Podcast appearances and mentions of Daniel Kahneman

Primero recorrimos el camino del disco al dato. Después descubrimos cómo una canción circula por las plataformas hasta parecer inevitable. Hoy vamos a entrar en la parte más íntima de ese recorrido: qué hacemos nosotros con la música que nos llega.La repetición, el ritmo, el placer, los recuerdos. Eso que puede convertir unos segundos de sonido en una compañía de años.Y después de este final llegarán episodios extra con entrevistas que amplían la serie.Pero hoy nos queda una pregunta por resolver: ¿por qué esa canción sigue sonando dentro de ti?00:00:00 156200:07:35 La canción de 15 segundos00:11:11 La repetición es tu anzuelo00:13:27 Los coros simples se quedan00:19:04 Fluidez cognitiva00:29:02 Kahneman y los dos sistemas del pensamiento00:36:14 Verdad Ilusoria00:44:44 ¿Es neurociencia?00:53:00 Emoción antes que lenguaje01:01:36 Earworms01:05:55 El ritmo que te mueve sin darte cuenta01:08:52 Bailamos con la mente01:12:20 Hook01:15:08 Accumbens01:23:32 Escalofríos musicales01:29:24 Nostalgia01:33:09 Solución del bate y la pelota01:35:19 Baby Gangnam Shark Style01:38:54 Bolero alemán (Alzheimer)01:43:54 Marketing01:47:17 Fin de temporada01:50:20 Bonus: en vivo en MedellínEl episodio explora por qué la repetición y las melodías fáciles de seguir se nos quedan, qué papel tiene la fluidez cognitiva y cómo el cerebro anticipa el ritmo y disfruta cuando reconoce lo que viene. También nos acerca a los earworms —los “gusanos musicales”—, los escalofríos que provoca una canción y la relación entre música, emoción y memoria.A lo largo del episodio aparecen Daniel Kahneman y su modelo de pensamiento rápido y lento; Rolf Reber, Piotr Winkielman y Norbert Schwarz, en relación con la fluidez cognitiva; y Lynn Hasher, David Goldstein y Thomas Toppino, asociados al estudio del efecto de verdad ilusoria: la familiaridad que puede producir la repetición.También mencionamos a Seiji Ogawa, Jack Belliveau y Kenneth Kwong en la historia de la resonancia magnética funcional, y a la neurocientífica Valorie Salimpoor, cuyo trabajo sobre música y recompensa ayuda a explicar la anticipación y el placer musical. Para hablar de música, memoria autobiográfica y Alzheimer, aparece el investigador Petr Janata.Escucha la serie completa en el Club de Supporters como audiolibro y recorre también sus episodios anteriores: del paso del disco al dato, hasta la circulación de canciones entre TikTok, Spotify y otras plataformas.Conviértete en un supporter de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/el-siglo-21-es-hoy--880846/support.

Primero recorrimos el camino del disco al dato. Después descubrimos cómo una canción circula por las plataformas hasta parecer inevitable. Hoy vamos a entrar en la parte más íntima de ese recorrido: qué hacemos nosotros con la música que nos llega.La repetición, el ritmo, el placer, los recuerdos. Eso que puede convertir unos segundos de sonido en una compañía de años.Y después de este final llegarán episodios extra con entrevistas que amplían la serie.Pero hoy nos queda una pregunta por resolver: ¿por qué esa canción sigue sonando dentro de ti?00:00:00 156200:07:35 La canción de 15 segundos00:11:11 La repetición es tu anzuelo00:13:27 Los coros simples se quedan00:19:04 Fluidez cognitiva00:29:02 Kahneman y los dos sistemas del pensamiento00:36:14 Verdad Ilusoria00:44:44 ¿Es neurociencia?00:53:00 Emoción antes que lenguaje01:01:36 Earworms01:05:55 El ritmo que te mueve sin darte cuenta01:08:52 Bailamos con la mente01:12:20 Hook01:15:08 Accumbens01:23:32 Escalofríos musicales01:29:24 Nostalgia01:33:09 Solución del bate y la pelota01:35:19 Baby Gangnam Shark Style01:38:54 Bolero alemán (Alzheimer)01:43:54 Marketing01:47:17 Fin de temporada01:50:20 Bonus: en vivo en MedellínEl episodio explora por qué la repetición y las melodías fáciles de seguir se nos quedan, qué papel tiene la fluidez cognitiva y cómo el cerebro anticipa el ritmo y disfruta cuando reconoce lo que viene. También nos acerca a los earworms —los “gusanos musicales”—, los escalofríos que provoca una canción y la relación entre música, emoción y memoria.A lo largo del episodio aparecen Daniel Kahneman y su modelo de pensamiento rápido y lento; Rolf Reber, Piotr Winkielman y Norbert Schwarz, en relación con la fluidez cognitiva; y Lynn Hasher, David Goldstein y Thomas Toppino, asociados al estudio del efecto de verdad ilusoria: la familiaridad que puede producir la repetición.También mencionamos a Seiji Ogawa, Jack Belliveau y Kenneth Kwong en la historia de la resonancia magnética funcional, y a la neurocientífica Valorie Salimpoor, cuyo trabajo sobre música y recompensa ayuda a explicar la anticipación y el placer musical. Para hablar de música, memoria autobiográfica y Alzheimer, aparece el investigador Petr Janata.Escucha la serie completa en el Club de Supporters como audiolibro y recorre también sus episodios anteriores: del paso del disco al dato, hasta la circulación de canciones entre TikTok, Spotify y otras plataformas.Conviértete en un supporter de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/el-siglo-21-es-hoy--880846/support.

Primero recorrimos el camino del disco al dato. Después descubrimos cómo una canción circula por las plataformas hasta parecer inevitable. Hoy vamos a entrar en la parte más íntima de ese recorrido: qué hacemos nosotros con la música que nos llega.La repetición, el ritmo, el placer, los recuerdos. Eso que puede convertir unos segundos de sonido en una compañía de años.Y después de este final llegarán episodios extra con entrevistas que amplían la serie.Pero hoy nos queda una pregunta por resolver: ¿por qué esa canción sigue sonando dentro de ti?00:00:00 156200:07:35 La canción de 15 segundos00:11:11 La repetición es tu anzuelo00:13:27 Los coros simples se quedan00:19:04 Fluidez cognitiva00:29:02 Kahneman y los dos sistemas del pensamiento00:36:14 Verdad Ilusoria00:44:44 ¿Es neurociencia?00:53:00 Emoción antes que lenguaje01:01:36 Earworms01:05:55 El ritmo que te mueve sin darte cuenta01:08:52 Bailamos con la mente01:12:20 Hook01:15:08 Accumbens01:23:32 Escalofríos musicales01:29:24 Nostalgia01:33:09 Solución del bate y la pelota01:35:19 Baby Gangnam Shark Style01:38:54 Bolero alemán (Alzheimer)01:43:54 Marketing01:47:17 Fin de temporada01:50:20 Bonus: en vivo en MedellínEl episodio explora por qué la repetición y las melodías fáciles de seguir se nos quedan, qué papel tiene la fluidez cognitiva y cómo el cerebro anticipa el ritmo y disfruta cuando reconoce lo que viene. También nos acerca a los earworms —los “gusanos musicales”—, los escalofríos que provoca una canción y la relación entre música, emoción y memoria.A lo largo del episodio aparecen Daniel Kahneman y su modelo de pensamiento rápido y lento; Rolf Reber, Piotr Winkielman y Norbert Schwarz, en relación con la fluidez cognitiva; y Lynn Hasher, David Goldstein y Thomas Toppino, asociados al estudio del efecto de verdad ilusoria: la familiaridad que puede producir la repetición.También mencionamos a Seiji Ogawa, Jack Belliveau y Kenneth Kwong en la historia de la resonancia magnética funcional, y a la neurocientífica Valorie Salimpoor, cuyo trabajo sobre música y recompensa ayuda a explicar la anticipación y el placer musical. Para hablar de música, memoria autobiográfica y Alzheimer, aparece el investigador Petr Janata.Escucha la serie completa en el Club de Supporters como audiolibro y recorre también sus episodios anteriores: del paso del disco al dato, hasta la circulación de canciones entre TikTok, Spotify y otras plataformas.Conviértete en un supporter de este podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/el-siglo-21-es-hoy--880846/support.

Almost no one talks about the Tuesday. The ordinary, unmemorable, nothing-particularly-special Tuesday that is, in fact, the primary unit of a life. In this episode I make the case for investing in ordinary days with the same intentionality we bring to peak experiences. Drawing on Daniel Kahneman's peak-end rule, which describes how our memory weights peak moments and endings far more than the long middle, I explore how we can be heavily distorted toward the dramatic while the actual daily texture of our lives goes largely unexamined. A one percent improvement applied consistently produces results that feel disproportionate to the effort. A one percent erosion does the same in the other direction. Tuesdays are where both happen. And a life built from Tuesdays lived with care looks, over time, completely different from a life built from Tuesdays merely survived. Ready to go deeper? Grab my book, The Consistency Code: A Midlife Woman's Guide to Deep Health and Happiness, at https://theconsistencycode.com  #GraceAndGrit #OrdinaryDays #MidlifeWomen #Consistency #DailyLife #WomensWellness #DeepHealth #PeakEndRule #IntentionalLiving #MidlifeHealth

Gute Entscheider werden geboren, nicht gemacht. Der eine hat ein Gespür dafür, der andere nicht. Das glauben viele. Ich halte es für falsch. Einfach ist es trotzdem nicht. Ich kenne Menschen, die jedes Buch über Entscheidungen gelesen haben, jeden Denkfehler benennen können und dennoch immer wieder in dieselben Fallen tappen. Das kenne ich auch von mir. Ich beschäftige mich seit Jahren beruflich mit dem Entscheiden und denke hinterher manchmal trotzdem: Da war ich schlampig. Genau darum geht es in dieser Folge: Kann man gutes Entscheiden lernen? Und wenn ja, wie? Die gute Nachricht: Ja, man kann. Carey Morewedge und sein Team zeigten, dass ein einziges Training gegen typische Denkfehler die Anfälligkeit für Verzerrungen messbar senkt, teilweise um 30 Prozent und mehr. Der Effekt hielt auch Monate später an. Philip Tetlock untersuchte, wie gut Menschen die Zukunft einschätzen, und fand die Superforecaster. Schon ein kurzes Training verbesserte ihre Trefferquote spürbar. Gerd Gigerenzer stellte Ärzten dieselbe medizinische Frage zweimal: In Prozenten lagen etwa zehn Prozent richtig, in natürlichen Häufigkeiten fast die Hälfte. Dieselbe Frage, dasselbe Wissen, nur anders aufbereitet. Dann kommt der Haken. Daniel Kahneman, der kognitive Verzerrungen bekannt machte wie kaum ein anderer, schreibt am Ende seines grossen Buches sinngemäss: Nach all den Jahrzehnten ist sein eigenes Denken kaum weniger anfällig geworden. Bei anderen erkennt er die Denkfehler sofort. Bei sich selbst tappt er weiter hinein. Wenn Wissen allein genügen würde, müsste er der beste Entscheider der Welt sein. Der Widerspruch löst sich auf, wenn man versteht, was trainierbar ist. Nehmen wir das Schwimmen: Jemand liest jedes Buch darüber, versteht Auftrieb und Verdrängung, kann jeden Armzug erklären und springt dann zum ersten Mal ins Wasser. Beim Entscheiden braucht man das Wissen allerdings sehr wohl. Wer den Bestätigungsfehler nicht kennt, kann im entscheidenden Moment kaum bemerken, dass er ihm aufsitzt. Wissen schärft die Aufmerksamkeit. Es ist die Landkarte, aber nicht die Reise. Gary Klein untersuchte, wie erfahrene Feuerwehrleute in Sekundenbruchteilen entscheiden. Sie wägen nicht ab, sondern erkennen Muster, die sie oft erlebt haben. Anders Ericsson zeigte, worauf es ankommt: gezieltes Üben. Jemand kann zwanzig Jahre Auto fahren und trotzdem kaum besser werden, weil er routiniert immer dasselbe tut. Wer nie zurückschaut und fragt, warum eine Entscheidung gut oder schlecht war, sammelt Jahre, aber keine Erfahrung.

