore didn't really stand a good chance to win, and so they wanted to make sure that it got recognized somehow and/or 2) in terms of awards, The Oscars are still considered a step above all other awards in prestige, so even though it may have been “acceptable” for a comic book movie to win other awards, the mere fact that it's a comic book movie made it undeserving of Hollywood's biggest honor? Just to be clear, I don't subscribe to any of these ideas myself. A great movie should be recognized as such, regardless of its genre. I'm just trying to get inside some of these people's heads.39:23 BenHey Sean! It seems like Marvel is truly embracing diversity for the new era. It's extremely exciting to me how fast they may go from being a really straight white male centric franchise, to possibly the most diverse franchise in Hollywood. I do think that Marvel is going to pay a price for this though. I think many of people will drop off, either because they are racist/sexist/homophobic, or they are only interested in the traditional old school characters. But I also think that a new, more diverse, fanbase will rise to replace them. What are your thoughts on the coming changes at Marvel, and the possible changes in the Marvel fanbase?43:53 BenDo you think the gay character in Eternals could be Hercules? He was known to have male lovers in Greek mythology.45:00 AdineOn the Midweek Q&A, someone asked about the possibility of a Collector/GrandMaster limited series. I just wanted to share that there is an Infinity War tie-in novel that features the two with the sort of brotherly rivalry type story you were describing. The series is called AIW: Cosmic Quest. I'm about half way through the audio book, and the reader does a great job of imitating the characters' on screen performances. I know this isn't nearly as great as a limited series would be, but it might still scratch that itch for someone who just wants to spend more time with these two45:46 AlexSean, what do you think is the secret to the Marvel's success? Why are they more consistent than other studios  like Warners, Sony, and Fox  who also make superhero films?And do you think Warner Bros and Sony will be able to achieve Marvel's good quality streak going forward?50:22 AlexDo you think Marvel could pull off either an X-Men and Fantastic Four trilogy without use of the archemeies of their respective franchises like Magneto and Doctor Doom. Would you personally be disappointed if Marvel refrains from using them in the trilogies. Opting instead to introduce those character in other movies outside FF and X-Men films.53:07 Alex WardSo I finally got my girlfriend to agree to see Captain Marvel and Endgame with me. We obviously can't get through all the MCU before then, and I know Captain Marvel will at least be pretty standalone, but what movies do you think are the most important to watch before each? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

NO COPYRIGHT INTENDED OR EXPRESSED WITH ANY IMAGES OR MUSIC.   Show Notes It was another wild week in the world of MMA and pro wrestling and My Take Radio is here to give you the good, the bad and the ugly that transpired this week. MMA 00:12:00– Audio The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly – Bellator 158, UFC Fight Night 91 Another fighter loses their opponent for UFC 201 Tito Ortiz want to Wanderlei, Rampage or Royce Gracie next? Brock Lesnar fails a second USADA test? Bendo v. Pitbull is imminent! UFC on Fox 20 goes down this weekend. Rich shares his thoughts on the card. Joe Lauzon and Jim Miller set to square off once again. Bellator releases. Condit v. Maia moved to UFC on Fox 21.     Wrestling 00:42:49– Audio The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly – WWE RAW and SmackDown Live Cruiserweights are coming to RAW New announce teams post-draft Jay Santy joins us to break down the latest news. Sin Cara v. Simon Gotch went down at the SmackDown tapings and it, not a wrestling match. WWE BattleGround predictions Are network enhancements being considered? WWE to combat a new lawsuit with a slew of WWE alumni involved.       Announcements RAGE Works is always looking for new writers for all our coverage. We have openings in all categories and have a minimum requirement of four articles a month and some good writing skills. WordPress and Windows Live Writer experience are a plus. Writers get access to comics, hardware, and software when available. Guest Links Keep up with Jay Santy & TRSS via the following links: TRSS Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/regularseasonsports/ Join the TRSS FB Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1467288046907257/ Follow Jay on Snapchat: @WaterbedRedRW Follow Jay/TRSS on Twitter: https://twitter.com/RWJaySanty TRSS on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOpm1nx26SbpndkdRoRCIXA   Sponsor Links Use WWESAVE10 to save $10 on orders over $70     Listener Info Support My Take Radio on Patreon. Patreon.com/MyTakeRadio Please take a moment and rate the show and/or app on iTunes. Guest inquiries can be forwarded to MTRHost@MyTakeRadio.com Show your support by picking up an MTR T-Shirt or by shopping from our Amazon store.   Click here to subscribe to MTR on iTunes Click here to subscribe on Stitcher Click here to subscribe on TuneIn Radio Subscribe to the My Take Radio RSS feed (Use for dedicated MTR shows)   Keep up with RAGE Works & My Take Radio Become a fan on Facebook Follow RAGE Works on Twitter Follow My Take Radio on Twitter Follow RAGEWorks on Instagram Follow RAGE Works on Snapchat Subscribe to RAGE Works on YouTube Add My Take Radio to your circle on Google+ Follow our boards on Pinterest       Check Out Some Of Our Other Shows Black is the New Black Call Me When It's Over The Regular Season Sportscast