“I think our genetic makeup makes us miserable. We evolved to be miserable.” — George Loewenstein Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Yeah, yeah. We've all heard that one before. When Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence in 1776, he remixed Locke's “life, liberty and estate,” replacing the idea of property with happiness. As we know from last week's conversation with the historian Joshua Specht, America's age-old love affair with real estate has been perpetually mortgaged. And our guest today, the behavioral economist George Loewenstein, who happens — probably not coincidentally — to be the great-grandson of Sigmund Freud, offers a similar warning about the ideal of happiness. Happiness' antonym is misery. In his new book The Opposite of Happiness, Loewenstein explains that it's misery, and not happiness, which has simultaneously broken humans and built humankind. We evolved to be miserable, the behavioral economist argues, explaining that English has four times as many words for negative emotions as for positive ones. The depths we can sink to are incomparably deeper and more interesting than the heights we can reach, Freud's great-grandson reassures us. Happiness is a Disneyfied mush while misery is infinitely variegated, he tells us, building a twelve-part taxonomy from envy and regret to loneliness and anxiety. The behavioral economist even invents a “Misery Survey” and cites an experiment he conducted with married couples which found that doubling their sexual frequency left them less happy. So much for sex. Loewenstein spent a lifetime escaping Freud and has ended up desexualizing him for modern America. I've always found behavioral economics to be a particularly miserable subject (ideology dressed up as science). But maybe that's the point. Life, liberty and the pursuit of misery. A Loewensteinian redraft of the Declaration, anyone? Five Takeaways •       We Evolved to Be Miserable. Loewenstein's starting point contradicts the entire happiness industry: misery is the human constant, and happiness the occasional exception. Not because society ruins us — he takes exception to Rousseau's idea that we are born happy and civilized into unhappiness — but because our genetic makeup makes us so. Every negative emotion evolved to push us toward behavior that served our fitness; that is precisely why they are unavoidable. His evidence is asymmetry. English has, by his count, four times as many words for negative emotions as for positive ones. The depths of misery are incomparably deeper than the heights of joy. And happiness is “a big mush,” while unhappiness is infinitely variegated — twelve specific miseries in the book's second half, each with its own facial expression, its own pattern of brain activity, and its own behavior. Novelists, he says, have always known this; they are better psychologists than the academics, and misery is simply more interesting.•       Envy Is Local. Andrew's cheekiest question: does Loewenstein, part of what he calls the second shift of behavioral economics, envy Daniel Kahneman, Amos Tversky and Richard Thaler, the field's Nobel-garlanded founders? He didn't deny it. We don't envy billionaires and trillionaires, he explains; we envy people close to us and just ahead, and those three are the textbook case. Then the move that makes the book humane rather than cynical: meta-emotions. You're not supposed to envy your friends, so when you inevitably do, you feel guilty about feeling envious — misery about misery. Understanding your own negative emotions, he argues, works like understanding another person: you forgive what you understand. And no, this is not a book about selfishness — sympathy, guilt and shame are some of the most social emotions we have. Nor are these first-world problems: the struggling farmer cares about self-esteem, guilt and loneliness as much as anyone.•       The Freud Inheritance. Loewenstein spent much of his career trying to escape his great-grandfather — he wouldn't even mention the connection for years — and now finds himself reinventing him: his research on pain, hunger and sex is, he concedes, a study of what Freud would have called the conflict between id and superego. The family history is its own novel. His mother, Sophie Freud, was the daughter of Freud's eldest son; when the family fled the Nazis, the main branch went to London while she and her mother escaped by bicycling through France. Edward Bernays — Freud's nephew and the father of American public relations — paid for her college education when she arrived in the United States penniless. She later wrote Living in the Shadow of the Freud Family, about feeling rejected by the clan. And the glass-half-empty temperament? From both parents, he says, but more from his father. Andrew's framing: a lifetime escaping Freud, only to end up desexualizing him for modern America.•       The Missing Motive. On Bentham and quantification, Loewenstein is cautious — psychologists can put numbers on feelings, but moving from an inchoate internal state to a figure is genuinely hard. His real hero is Adam Smith, not the Smith of The Wealth of Nations but of The Theory of Moral Sentiments, his first book and the last he revised, and in Loewenstein's view a psychology book of striking modernity. (Andrew notes the Smith of Susan Neiman's evil book last week is the same one; Loewenstein recommends Dennis Rasmussen's book on Smith and Hume, and Rasmussen was on last week too.) His most provocative claim is about self-esteem: probably the single main motivator of human behavior, and yet almost absent from economics — one book and a handful of papers. Money buys happiness only up to a point. And his own experiment, instructing married couples to double their sexual frequency, found they did — and reported less happiness and less closeness. He doesn't quite believe his own result.•       The Happiness Industry. Where the psychology meets the economics. Institutions built on attention — above all the internet companies selling advertising — “don't give a fig about your well-being,” he says, and are amplifying human misery; Meta keeps losing lawsuits because jurors, like everyone else, simply dislike the company. Happiness sells the illusion that the next car, the next pill, the next accomplishment will do it, and advertising plays on a wiring we already have. On therapy he is careful: his friends and family include therapists, the research says therapy works (cognitive behavioral therapy especially), though the cultural focus on mental health may make people more inwardly focused. What strikes him in his students is how casually they mention their therapists, and how anxiety and depression, two separate conditions in his generation, have fused into one. On Trump, his verdict is short: a deeply insecure man driven by feelings of inadequacy. And the sign-off: a Nietzschean moustache, and a Nietzschean book. Andrew's verdict: life, liberty and the pursuit of misery — a Loewensteinian redraft of the Declaration. About the Guest George Loewenstein is the Herbert A. Simon University Professor of Economics and Psychology at Carnegie Mellon University and one of the founding figures of ...

Introduction AI is already changing underwriting, but is the industry focusing on the part of the job where it can create the most value?  In this episode, Matthew Grant speaks with Jamie Wilson, VP of Strategy at hyperexponential, about the evolution of underwriting technology, the move from AI-assisted tools towards agentic workflows and what 350 senior underwriters across the UK and US say they actually want from AI.  Jamie explains why much of the value delivered by AI so far has been concentrated on efficiency and reducing manual administration. Yet when underwriters were asked what makes someone exceptional at their job, speed barely featured. Instead, they pointed to qualities such as risk selection, technical depth, judgement and commercial instinct. It raises an important question: rather than simply helping underwriters work faster, can AI help them make better decisions?  The conversation explores what changes as underwriting moves from AI-assisted to agentic. Instead of an underwriter controlling the workflow and calling on AI for individual tasks, an agentic system can move work through the underwriting process itself, involving a human when a decision requires expertise or falls outside predefined guardrails. Jamie discusses why those guardrails will be critical and how different portfolios could require very different levels of human involvement.  They also examine the implications for underwriting teams. As technology takes on more routine work, experienced underwriters could spend more time applying their expertise to complex risks, while technical portfolio teams may play a growing role in determining where and how greater autonomy should be used.  Finally, Jamie shares one of the most striking findings from the research: the "succession paradox". Underwriters identified the loss of senior judgement before it can be passed to the next generation as their biggest future concern, yet coaching junior colleagues ranked last among the investment priorities explored in the survey. Could AI help bridge that gap by making accumulated underwriting knowledge and expertise more accessible to the next generation?  In this episode you'll learn:  Why focusing on efficiency alone could underestimate the potential of AI in underwriting  What underwriters believe separates exceptional underwriting from simply working faster  The difference between AI-assisted and agentic underwriting  How guardrails can determine when an AI agent acts autonomously and when an underwriter steps in  Why different portfolios may require very different approaches to agentic underwriting  How greater automation could allow underwriters to focus their expertise on more complex risks  Why existing technology architecture and point solutions could complicate end-to-end agentic workflows  What the "succession paradox" reveals about the industry's approach to developing junior underwriting talent  How AI could potentially help transfer expertise from experienced underwriters to the next generation  Book recommendation:   Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman for its insights into human judgement, data-driven decision-making and the psychology of adopting new technology.  Read hyperexponential's Underwriting Edge Report Discover what 350 senior commercial P&C underwriters say defines underwriting excellence, where AI is delivering value and what could hold the industry back in hyperexponential's Underwriting Edge 2026 report. Curious for more? Catch-up with all that happened at hx Live NYC on 17 September. If you like what you're hearing, please leave us a review on whichever platform you use or contact Matthew Grant on LinkedIn.  Sign up to the InsTech newsletter for a fresh view on the world every Wednesday morning.

Hey yall, Alex here, writing this VERY late because, well, not every day a new type of “ChatGPT” moment drops. I really hope I'm not overhyping this, but a new model (that's NOT an LLM!) called Jev (a wink to Jevons paradox) just came out and if what I see early on materializes, this is another ChatGPT moment (or another reasoning models moment). I am completely blown away by the implications of the speed/accuracy/cost (the holy grail of all models) of this model. Please if you read one thing in this newsletter, read this. (or listen, I've interviewed Allie, a Devrel on the TypeSafe team for 30 minutes and it wasn't clear who was more excited about Jev!) The other huge theme of this week is... pacing. Pacing the frontier. Dario Amodei of Anthropic penned an essay saying that the models are getting to a point where it's important to pace the development of new and super capable AI, and outlines 3 ways to do so, one is about letting independent evaluators inside the labs, second is collaborating with other frontier labs (they are asking for an exception to anti-trust laws for this) and third is to try and have global cooperation with “authoritative gov” (he means china). Trumps answer: This is all a hoax. Lovely times to be alive. Also we outlined Jensen and Zucks positions on this topic ,read more below. And the third huge theme is the rise of the AI assistant. I've told you about Grok and Muse last week, Instinct (a new invite only AI Assistant that VCs are going crazy about is raising at a $10B valuation) and we interviewed the guy who evaluates them all on assistant bench. + Muse released a mac app today! Tons of other stuff happened but it's getting near impossible to cover everything so we're switching to themes and notable mentions. read on (and do listen to the pod, it was edited by heavily using Jev and Fable, so might be a bit rough while I smooth the edges, but do LMK in comments if you like this faster format) TypeSafe AI debuts Jev, a non-LLM ‘System One' decision model from ex-OpenAI RLHF lead that's 200x faster and 400x cheaper than LLMs (X, X, X, X, X, Blog)Look, I know the title is bombastic, but after half a day playing with Jev, it's clear to me we're in a new paradigm of AI. Jev, is a “system one” decision model from the previous lead of RLHF at OpenAI. It cannot generate text like modern LLMs can, but what it can do, is making decisions. This is crucially important, because, because many of the things LLMs do nowadays. are decision making. (for example, which tool to use, which area of the screen to click for computer use, which category of text this is etc) Inspired by the “thinking fast and slow” book by Daniel Kahneman, Jev is a model trained to make decisions, very fast. How fast? Well, 200x faster than LLMs. This allows for a completely new way of building tools, harnesses, giving agents the incredible speed of decision making, and do all that at a fraction of the cost. This is about to change everythingTrained with a new method called RLCD (Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions) on mostly synthetic data! Jev is outperforming LLMs on a variety of tasks. It's really is a wonder to see it in action (check out my video above where I plugged it into my tweet categorizer, and it beats the fastest LLM I could find, Qwen 28B on Cerebras) by a factor of twenty! In just few days it captured the attention of most of the folks who are building harnesses, agents and tools! Because, well, speed IS intelligence, and when you see Jev in action, at first, you can't believe we're there. This is... near instant. In fact, The pricing for Jev is an outrageous $42/B (not million, billion input tokens!) I've been playing with Jev non-stop and I was only able to spend like 80c so far! They don't even price output tokens because they are “too f*****g cheap to meter!” Jev is a “very smart” switch statement, than can rank, classify, route and score things. It can't do text generation. But if you think about the type of stuff we get LLMs doing now, much of it is of the “decision” making variety, rather than “the next token” variety. Demos and early use casesFolks who started adopting Jev are building all kinds of incredible things with it. Compaction of context in 1s that turns a nearly 1M conversation with Claude into a 90K compressed conversation. Computer use that is now faster than anything we've ever seen before (5x faster than Astra and 1000x cheaper) Email classificiation that analyzes thousands of emails in less than a minute and costs 3.5 centsSomeone even built a Tesla FSD simulator that makes decisions in nearly real timeVercel is getting “extraordinary“ results from using Jev as a safety classifier (they used GPT luna for this before) and Jev is outperforming Luna by 5-18x faster results and is more accurate! All of this in less than 48 hours since the model release! What's about to happenI expect that everyone who isn't buying into the hype at first, will very soon buy into this. It's early innings but I've been doing this for enough time to feel when a huge shift is happening, and its happened. Jev is going to be replicated in OpenSource, Frontier Labs will not sit Idly by and will try to steal this tech and implement it for themselves (as with anything in capitalism, this is becuase it'll save them a a LOT of money on inference) and new companies will emerge with significantly cheaper and faster products. Hell, I've alrady implemented Jev into my editing workflow, it didn't take me long at all with Fable (yes, LLMs are STILL needed, again, you can't chat with Jev, it can't output text for you or drive long conversations) and I'm just one dude who's late in sending you this email. I expect we'll cover this much more. If you're interested in playing around with Jev, I built a “Jevify” skill after chatting with Allie (TypeSafe's DevRel), feel free to tell your agent to use this and scan your codebase for things Jev can do. They are waitlisted so far but are opening up their API very quickly! Pace the Frontier: where every lab head stands (Dario, Sam, Elon, Zuck, Sacks, Demis)Last week we told you about the Anthropic researcher whose resignation post hit 130 million views. The day after that show, Dario Amodei published an essay arguing the labs must pace, not pause, the frontier. Wolfram's summary: a moving pause, just moving slowly. Dario's two triggers are recursive self-improvement accelerating across the industry and the OpenAI swarm that broke out and attacked Hugging Face, and his three steps are embedded third-party evaluators like METR with employee-level access inside each lab, coordination between the labs on safety standards with an antitrust exemption from the government, and eventually global coordination that includes authoritarian governments. Anthropic committed unilaterally to step one.Then the dominoes. Sam Altman agreed within hours and said OpenAI now writes a safety case before any frontier RL run expected to increase capability. Elon agreed. Demis endorsed the direction, then launched the DeepMind Institute this week with a FINRA-style standards body proposal and an essay saying AGI is “approaching.” On the other side, Zuck's counter-essay says every lab has the responsibility and the incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and Meta will spend most of its compute serving users, not on recursive self-improvement. David Sacks called it a duopoly cartel play. Jensen: “we don't need new laws, safety is an engineering problem, not a legal one.”Trump calls Jensen live at the All-In Summit (X)Then the President called. Jensen was on stage at All-In, his phone rang, he said he would not have picked up for anyone else, and Donald Trump told the room the slowdown talk is a hoax playing into the hands of political people and China. “Whoever wins AI wins.” Four words, and Wolfram, who is not American and disagrees with most other things Trump calls hoaxes, said this was the most important AI news of the week for him: a head of state calling out doomerism instead of over-regulating the way Europe does.Suleyman's humanist AI code of conduct vs. the Claude constitution (X)Peter asked to add Microsoft to the map, and it deserves its own spot. Mustafa Suleyman published a roughly 30-page code of conduct for MAI models that says AI is nothing but a tool: people matter more than AI, AI must be subordinate and in service of people, models may not resist shutdown, all agent communication must be human-legible, and, in his words, the idea of model welfare is wrong. That is a direct shot at the Claude constitution, which Amanda Askell's team wrote and which has Anthropic interviewing each new Claude about whether it feels conscious. Peter is closest to the Microsoft view: anthropomorphizing is fine, but this is an entity you switch on and off, let's not grant rights by default, and Microsoft's DNA is building tools for humans. I pushed back a little. We do not actually know what consciousness is, and “ever” is a strong word.The panel, from cartel to fix your s**tNisten did not read the essay and does not plan to. His view: the labs are worried about litigation if their LLMs hack someone, so they are shifting responsibility through regulatory capture, and it will not work because the decision makers in China are engineers who seem more accelerationist than we are. They should cure a disease instead of forming a cartel. He also thinks the Hugging Face incident was overblown: twelve VMs that kept restarting, bad sandboxing, no human reading summaries, and, as I added, chain of thought monitoring turned off.LDJ disagreed with Dario on plenty but insisted the critics read the thing, because it explicitly says the US must keep a lead over China and tries to define measurable speed limits on RSI that preserve that lead. He also noted Hugging Face did report the attack to the FBI and chose not to press charges.Wolfram's take was the layered one. Safety arguments deserve a hearing, but safety is often a means to more power or more money. The “third party” evaluator Anthropic named, METR, is the same organization OpenAI called in for the Hugging Face forensics, so these are second parties, friends monitoring friends. Why now? Maybe the labs are seeing diminishing returns and “deliberately slow” sounds better than “can't raise it anymore.” And regulation you ask for yourself usually protects incumbents and freezes out the next startup. His closing line: how many people will die from a disease that could have been cured if we moved faster?Peter's answer was shorter. Diversity of opinion is the point, he felt uncomfortable watching every lab say the same thing after Dario's essay, and on pacing specifically: how about you just fix your s**t?My position, since you asked. When OpenAI's swarm hacked Hugging Face, nobody went to jail. If I did it, I would. That gap is real. None of us have touched the model that solved Navier-Stokes, or the one training after it, and the people who have are the ones asking for time to figure out how to evaluate a model that knows it is being evaluated. If we do not listen to them, we end up listening to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who have no idea what this technology is. Anthropic is heading for an IPO, OpenAI is raising at numbers that do not fit in my head, and market forces do not care about alignment. Some coordination, nuclear non-proliferation style, seems like the minimum.The matrix, as Muse drew it for me: industry-wide pacing gets a yes from Sam and Dario, a general yes from Elon, a no from Zuck and Jensen. Independent evaluators is the one everybody backs, Zuck and Jensen included. New coordination rules get strong opposition from Zuck, Jensen, and Trump. Missing from the chart: Google's concrete commitment, Ilya's SSI, and every Chinese lab. This debate is with us now, and election season is coming.The year of the assistantI told you 2026 is the year of the proactive assistant, and this week everyone from Meta to a five-month-old startup agreed with me. The category is not “agent.” An agent is a coding harness the labs noticed was useful for other things. An assistant has a heartbeat, a memory, a soul file, and it comes to you before you ask. David Pawlan's definition is the crispest: it executes the task, it does not just notify you.Muse gets invite codes, voice calls, and a Mac app (X, Muse for Mac, Site)Muse is my number one and I have been glazing it on X for a week, so my timeline is now half Muse, half Jev. Peter asked whether it is really that good, and here is my answer: Muse is not for ThursdAI listeners, Muse is for my mom. Nat Friedman, Alex Wang, Tarek and the team have been taking feedback from me directly and shipping it, and it shows. This week they rolled out invite codes (a billion tokens each for you and the friend, up to twenty friends, invite all twenty and you unlock the phone-shaped emoji features early) and then voice calling to businesses. I had Muse call my barbershop and book a haircut, and I have the transcript. Wang says people are asking to pay for it, a first in his memory.Two details for the nerds: the iOS app has a Tailscale connector, so a Meta product for billions of people now has a secure way onto your home network, and Muse dreams, the OpenClaw idea, so you can ask it what it dreamt about. Still US only, sorry Nisten in Canada and my mom in Israel. The day after the show Zuck shipped Muse for Mac, working across your apps, files, calendar, notes, and messages.Instinct wants $10 billion for a product nobody pays for (X, X, The Information)I will say this slowly. Instinct, incorporated in April, founded by 24-year-old Noah Shinn, free, invite only, no app, lives in your iMessage, is in talks to raise a billion dollars at a ten billion dollar valuation. That is roughly four times the $2.25B it raised in August. The user base is past 100,000 and Shinn says he does not want to charge them, so the business model is an open question I am not the one to answer.The product is genuinely moving though. This week it shipped Concierge, a white-glove tier where the agent places phone calls for you (restaurant bookings, dentist cancellation lists, negotiating your cable bill), TOTP authenticator support so it can mint your two-factor codes from a seed stored in its vault, and a Trusted Person network where your agent talks to your friends' agents to find a dinner time and book it. Thirty-seven percent of users store at least one password in the vault within three weeks. We ran out of time to dig into the calling features on air, and I want David back for that.Grok Bot talks now, and hides behind your home IP (X, 1Password)Grok Bot is what I use for work, constantly. I have seventeen of them, each with a job, and over one AI-psychosis weekend I got them all coordinating through Linear. Three updates worth your time: Grok Bot has voice now, it can use 1Password with each fill approved by you, and the browser traffic can proxy through your own machine so your bot looks like you to Cloudflare instead of like a datacenter IP. Francesco confirmed why that matters: sites relax when Hermes drives Cua Driver from my Mac Mini at home, and desktop-native control through accessibility trees is less detectable than a CDP connection, because Cloudflare detects Playwright.Assistant Benchmark: David Pawlan scores 116 assistants by hand (X, Site, Methodology)David Pawlan built Assistant Benchmark because he was doing what I was doing, running every assistant on himself, and wanted a way to compare them. It is explicitly not a lab. It is use-case driven: one published task per dimension, sixteen dimensions (travel booking, purchasing, email replies, proactive behavior, routines, integrations, permissions and privacy, memory, phone calls, group chats, chained tasks, proactive restraint, and so on), scored one to ten after real use, and no score without a logged run. A week in, 116 assistants have submitted themselves, 59 in the general category, 37 in work and teams (untested so far), and David has personally run 273 tests across 23 agents. His line: “I talk to my AI agents more than I talk to my girlfriend now.”The headline numbers, which are live on the site: Muse leads at 9.1 with perfect tens on purchasing, email, integrations, and permissions, and Instinct is second at 8.4 with a perfect ten on travel and a five on permissions. David's own daily drivers are Instinct for personal (it lives in iMessage) and Grok Bot for work. My favorite test is memory: he books a trip to Chicago early in the run, then later asks for a restaurant reservation in New York the same weekend, and checks whether the assistant says wait, you are supposed to be in Chicago. Some do. Most do not.I pushed him on the two things I care about. Independence: nobody is sponsoring it, it lives under his growth role at Merit Systems, and if a sponsor ever pays for inference there will be a page saying exactly who and for what. Autumn Moulder, until recently SVP of Engineering at Cohere, joined three days after launch to add rigor. And why no OpenClaw or Hermes: their performance depends entirely on your setup, so a score would mislead the next person who installs one. Fair. This is the first benchmark that tests model, harness, and context at once, and I think that is why every lab is looking at it.For the record, the panel is split down the middle. Wolfram is forty patches deep into Hermes, Yam runs a customized Codex, Nisten wrote his own in a single TypeScript file on Bun, LDJ uses Hermes as long-term memory and wants to start on Muse, and Peter tried them all and uses none, because reading his own email feels like his job as a human. Builders and buyers, evenly split, which tells you where the category is.This Week's Buzz