NO COPYRIGHT INTENDED OR EXPRESSED WITH ANY IMAGES OR MUSIC. Show Notes A fresh serving of MMA & wrestling news and commentary heads your way. Rich got the video up and running in the new RAGE Works studio and video can be found on both MyTakeRadioTV and OfficialRAGEWorks on YouTube.   MMA00:12:15– Audio00:12:28– VideoUFC on Fox 18 commentaryUFC Fight Night 86 begins to take shapeMachida and Hendo set to square off later this yearUFC 197 gets a new fight added to its card as well as a number change. UFC 197 will now be 196 after 196 was moved to free TV and rebranded as UFC Fight NightCain Velazquez surgery and recovery update.Bellator 148 results and commentaryJon Jones lays out a light heavyweight roadmap as he prepares to make the move to heavyweight.Bendo heads to BellatorRonda's coach in hot water with the commission?  Wrestling00:56:28– Audio00:56:40– VideoRAW commentaryLethal and reDragon resign with ROHAn NXT superstar heading to the Summer Olympics?Awesome Kong and Reby Sky get physical?Lucha Underground gets a 3rd season!Bret Hart shares cancer diagnosis with fans.Blackjack Mulligan hospitalized   AnnouncementsRAGE Works is always looking for new writers for all our coverage. We have openings in all categories and have a minimum requirement of four articles a month and some good writing skills. WordPress and Windows Live Writer experience are a plus. Writers get access to comics, hardware, and software when available.My Take Radio returns 2/10/16 at 11 pm ET/ 8 pm PTGuest LinksNo guests this episode  Sponsor LinksUse WWESAVE10 to save $10 on orders over $70  Listener InfoSupport My Take Radio on Patreon. Patreon.com/MyTakeRadioPlease take a moment and rate the show and/or app on iTunes.Follow My Take Radio on Twitter-@MyTakeRadioBecome a fan of My Take Radio on Facebook-Facebook.com/officialrageworksAdd My Take Radio to your circle on Google+Follow our boards on PinterestFollow Rich on Instagram: RAGEWorks_RichIf you have any feedback or questions you can now call the MTR Feedback line 347-815-0687.Guest inquiries can be forwarded to MTRHost@MyTakeRadio.comShow your support by picking up an MTR T-Shirt or by shopping from our Amazon store.   

Ever wonder why Benson Henderson always has a toothpick in his mouth? Bendo tells all in Legend of the Toothpick. Don't miss his upcoming fight against Donald Cerrone at UFC Fight Night Boston.

See what happens when Anderson Silva and Chael Sonnen face off at the official pre fight press conference held in Las Vegas. Catch this exciting main card at UFC® 148: Silva vs Sonnen, live on Pay-Per-View, Saturday, July 7th at 10PM/7PM.

See the replay now to this epic event.

If you missed UFC 145, you missed one hellava an event. Sneak a peak at the replay.

Follow Stephen Thompson in the final hours leading up to his debut at UFC® 143. His astonishing first round finish earned him knockout of the night honors and motivated Georges St-Pierre to declare him one of the best strikers he's ever seen. "Wonderboy" now faces Matt "The Immortal" Brown at UFC 145. Find out if he can repeat his memorable performance Saturday, April 21st, live on FX beginning at 8PM/5PM ET/PT. Watch this and other features on UFC® Ultimate Insider, hosted by commentator Jon Anik, Tuesdays at 10:30PM/7:30PM on FUEL TV. Available internationally on YouTube

Two-time light heavyweight champ Randy Couture knows a thing or two about greatness at 205 pounds. In this episode of The Takedown, Couture gives us his unique perspective on this marquee division plus gives his surprising prediction for UFC® 145: Jones vs. Evans. Watch this and other features on UFC® Ultimate Insider, hosted by commentator Jon Anik, Tuesdays at 10:30PM/7:30PM on FUEL TV. Available internationally on YouTube.

Randy Couture's Hall of Fame career and legendary status makes him a “natural” at breaking down the sport to which he's dedicated his life. In this episode of The Takedown, Couture weighs in on the always fluid pound for pound debate including an insightful analysis of light heavyweight champ Jon Jones. Watch this and other features on UFC® Ultimate Insider, hosted by commentator Jon Anik, Tuesdays at 10:30PM/7:30PM on FUEL TV. Available internationally on YouTube.

2011 will go down as one of the most memorable years in UFC® history, highlighted by one of the most jaw-dropping fights between Frankie Edgar and Gray Maynard, amazing knockouts by Junior dos Santos and Anderson Silva, and several astounding submissions. 2011 was also witness to a potential fight of the decade between two of the most storied legends of the sport in Dan Henderson and Mauricio Rua, and the emergence of a rising superstar, Jon Jones. Re-live all these moments in this amazing must-have collection now available on Blu-Ray and DVD.

Joe Rogan has been Octagon-side for the biggest fights in UFC® history, and that includes calling every Ultimate Fighter Finale from the very beginning back in 2005. Now he shares his favorite TUF moments. Watch this and other features on UFC® Ultimate Insider, hosted by commentator Jon Anik, Tuesdays at 10:30PM/7:30PM on FUEL TV. Available Internationally on YouTube.