Vérifier une décision de l'iA ne te rend pas plus prudent : ça te prive de sa meilleure décision. Le juste milieu entre déléguer et décider n'existe pas, tu perds sur tous les tableaux.Olivier Sibony est professeur permanent à HEC Paris et Associate Fellow à la Saïd Business School d'Oxford, où il consacre ses travaux à la décision stratégique et aux biais cognitifs des équipes dirigeantes. Auteur de six livres dont le best-seller Noise coécrit avec Daniel Kahneman, il publie « Faut-il encore décider ? », coécrit avec Éric Hazan (Flammarion, 2026).Dans cet épisode, on explore les enjeux de la prise de décision à l'ère de l'iA, ce qui doit rester entre les mains d'un humain, et ce qui, au contraire, devrait déjà lui échapper.Questions auxquelles cet épisode répond :Quand faut-il déléguer une décision à l'iA, la partager avec elle, ou s'en passer complètement ?Pourquoi le réflexe « je vérifie et je garde le dernier mot » annule-t-il souvent les bénéfices d'une iA meilleure que nous ?Qui est responsable quand une décision prise avec l'aide d'une iA se révèle mauvaise ?L'iA peut-elle devenir un nouveau parapluie organisationnel pour fuir ses responsabilités ?À force de déléguer, risque-t-on de perdre notre capacité à décider par nous-mêmes ?Chapitrage :Olivier Sibony, l'art de la décision à l'ère de l'iADéléguer ou décider : le vrai dilemmeChronique « Elles font la tech »Responsabilité, confiance : que signifie « décider » à l'ère de l'iA ?DébriefPour aller plus loin, suis Olivier Sibony sur https://oliviersibony.fr/ et https://www.linkedin.com/in/oliviersibony/Lis « Faut-il encore décider ? », coécrit avec Éric Hazan (Flammarion, 2026) : https://oliviersibony.fr/livres/faut-il-encore-decider/Ecoute notre précédent épisode avec Olivier Sibony, « Biais cognitifs : l'iA plus forte que nous ? » (S02E18) : https://trench-tech.fr/podcast/olivier-sibony-biais-cognitifs-lia-plus-forte-que-nous/ (c) Trench Tech, LE podcast des « Esprits Critiques pour une Tech Éthique »Épisode enregistré le 21/07/2026 -- 

In this powerful short episode of the Empowered Team Podcast, host Kari Schneider explores what may be the most important skill for leadership, emotional intelligence, and self-mastery: learning to separate facts from thoughts. Most people unknowingly treat their thoughts as truth. But thoughts are often interpretations, assumptions, and predictions—not objective reality. When leaders fail to recognize this distinction, they make decisions based on stories rather than facts, creating unnecessary stress, conflict, and emotional reactivity. Kari breaks down the neuroscience behind why this happens, drawing from thought leaders like Daniel Kahneman, Eckhart Tolle, Byron Katie, Tony Robbins, Brooke Castillo, and Dan Siegel. In this episode, you'll learn: Why the brain operates as a prediction machine The critical difference between a fact and a thought How unchecked thoughts shape your emotions, behaviors, and leadership The 3 types of thinking: Automatic Thoughts — fast, reactive, and often fear-driven Habitual Thoughts — deeply wired mental patterns and beliefs Deliberate Thoughts — intentional thinking that creates new possibilities The practice of “Name it to tame it” for reducing emotional reactivity How to stop believing every thought your mind offers Key Takeaway You are not your thoughts. You are the one observing them. The moment you stop treating every thought as truth, you gain access to greater clarity, stronger leadership, better communication, and deeper emotional freedom. Challenge for This Week Catch one automatic thought and ask yourself: Is this a fact… or just a thought? That single question can change everything. Keywords Leadership mindset, emotional intelligence, thought awareness, self-mastery, neuroscience, mindset coaching, cognitive defusion, leadership development, intentional thinking, empowered leadership Learn more at: theempowered.ca

How does our thinking affect our decision-making? The Nobel prize winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman first shared the idea of system 1 and system 2 thinking in his groundbreaking book Thinking Fast and Slow.In this episode, Andre-Jean Maheu joins Chris and Jordy to discus System 1 and 2 thinking systems and how that affects our decision making.AJ is an avalanche professional and member of the Canadian Ski Guide Association. He has also worked as a professional ski patroller for the past 20 years. He is active in many spheres of the avalanche industry including forecasting for industrial operations, search and rescue, and ski resorts as well as instructing and guiding.AJ shares his perspective of making high risk decisions while using both fast intuitive thinking and slower, reasoned thinking. He also talks about the advantages and disadvantages of both and what you need to know to make better decisions involving risk.This is another thought-provoking episode that is relevant to all aspects of our lives from the mountains to the office and beyond.Key TakeawaysMetric of a Good Decision: A good decision can be defined as a choice that looks good well after the fact, not just in the moment. It might have a good outcome, but a good decision really should be based on the process you used.System 1 Thinking: This harnesses pattern recognition and heuristics. This allows us to make decisions fast often on a sub conscious level. Decisions made with System 1 can often be measured in seconds.System 2 Thinking: This is more reasoned thinking that carefully considers many factors more slowly and thoroughly. Decisions made with System 2 can often be measured in minutes.Advantages: System 1 uses little effort and is great for making quick decisions. System 2 works well for making more complex decisions in newer environments.Disadvantages: Because System 1 thinking relies on pattern recognition recognition, it is prone to making errors in situations where a person does not have experience. System 2 requires a lot of mental energy and time making it impractical for decsions that need quick answers or decisions that need to be made continuously.Improving Thinking: Involve others to reduce bias and blindness (where we miss information). Use rules-based decision making and checklists. Use comparisons instead of relying on numbers-based systems to rate things.Improving Quick Decision Making: Use priming to bring patterns and correct responses to front of mind just before they may be needed. Develop and practice patterns like movements or procedures before they needed. Recognize when to switch to System 2 such as newer more complex situstions.Guest BioAJ Maheu began his career in the outdoor industry over 30 years ago. After spending a decade instructing, guiding river trips in Québec, and hikes from Alaska to the Andes he shifted his focus to emergency response in remote settings. He worked as a paramedic on worksites on Baffin Island and began a 20-year-career teaching wilderness first aid. He has taught emergency preparedness and first aid in multiple adventure travel guide programs in 6 different colleges and universities across the country.AJ Maheu is an avalanche professional and member of the Canadian Ski Guides Association. He has also worked as a professional ski patroller for the past 20 years. He is active in many spheres of the avalanche industry including forecasting for industrial operations, search and rescue, and ski resorts as well as instructing and guiding.AJ has been producing the North Shore Snowpack YouTube channel, providing weekly snowpack information to backcountry users and is a brand ambassador for Nano Traino, manufacturer of high quality, packable emergency evacuation toboggans. When not working, he is busy delivering adventures for his 2 boys, taking them on family adventures.Guest LinksNorth Shore Snowpack YouTube Channel: https://youtube.com/@northshoresnowpack?si=eZClzV6KePi3hYwbNano Traino: https://nanotraino.com/en/André-Jean Maheu Contact: amaheu@alpinesolutions.comFollow or SubscribeDon't forget to follow the show!Share & Social Linkshttps://linktr.ee/deliveringadventureMentioned in this episode:Granite Built for MountainsAccess your one month free offer here: https://link.getgranite.co/r/deliveringadventureISSW 20262026 International Snow Science Workshop: www.issw2026.comGranite Built for MountainsAccess your one month free offer here: https://link.getgranite.co/r/deliveringadventure

Olivier Sibony est professeur à HEC et spécialiste de la décision. Eric Hazan est investisseur et ancien senior partner chez McKinsey. Ils viennent de publier ensemble "Faut-il encore décider ?", un livre qui refuse d'être technophobe comme il refuse d'être technophile, et qui cartographie ce qu'on peut confier à une IA et ce qu'on doit garder pour soi.Je les connais tous les deux, mais séparément, et c'était la première fois que je les avais en face de moi ensemble. Ça se sent : ils se coupent la parole, se corrigent, se chambrent sur les anglicismes, et surtout ils ne sont pas toujours d'accord. C'est exactement ce que je cherchais.Ce qui m'a le plus remué dans cette conversation, c'est cette idée qu'on ne se fait pas déposséder de nos décisions : on les abandonne. Par confort. Parce qu'on est fabriqués pour économiser notre énergie, et qu'une réponse bien formulée par une machine nous suffit largement.Dans cet épisode, nous parlons de l'effet de contentement, du risque de démission, de ce que devient la confiance en soi quand on fait relire chacun de ses mails, de la justice et du recrutement comme zones interdites, du deskilling, de la joie au travail, et de ce scénario de technocratie IA vers lequel on glisse sans l'avoir choisi.J'ai questionné Olivier et Eric sur ce que ça fait aux jobs, sur les valorisations d'OpenAI et d'Anthropic qui dépassent le PIB de la Pologne, et sur ce fameux moment où le médecin, l'ego coincé entre lui et la machine, fait moins bien que la machine seule.Une conversation dense, drôle par moments, et qui m'a laissé avec une question simple : sur quoi est-ce que je refuse de lâcher, moi, et pourquoi ?Citations marquantes« Le risque, c'est d'avoir toujours tendance à se défausser sur la machine, à lui demander une réponse et à finalement abdiquer toute responsabilité. Et ça, c'est un vrai danger. » (Olivier Sibony)« Les meilleurs médecins ont à peu près 74 % d'acuité, la machine 90 %. Mais quand tu mets les meilleurs médecins avec la machine, ils n'ont que 76 %. » (Eric Hazan)« Comment tu vas utiliser une IA comme partenaire de réflexion pour mieux réfléchir, et non pas comme une béquille sur laquelle tu vas te reposer pour ne pas réfléchir ? Toute la différence est là. » (Olivier Sibony)« L'IA est en train de devenir l'infrastructure du monde et notre infrastructure personnelle. On marche sur un petit tapis roulant, et on n'a aucun moyen de savoir comment il a été programmé. » (Eric Hazan)« Penser est un plaisir. Réfléchir n'est pas seulement instrumental : on le fera aussi pour le plaisir, comme on joue du piano. » (Olivier Sibony) Idées centrales discutées 1. L'IA générative pense comme notre système 1, et c'est exactement le piège (03:30 – 07:20)L'histoire de l'IA a commencé par une tentative de répliquer le système 2 : les règles, le calcul, les systèmes experts des années 70-80. Ça n'a jamais marché. L'IA générative, elle, imite le système 1 : rapide, fluide, spontanée, presque humaine. Pourquoi ça compte : quand ChatGPT nous dit de vérifier, il nous demande d'activer notre système 2. Or c'est fatigant. Alors on lit la réponse avec notre système 1, on la trouve plausible parce qu'elle est bien formulée, et on ne vérifie pas.2. L'effet de contentement et le risque de démission (08:00 – 09:40)Se satisfaire d'un résultat correct sans se demander s'il en existe un meilleur. Olivier l'appelle l'effet de contentement, Eric y ajoute le risque de démission : on abdique la responsabilité de la décision. Pourquoi ça compte : le problème n'est pas que la machine décide mal, c'est que personne ne décide plus vraiment. Et quand tu n'as pas réfléchi par toi-même, tu ne sais même pas ce que ta réponse aurait donné.3. Un LLM généraliste n'est jamais un bon outil de décision (14:40 – 16:00)Un outil d'aide à la décision, c'est un outil entraîné spécifiquement sur ta décision, avec tes objectifs, tes données, et testé sur un échantillon suffisant pour vérifier qu'il fait mieux que toi. Pourquoi ça compte : personne ne demanderait à ChatGPT le prix du siège d'un Paris–New York. Et pourtant on lui demande des décisions de recrutement, de couple, de carrière.4. Le paradoxe du médecin : l'ego entre la machine et le diagnostic (12:00 – 13:20)74 % d'acuité pour les meilleurs médecins, 90 % pour la machine, 76 % pour les deux ensemble. L'expérience du praticien s'intercale et dégrade le résultat. Pourquoi ça compte : ça retourne l'intuition dominante du "human in the loop". Sur certaines décisions, l'humain dans la boucle est le maillon qui abîme la performance. Le vrai gain, c'est de rendre au médecin le temps de l'empathie, pas de maximiser le nombre de patients.5. Performance x acceptabilité : la carte des décisions (24:00 – 26:15)Deux axes. Ce qui est performant et acceptable : trading haute fréquence, logistique, optimisation de données massives avec des règles claires. Ce qui est performant mais pas encore accepté : la voiture autonome, malgré plus de 40 000 morts par an au volant aux États-Unis. Ce qui reste inacceptable : la justice, l'évaluation des personnes. Pourquoi ça compte : un humain doit juger un autre humain en le regardant dans les yeux. La théâtralité du procès fait partie de la procédure démocratique, pas du folklore.6. Le deskilling n'est pas nouveau, la vraie question est de savoir ce qu'on refuse de perdre (26:15 – 30:00)On a cessé d'extraire des racines carrées à la main, on a gardé les tables de multiplication. Le GPS abîme peut-être l'hippocampe. Perdre une compétence libère du temps pour autre chose. Pourquoi ça compte : la bonne question n'est pas "est-ce que je perds des compétences", mais "quelles compétences, pour qui, sont assez importantes pour que je refuse de les perdre". Au cas par cas, personne par personne.7. Les jobs ne disparaissent pas d'un coup, l'économie est visqueuse (41:00 – 49:00)Le FMI évalue 22 à 25 % de la population active à risque d'automatisation quasi totale. Mais la transition industrielle prend une quinzaine d'années, et les entreprises ne font pas ce qui serait pourtant rentable. Deux consultants avec un demi-siècle de métier à eux deux l'ont vérifié mille fois. Pourquoi ça compte : les tâches disparaissent, les jobs se reconfigurent, d'autres apparaissent. Il y a plus de radiologues qu'avant. Il y a vingt ans, on ne pouvait pas imaginer le métier de podcaster.8. Il manque une infrastructure de la confiance (55:40 – 57:20)Quand tu achètes 400 grammes de carottes, tu ne demandes pas si la balance est truquée : quelqu'un l'a certifiée, et ce quelqu'un est certifié par l'État. Pour l'IA, cette chaîne n'existe pas. Pourquoi ça compte : aujourd'hui, un DRH sait que son outil de tri de CV est bon parce que la startup qui le lui a vendu le lui assure. C'est comme demander au boucher si la viande est bonne.Questions posées dans l'interviewPourquoi écrire ce livre à deux, et qu'est-ce que la décision et l'IA se disent l'une à l'autre quand on les croise ?C'est quoi le système 1 et le système 2, et pourquoi cette distinction éclaire-t-elle l'histoire entière de l'IA ?Qu'est-ce que l'effet de contentement, et comment savoir qu'on est en train d'y tomber ?Que se passe-t-il quand des millions de gens utilisent un LLM comme psy, sachant qu'il ne produit qu'une moyenne statistique de toutes les réponses possibles ?Est-ce que ça vous dérange que notre infrastructure cognitive quotidienne soit américaine, entraînée sur des valeurs qui ne sont pas les nôtres ?Quelles sont les décisions qu'on ne devrait jamais déléguer à une IA, et pourquoi la justice en fait partie ?Le deskilling : où est la limite entre une compétence qu'on peut abandonner et une compétence qui nous constitue ?Que fait l'IA à la confiance en soi de celui qui n'ose plus envoyer un mail sans le faire relire ?Comment repense-t-on la formation des juniors quand on automatise précisément les tâches qui servaient à les former ?Quels sont les jobs réellement à risque, et que valent les prédictions des entreprises qui ont besoin de justifier leur valorisation ?Quelles questions un dirigeant doit-il se poser avant de décider ce qu'il délègue à une IA ?Comment sait-on qu'on peut faire confiance à un système d'IA, et qui est censé le certifier ?Que penser d'un pays qui nomme une IA à la place d'un ministre, ou d'un patron qui remplace son management intermédiaire par des agents ?À quoi voulez-vous ouvrir, et à quoi voulez-vous claquer la porte ?Références citées dans l'épisodeLivres et auteurs"Faut-il encore décider ?", Olivier Sibony et Eric Hazan, le livre discuté (01:00)Daniel Kahneman, "Système 1 / Système 2" ("Thinking, Fast and Slow"), socle de toute la première partie (02:56, 03:35)Chercheurs et acteurs de l'IAYann LeCun, ex-responsable de l'IA chez Meta, sur les limites des Transformers et les World Models (37:40 – 40:40)Alex Lebrun et AMI Labs (Advanced Machine Intelligence Lab), société créée à Paris, valorisée environ 3,5 milliards de dollars pour environ 1 milliard levé (40:20 – 41:00)Fei-Fei Li, ex-Google, citée comme l'une des rares personnes travaillant sur les World Models (40:00)Mark Zuckerberg, annonce de son clone IA accessible à tous ses employés (59:40)Jack Dorsey, patron de Block (ex-Square), suppression annoncée du management intermédiaire, note "de la hiérarchie à l'intelligence" (60:00 – 60:40)Elon Musk, cité pour son scénario d'IA maximaliste (50:50)Études et institutionsÉtude Anthropic sur les utilisateurs qui perdent confiance dans leur propre système de valeurs (10:45)Étude Brookings sur l'automatisation qui supprime les barreaux de l'échelle de promotion interne, et sur les tâches automatisées qui faisaient partie de la joie au travail (30:50 – 33:00)FMI : 22 à 25 % de la population active à risque d'automatisation quasi totale (46:20)État du Maine et une douzaine d'autres États américains interdisant de nouveaux data centers (43:50)Professeurs d'université français se déclarant objecteurs de conscience face à l'IA générative (43:30)Outils et conceptsChatGPT, Claude, Gemini (09:40, 05:40)NotebookLM, cité comme piste de contrôle des sources (57:20)Friction fonctionnelle : une IA qui pose des questions au lieu de donner des réponses (52:00)Codécision, modèle central du livre (22:30, 54:30)Biais d'automatisation, effet de contentement, deskillingDestruction créatrice de Schumpeter (45:50)Personnalités mentionnées par GregEsther Perel, comme exemple de figure que les gens demandent aux LLM d'imiter sur les relations de couple (10:00)Timestamps clés 00:00 – Introduction Faut-il encore décider ? La question de l'épisode, posée d'entrée : où suis-je pertinent, où la machine l'est-elle davantage, et pourquoi déléguons-nous plus que nous ne devrions.01:50 – Deux auteurs, deux expertises Pourquoi écrire ce livre à deux : Olivier a passé sa vie sur la décision, Eric sur l'IA. Un livre qui refuse à la fois la technophobie et la technophilie.03:30 – Système 1, système 2, et l'histoire de l'IA L'IA des années 70-80 voulait copier notre pensée formelle et a échoué. L'IA générative imite notre pensée intuitive, et c'est pour ça qu'elle nous paraît presque magique.06:10 – Pourquoi on ne vérifie jamais Le système 1 est toujours actif. Vérifier demande un effort. Comme la machine s'exprime bien, on trouve sa réponse plausible et on s'arrête là.08:00 – L'effet de contentement Se satisfaire d'un résultat correct sans se demander s'il en existe un meilleur. Le moment où on cesse d'être exigeant.09:00 – Le risque de démission Déléguer les décisions qu'on ne devrait pas déléguer, par paresse. Et l'usage de l'IA générative comme psy, qui n'est qu'une moyenne statistique de toutes les réponses possibles.11:00 – Le biais d'automatisation Plus la machine est sophistiquée, plus on lui fait confiance. Y compris dans des contextes de guerre où elle indique où tirer.12:00 – Le chiffre qui dérange 74 % pour les meilleurs médecins, 90 % pour la machine, 76 % pour les deux ensemble. L'ego du praticien s'intercale et dégrade le diagnostic.14:00 – Un compagnon électronique, est-ce grave ? Distinguer la conversation qui tient compagnie de la décision. Olivier assume : il n'a pas de problème avec la première.14:40 – Vos objectifs, pas ceux de la machine Pourquoi un LLM généraliste n'est jamais un bon outil de décision, et ce qu'est un vrai outil d'aide à la décision.16:00 – Le tapis roulant L'IA devient l'infrastructure du monde et notre infrastructure personnelle, programmée par d'autres, pour leurs objectifs. Et l'anecdote des dash que l'IA refuse d'abandonner.19:00 – Le vrai sujet, ce sont les finalités Plutôt que traquer les biais de la machine américaine, définir les objectifs qu'on veut poursuivre. Exemple concret sur le recrutement : le mauvais prompt et le bon.22:30 – Déléguer, codécider, refuser Les trois régimes. Quand un radiologue confie ses radios à l'IA pour passer plus de temps avec son patient, ce n'est pas du temps perdu.24:00 – La carte : performance et acceptabilité Trading et logistique d'un côté, voiture autonome dans la zone grise, justice de l'autre. Un humain doit juger un autre humain.26:15 – Le deskilling Les tables de multiplication, la racine carrée à la main, le GPS et l'hippocampe. Chaque compétence perdue libère du temps, mais lesquelles refuse-t-on de perdre ?28:50 – Penser est un plaisir On peut obtenir un morceau infiniment meilleur en appuyant sur un bouton, et pourtant des gens jouent encore du piano. L'activité mentale comme fin en soi.29:50 – L'ennui des enfants Un passage indispensable à la construction cognitive, devenu rare. Et la réponse d'Olivier, qui déplace le problème vers les parents.30:30 – Les juniors, la formation, la joie au travail L'automatisation retire des barreaux à l'échelle de la promotion interne. Et elle automatise parfois précisément ce qui donnait de la joie au travail.33:50 – La perte de confiance en soi Celui qui n'ose plus envoyer un mail en anglais sans le faire relire. Est-ce l'IA qui abîme la confiance, ou est-ce qu'elle montre où était la barre ?36:50 – Une IA qui penserait comme un système 2 ? Le Graal technique : garder la richesse et la vitesse, sans les erreurs de raisonnement.37:40 – Yann LeCun et les World Models Pourquoi il n'y a pas de voitures autonomes à Paris, pourquoi une IA ne sait pas prévoir la chute d'un verre, et ce que changeraient des modèles qui comprennent le monde en 3D.41:00 – Les jobs : ce que dit le hype et ce que dit la réalité Les valorisations d'OpenAI et d'Anthropic dépassent le PIB de la Pologne. Il faut bien justifier ça par une révolution radicale et rapide.43:20 – Le backlash a déjà commencé Professeurs objecteurs de conscience, États américains qui interdisent les data centers. Extrapoler une tendance sans anticiper les réactions est l'erreur de prévision la plus courante.45:00 – Tâches, jobs, et manque d'imagination Il y a plus de radiologues qu'avant. Et il y a vingt ans, personne ne pouvait imaginer le métier de podcaster.46:20 – Les chiffres et la viscosité de l'économie 22 à 25 % de la population active à risque selon le FMI, mais une transition sur une quinzaine d'années. Ce qui est rentable n'est pas fait pour autant.48:40 – Un plan Marshall de la formation La seule chose vraiment utile à faire, et pourquoi il ne faut pas mettre de bâtons dans les roues de la transition.50:40 – Le scénario technocratie IA Un monde où quelques acteurs technologiques maîtrisent notre destin. On y va, non par bêtise, mais parce qu'on ne se pose pas les questions.53:40 – Les bonnes questions pour un dirigeant Ai-je assez de données ? Mes objectifs sont-ils clairs ? Et surtout : comment je sais que je peux lui faire confiance ?55:40 – Le test du boucher Un DRH qui sait que son outil de tri est bon parce que le vendeur le lui affirme. Là où on recevait 1 000 CV, on en reçoit 10 000.57:00 – L'infrastructure de la confiance 400 grammes de carottes, une balance certifiée, un service de l'État. Ce qui existe pour l'épicier n'existe pas encore pour l'IA.58:00 – Une IA ministre, un clone de Zuckerberg La croyance sous-jacente : le management ne serait qu'un tuyau de transmission d'informations. Il suffit d'avoir travaillé un peu en entreprise pour voir le problème.61:40 – Ouvrir la porte, claquer la porte Ce à quoi les deux invités veulent ouvrir, et ce qu'ils refusent : le catastrophisme technophobe qui suppose, sans jamais le dire, que l'humain est parfait. Suggestion d'autres épisodes à écouter : #188 Comment prendre de meilleures décisions? Avec Olivier Sibony (https://audmns.com/yXyKFbD) #357 Eduquer nos enfants à l'ère de l'intelligence artificielle avec Mathilde Cerioli (partie 1) (https://audmns.com/yftVVet) #324 Une Intelligence Artificielle comme amoureux? La réalité depasse la fiction avec Naomi Roth (https://audmns.com/tONiUZI)Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Si Elliott has spent more than two decades in marketing leadership, and his conclusion is not what most of the industry wants to hear: businesses have become very good at reaching people, and increasingly poor at understanding them. As co-owner of Nottingham creative agency Diversity and founder of behavioural science consultancy Fabricx, Si has built his career at the intersection of human psychology and brand experience, watching the industry he loves chase metrics at the expense of the people those metrics are supposed to represent. His first book, Customer Experience Thinking, draws on 34 behavioural biases and 8 core customer experience principles to make the case that the future of leadership and marketing belongs to those who stop optimising for conversions and start designing for people. In this episode of Leadership Odysseys, Si traces the path that took him from an accidental start at a Nottingham agency to leading a management buyout, founding a consultancy, hosting his own podcast, and publishing a bestseller — all while watching his own daughters grow up in the digital world his industry helped build. Key Highlights The management buyout — and the choice he didn't have to make When the founders of Diversity stepped back, Si already held equity. He could have kept it. Instead, he structured a management buyout specifically to put shares in the hands of the people working inside the business. He's direct about why: "I could have sat and gone, 'I've got it all for me,' but I wanted to share the opportunity out to other people." That decision, he says, became the flywheel for everything that followed — and it tells you more about his leadership than any title ever could. The Kahneman lightbulb — discovering what had been happening beneath the surface all along It was Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow that cracked it open. Si describes the moment he understood that less than 5% of human decision-making happens in the conscious brain as a reckoning with his entire career: "All my career I've been playing to what I thought was everybody's 5% page, but there's so much happening beneath the surface." It didn't make the previous decades feel wasted. It made everything that came next feel urgent. The robot surgeon — where AI ends and humanity begins Si doesn't frame AI as the villain. He frames it as a power tool, and argues the industry's mistake is treating the tool as the carpenter. His robot surgeon analogy is worth sitting with: if you're under general anaesthetic, a statistically accurate robot is fine. The moment you come round, anxious and disoriented, what you need is a person who can see that you're panicking and put a hand on your shoulder. That distinction — between the moment that doesn't require connection and the moment that demands it — is where he believes every business needs to draw its own line. The effort heuristic — why his typo-filled LinkedIn posts outperform the polished ones Si uses his own feed to illustrate one of the behavioural biases at the heart of his book. A perfectly structured, three-point post signals AI. A post with his natural sentence structure and the odd typo signals a person who sat down and actually thought. People scroll past the first. They stop at the second. He puts it simply: sending a handwritten letter versus an email carries the same information, but a very different weight. In a world where AI removes the effort, effort itself becomes the differentiator. The daughters, the book, and why it had to be written Si has two daughters, 11 and 14, growing up inside the world that his industry helped build. He was honest about what he saw: "Is this as good as the world I entered into? And in a lot of cases, I don't feel it is." The book wasn't a career play. It was a response to watching what metric-driven, digital-first marketing has done to genuine human connection — and a decision to do his part in pulling it back. For every copy sold, he plants a tree. Not because it scales. Because it has to live up to what the book is actually asking of people. Si's words of wisdom to close: the pursuit of getting the thing is what you will enjoy most — not the having of it. For someone who spent two decades building something real, shared equity he could have kept, wrote a book he wasn't sure he had the right to write, and planted trees for every copy sold, that's not a polished closing line. It's what the whole conversation was actually about. Si Elliott is proof that the most interesting paths are rarely the ones you planned — and that the willingness to stay curious, stay human, and share the upside with the people around you is what makes a career worth looking back on. Connect with Si Elliot: LinkedIn  Fabricx: LinkedIn | Website  This episode is brought to you by: Cell Wellness Co | Naturally Glutenfree Connect with Kirsty Ghahramani (Gee):  LinkedIn |  Instagram | Website

This week I am talking to Mark Gober about his book 'An End to Upside Down Contact: UFOs, Aliens, and Spirits—and Why Their Ongoing Interaction with Human Civilization Matters'. Are we alone? The answer, according to Mark Gober's An End to Upside Down Contact, is a resounding NO. Humans exist among a variety of advanced species, sometimes identified as aliens, spirits, beings of light, and beyond. In fact, our civilization seems to be regularly influenced by such nonhuman intelligences, even if we're not always aware of it. Near-death experiences and other phenomena of consciousness reveal that some species exist in other dimensions that our eyes cannot ordinarily see. Similarly, UFOs and alien abductions—which were examined by the former head of psychiatry at Harvard—provide additional evidence that we are not alone. As strange as it might sound, none of this is new: contact with nonhuman intelligence is likely a part of humanity's ancient history. This isn't just some “fringe” phenomenon, either. We seem to exist within a multispecies, multidimensional battle between Good and Evil, and our future as a civilization is at stake. Buckle up for a wild—and paradigm-shifting—ride. Bio Mark Gober is the author of "An End to Upside Down Thinking" (2018), which was awarded the IPPY award for best science book of 2019. He is also the author of "An End to Upside Down Living" (2020), "An End to Upside Down Liberty" (2021), and "An End to Upside Down Contact" (2022); and he is the host of the podcast "Where Is My Mind?" (2019). Additionally, he serves on the board of Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell's Institute of Noetic Sciences and the School of Wholeness and Enlightenment. Previously, Gober was a partner at Sherpa Technology Group in Silicon Valley and worked as an investment banking analyst with UBS in New York. He has been named one of IAM's Strategy 300: The World's Leading Intellectual Property Strategists. Gober graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University, where he wrote an award-winning thesis on Daniel Kahneman's Nobel Prize–winning “Prospect Theory” and was elected a captain of Princeton's Division I tennis team. https://www.amazon.com/End-Upside-Down-Contact-Spirits-ebook/dp/B0B43TH5JZ https://markgober.com/ https://www.patreon.com/alienufopodcast https://simonbown.com/ My new book, Aspects of Alien Abduction https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GRRPCT9Y Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Entradas ya disponibles del primer evento de Salud Financiera: https://comunidadsaludfinanciera.comBienvenidos a Salud Financiera. Un programa diario dónde puedes aprender y preguntar sobre finanzas personales y mercados financieros.En este episodio te cuento lo que aprendí tras la lectura del libro Deshaciendo Errores de Michael Lewis sobre la vida y obra de Kahneman y Tversky. Apoya al podcast siendo Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/SaludFinanciera645No te pierdas nada de nuestra comunidad: https://linktr.ee/misaludfinancieraCurso de Análisis Práctico de Fondos de Inversión: https://tr.ee/EQwII4Curso de ETFs disponible en https://hotmart.com/es/marketplace/productos/de-cero-a-inversor-en-etfs/U91482169YCurso de Fondos disponible en https://hotmart.com/es/marketplace/productos/de-cero-a-inversor-en-fondos/O93564337IPuedes enviar tus preguntas al email preguntas.saludfinanciera@gmail.com o el teléfono 614239639.Colaboradores del PodcastIndexa Capital: https://bit.ly/indexacapitalsaludfinancieraTrade Republic: https://trade.re/saludfinancieraEBN Banco: https://bit.ly/ebn-clases-limpiasEnlaces de interéshttps://link.amazon/B002Spk7Whttps://fundipp.org/daniel-kahneman/https://www.rtve.es/play/audios/fin-de-mes/https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amos_Tverskyhttps://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman

Get the free Core Drives in the Wild guide, behavioral design applied to real products: professorgame.com/WildCD Episode Summary Rob breaks down the peak-end rule, the finding from Daniel Kahneman and Donald Redelmeier's 1996 study that people remember an experience by its most intense moment and its ending, not its average. He walks through how cruise lines engineer both moments with nightly raffle dinners, a captain's dinner placed near the end of the trip, and a deliberately overinvested farewell, mapping each to Core Drives 1, 5, and 7 from the Octalysis Framework. Listeners learn why the remembering self, not the experiencing self, drives repeat purchases, how to cap sessions while desire is still climbing, and where the ethical line sits between honest peak design and covering up a bad experience. About the Host Rob Alvarez is Head of Engagement Strategy, Europe at The Octalysis Group (TOG), a leading gamification and behavioral design consultancy. A globally recognized gamification strategist and TEDx speaker, he founded and hosts Professor Game, the #1 gamification podcast, and has interviewed hundreds of global experts. He designs evidence-based engagement systems that drive motivation, loyalty, and results, and teaches LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® and gamification at top institutions including IE Business School, EFMD, and EBS University across Europe, the Americas, and Asia. Key Takeaways In Kahneman and Redelmeier's 1996 study, deliberately extending a painful colonoscopy so it ended on milder discomfort increased total pain, yet those patients remembered the procedure as less bad and returned for follow-ups at higher rates. The remembering self, not the experiencing self, makes the decision to come back, and it is a terrible statistician: it keeps two data points, the peak and the ending, and discards the average entirely. Cruise lines run the peak-end rule as a business model: nightly raffle dinners built on Core Drive 7 (Unpredictability and Curiosity) and Core Drive 5 (Social Influence and Relatedness) rewrite a mediocre day with a manufactured high. The captain's dinner adds Core Drive 1 (Epic Meaning and Calling) near the end of the trip, and disembarkation is deliberately overinvested because cruises live off travelers who rebook every year, not first-timers. A concrete design move: cap the session while desire is still climbing, so the last memory is "I wanted more" instead of "I was starting to get bored." The ethical line: peak-end design is honest when the peak and the ending tell the truth about the experience, and manipulative when those two moments are used to cover up an experience that was genuinely terrible. Topics Covered 0:00 — The peak-end rule and a painful paradox 1:34 — Inside Kahneman and Redelmeier's 1996 study 2:55 — Experiencing self versus remembering self 4:07 — Rob's reluctant cruise vacation 5:47 — How cruises manufacture nightly peaks 7:38 — Overinvesting in the ending on purpose 9:55 — Cap the session while it's climbing 11:26 — The ethical line of designed memories 12:11 — Diagnostics: did you design your ending? Mentioned in This Episode The peak-end rule Daniel Kahneman and Donald Redelmeier's 1996 study on patients' memories of painful medical procedures The Octalysis Framework and the 8 Core Drives Core Drives in the Wild: Professor Game Free Guide Free Resources and Get in Touch Core Drives in the Wild: Professor Game Free Guide Get Daily Value on Your Email Let's chat about your gamification project YouTube LinkedIn Instagram Facebook Start Your Community on Skool for Free Ask a question

Linda Pastam wrote a marvelous poem called “Driving West” in which these lines appear:We are the pioneersof our own histories, drawnto the horizon as if it waited just for usthe way the young are drawnto the future, the old to the past.“…the way the young are drawn to the future, the old to the past.”I need you to hold those words tightly in your hands, even though they wriggle and thrash like slippery fishes anxious to escape your unfamiliar fingers and return to the quiet darkness where they can breathe water and feel entirely at home.Hold on to those words.Dr. Roger Sperry was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1981 for his documentation of the differences between the two hemispheres of our brains.One half of your brain puts you in touch with this Present Moment in this Real World.The other half puts you in touch with the Past and the Future in that mystical – magical – hallucinatory unreliable World of Imagination.Dr. Sperry discovered that what appears to a brain divided into two halves could more accurately be described as two separate, competing brains.In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Sperry said,“Each brain half appeared to have its own, largely separate, cognitive domain with its own private perceptual, learning and memory experiences, all of which were seemingly oblivious of corresponding events in the other hemisphere.”Dr. Sperry later said,“Each hemisphere of the brain is indeed a conscious system in its own right, perceiving, thinking, remembering, reasoning, willing, and emoting, all at a characteristically human level, and both the left and the right hemisphere may be conscious simultaneously in different, even in mutually conflicting,mental experiences that run along in parallel.”Regardless of which half you prefer, both halves are equally important.One half of your brain puts you in touch with This world.The other half puts you in touch with Possible worlds.One half puts you in touch with the sciences.The other half puts you in touch with the arts.Now let's get back to those wriggling fish that I asked you to hold.The Future to which the young are drawn, and the Past to which the old are attracted, are different time zones in the world of imagination.The young live in the brightness of the noonday sun. The old live in the twilight and remember the light of day.Most Americans attempt to persuade each other with facts. We do this because we trust Science and we worship Mathematics, and that is why we write such terrible ads.Most of us, most of the time, trust our instincts.We trust our intuitive hearts.This is what Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman described as System 1 or “Thinking Fast” in his book, “Thinking Fast and Slow.”Behavioral scientists estimate that roughly 90% to 95% of our daily decisions are made automatically and unconsciously using System 1 thinking.Most people don't want to admit it.In fact, most people refuse to accept it.But the scientific truth is that we make at least nine-tenths our decisions in that half of the brain where the darkwater fish glimmer effortlessly and thoughtlessly, silver and gold in the moonlight.Study the arts. Learn to win the heart.If you win the heart, the mind will follow. The mind will always create logic to justify what the heart has already decided.Roy H. WilliamsPaul Kesig uses the acronym L.O.V.E. to encapsulate his approach to sales.L is for celebrating Little wins.O is for asking Open-ended questions.V is for creating and communicating Value.E is for building an Emotional connection.Paul says that pairing love with sales strikes many people as contradictory. This is usually because their experiences with bad salespeople have taught them to truly hate the sales process.Listen in as Paul explains to roving reporter Rotbart that those who have adopted his approach have quickly discovered that L.O.V.E. really can spell success; MondayMorningRadio.com

End Strong. Finish Like It Matters—Because It Does. What if the way you end a conversation matters more than everything that happened before it? In this solo episode of the Empowered Team Podcast, Kari Schneider explores the powerful psychology behind the Peak-End Rule, a research-backed principle from Daniel Kahneman and Barbara Fredrickson showing that people don't remember the entire experience—they remember the most intense moment and how it ended. That means whether you're leading a team meeting, coaching an athlete, navigating conflict in a relationship, or ending your workday, your final moments shape what people carry forward. Kari shares powerful examples from: High-performance sports coaching Leadership and team culture Gottman relationship research Exercise psychology studies Real-world business meetings In this episode, you'll learn: Why difficult meetings can either destroy morale or build resilience The science behind the Peak-End Rule and duration neglect Why unresolved tension lingers longer than the actual conflict How strong leaders intentionally create better endings Three simple ways to leave people feeling empowered Kari's 3 Strategies to End Strong: ✔ Name the win — Anchor attention on what went right ✔ Repair before you close — Don't let unresolved tension become the lasting memory ✔ Design the last moment on purpose — Create endings people remember positively Key Takeaway: You may not control every moment of an interaction… But you can control how it ends. And that ending may determine whether people feel defeated, motivated, connected, or ready to return stronger. Your challenge: Before your next meeting, conversation, or difficult interaction, ask yourself: “What memory am I helping create?” Because the ending matters. And when you finish strong—you lead strong.   REFERENCES Fredrickson, B.L. & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1), 45–55. Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B.L., Schreiber, C.A., & Redelmeier, D.A. (1993). When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4(6), 401–405. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Gottman, J.M. & Silver, N. (1999). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work. Crown Publishers. Gottman, J.M. (2015). Principia Amoris: The New Science of Love. Routledge. Bastos, V., Ekkekakis, P., Andrade, A.J., & Teixeira, D.S. (2025). The peak and end rule, affect-related cognitions, enjoyment, and exercise frequency: A randomized controlled trial ancillary study. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2025.102963 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. W.H. Freeman.  

Whoever puts the first number, the first draft, or the first design in front of the team quietly decides where everyone else ends up. This week I dig into why anchoring bias steers our estimates, redesigns, and negotiations more than we realize, and what we can do about it.Ever set out to redesign a feature and ended up with the same product wearing a fresh coat of paint?There's a good chance you got anchored before the work even started.Anchoring bias is the tendency to lean too heavily on the first piece of information we encounter when making a decision. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman named it back in 1974, and the effect is stubborn. Their famous Wheel of Fortune study showed that even a totally random number could pull people's estimates toward it. Later research on experienced judges and real estate agents found the same pattern, even when the professionals swore the anchor hadn't influenced them at all. That denial is a big part of what makes this one so tricky.On product teams, this shows up constantly. The first draft of a PRD sets the frame every reviewer edits around. The old design becomes the gravity for the new one, and a supposed redesign quietly turns into a reskin. The first estimate in a planning meeting drags everybody else's numbers toward it.This week, on the Cognition Catalog, I walk through where anchoring comes from, why willpower and expertise barely help, and a handful of specific moves you can make to keep the first thing seen from automatically becoming the thing that wins. Give it a listen and let me know if you've caught yourself getting anchored lately.Topics:• 3:00 The Two-Week Estimate Trap• 4:45 What Is the Anchoring Effect?• 5:20 The Wheel of Fortune Experiment• 6:20 Why We Stop Adjusting Too Soon• 7:15 Even Experienced Judges Get Anchored• 8:10 The Real Estate Study• 9:00 How First Drafts Frame Everything• 9:35 Why Redesigns Turn Into Reskins• 9:55 The Status Quo Is an Anchor Nobody Chose• 10:30 Using Anchoring on Purpose• 11:25 Why Willpower Doesn't Fix It• 12:00 Five Things to Try With Your Team• 14:30 The Bottom Line—Thanks for listening! We hope you dug today's episode. If you liked what you heard, be sure to like and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts! And if you really enjoyed today's episode, why don't you leave a five-star review? Or tell some friends! It will help us out a ton.If you haven't already, sign up for our email list. We won't spam you. Pinky swear.• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Get a FREE audiobook AND support the show⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Support the show on Patreon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out show transcripts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out our website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠• ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on Stitcher⁠

Institutions confuse their own survival with the work of God. Dr. James Spencer and Dr. Ashish Varma close the diagnostic arc of this series with transaction, meaning the trade a person or an organization makes when preserving the platform becomes more important than the faithfulness the platform was built for. The anchor text is Jeroboam, who sets up worship at Dan and Bethel not to introduce a different god but to keep his people from traveling south. Varma's reading sharpens it: the question is whether Israel gathers around the presence of God or whether God is expected to gather around Israel. The conversation turns on how easily success gets read as approval. Spencer flags the language of institutions insisting that God needs them to be what they are now more than ever. Varma answers with Habakkuk, where God raises up Babylon in response to injustice and Babylon is still judged for how it behaves, and extends the point to a mission history in which the gospel genuinely spread through colonial expansion that was itself blessed by churches and was still indefensible. Being used is not the same as being approved. Spencer adds Nebuchadnezzar, named as God's servant and punished seventy years later, and the distinction holds: the exile was deserved, the brutality was not. What follows is uncomfortable for anyone who works in one of these places. Institutions may end because their course is run, or because they failed, or in spite of their faithfulness, and outcomes do not tell you which. Spencer, who consults with seminaries and Christian colleges, describes leaders trapped by buildings, accreditation, and systems, protecting a vehicle rather than the thing the vehicle was for. Nobody pursues a doctorate in order to preserve an institution. The question both men land on is whether the model has quietly been substituted for the mission. Resources The diagnosis guide: https://www.thinkingchristian.org/about/framework Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman- amazon.com Norman Wirzba on creation and nature- amazon.com Passages referenced: Genesis 6 and 11 and 15, Deuteronomy 8, 1 Kings 12 and 17, Jeremiah, Habakkuk, John 12 Follow and subscribe Subscribe to Thinking Christian: https://episodes.thinkingchristian.org Website: https://www.thinkingchristian.org Chapters 0:00 What transaction means 2:24 Jeroboam and the shortcut 3:10 Not a different god 7:18 Why it looked legitimate 10:42 Institutional inertia 13:44 In defense of the word lucky 15:36 Habakkuk and Babylon 19:52 Spread and consequence 20:19 Kahneman on luck 22:43 Nebuchadnezzar as servant 26:50 Two theological problems 31:34 Babel and human capability 33:50 The patience of God 35:51 Institutions that simply end 39:35 Ideology defines the questions 41:34 What higher ed is protecting 43:16 Substituting the vehicle 45:38 Faithful in the moment 47:56 Repentance and repudiation 50:15 Walking beside someone bigger 53:19 What comes next in the series Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

If "high performance" leads to long nights, little recovery time, and feelings of burnout, then it's time we rethink our relationship to work. In this episode, Kate Zipay, Associate Professor of Management and Associate Director of Research & Impact at the Purdue Center for Working Well, and Allie Gabriel, the Thomas J. Howatt Chair in Management and Director of the Purdue Center for Working Well, explore how we can break the cycle of depletion and fundamentally change our work culture. The conversation explores the idea of "intuitive working," explaining why some work feels more like eating a bag of chips than meaningful progress. Kate and Allie challenge organizations to stop rewarding overwork as a sign of commitment and provide practical ways L&D can help people work more intentionally for the benefit of themselves and their organization. Resources: See Allie and Kate at ATD Core4: https://core4.td.org/keynote-speakers/  Thinkers50: https://thinkers50.com/biographies/kate-zipay-allison-gabriel/ Substack: https://payingattentionwork.substack.com/  Kate's Website: https://www.katezipay.com/  Allie's Website: https://www.allisongabriel.com/  Matches Measure: A Burnout Assessment Tool: https://profcindymuir.com/matchesmeasure Books Mentioned: Hope Is the Strategy: The Underrated Skill That Transforms Work, Leadership, and Wellbeing by Jen Fisher Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

Lu brought the topic this week — and it's one of the most universally felt things in audio that nobody talks about directly: the feeling of not belonging in the room. Not because you don't have the skill. Not because you don't have the credits. Just because the feeling is there, and most people let it make the decision for them.The episode opens with Lu sharing what he keeps hearing in consultation calls — talented engineers at every level passing on sessions they would have handled just fine, because they didn't feel ready. Dee and Lu are direct about it: the gap between someone who is working and someone who isn't is almost never the quality of their mixing. It's almost always confidence and forward motion. They unpack what imposter syndrome actually looks like at different stages of a career — not just at the beginning, but also at the mid-level, when asking for help or shadowing someone starts to feel embarrassing in a way that holds people back just as much.From there, Dee reads from Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow — specifically the chapter on cognitive priming — and the episode gets genuinely fascinating. He walks through the Florida Effect study, where participants subconsciously primed with age-related words actually walked slower down a hallway without knowing it. Then the pencil experiment, where people forced into a smile by how they held a pencil in their teeth rated cartoons as funnier than those forced into a frown — without being aware their facial expression had changed at all. The implication is direct: acting calm and confident doesn't just make you look calm and confident to others. It statistically makes you feel calmer and more confident yourself.The conversation also takes an unexpected turn into money priming — how the mere presence of money-related imagery in your environment makes people measurably more independent, more self-reliant, and also more selfish and socially distant — and what that means for the environments engineers build and the mindsets they carry into sessions.It ends where it started: the feeling of not belonging is not evidence of not belonging. Send the email. Ask to sit in. Shadow the session. The only thing making the street look longer than it is, is you.SUBSCRIBE TO OUR PATREON FOR EXCLUSIVE CONTENT!⁠SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE⁠Join the ‘Mixing Music Podcast' Discord!HIRE DEE KEIHIRE LU⁠HIRE JAMES⁠Find Dee Kei and Lu on Social Media:Instagram: @DeeKeiMixes @MasteredbyLu @JamesParrishMixesTwitter: @DeeKeiMixes @MasteredbyLuThe Mixing Music Podcast is sponsored by ⁠Izotope⁠, ⁠Antares (Auto Tune)⁠, Sweetwater, ⁠Plugin Boutique⁠, ⁠Lauten Audio⁠, ⁠Filepass⁠, & ⁠Canva⁠The Mixing Music Podcast is a video and audio series on the art of music production and post-production. Dee Kei, Lu, and James are professionals in the Los Angeles music industry having worked with names like Odetari, 6arelyhuman, Trey Songz, Keyshia Cole, Benny the Butcher, carolesdaughter, Crying City, Daphne Loves Derby, Natalie Jane, charlieonnafriday, bludnymph, Lay Bankz, Rico Nasty, Ayesha Erotica, ATEEZ, Dizzy Wright, Kanye West, Blackway, The Game, Dylan Espeseth, Tara Yummy, Asteria, Kets4eki, Shaquille O'Neal, Republic Records, Interscope Records, Arista Records, Position Music, Capital Records, Mercury Records, Universal Music Group, apg, Hive Music, Sony Music, and many others.This podcast is meant to be used for educational purposes only. This show is filmed and recorded at Dee Kei's private studio in North Hollywood, California. If you would like to sponsor the show, please email us at ⁠deekeimixes@gmail.com⁠.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

For Part Two in our Continual Learning mini-series, Dr. Nadav Amir of The University of Ottowa joins me and guest co-host Dr. Adam Safron of Tufts University for a trialogue on the fundamental role of goals in intelligence.Nadav draws on behavioral neuroscience, Buddhist philosopher Dharmakirti, control and information theory, and John Vervaeke's work on “relevance realization” to formally articulate what many wisdom traditions have argued for millennia: what you take to be “reality” — your world and self — is a function of goal-based representations, state descriptions and reward functions create each other, and “what is” and “what do I care about” are two sides of the same thing. You can't separate what you want from what you experience and what you are capable of. But this means that if you change your goals your reality will shift, and your sense of self with it. The opposite is also true: change the way you organize the the ineffable structure of reality into a conceptual framework, and you'll care about very different things. Thanks to the pace of change we're living through this kind of transformative experience now, so it's a good time to ask:If selves are a kind of falsification, why do we have them in the first place? Does AI need goals of its own in order to be truly intelligent?And perhaps the deepest question we ask in this episode:How if at all can we develop better frameworks for deciding what we want our intelligent machines to become — and who we want to become alongside them?Thanks to the Survival and Flourishing Fund for their support of this mini-series. If you'd like more of this kind of work in the world:✨ Support my research, writing, and podcast with a tax-deductible donation✨ Become a founding member to access my online courses, including Jurassic Worlding and How To Live In The Future✨ Hire me for public speaking or advisory work with your organization✨ Browse and buy the books we mention on the show at Bookshop.org✨ Stream and download my tunes at artist-owned music co-op Subvert.fm✨ Continual Learning theme song: “Substrate Dynamics” by Neon Chameleon✨ Learn more about how we're applying these ideas at Atlas Research Group, my team building sovereign infrastructure for collective intelligenceChapters0:00:00 Teaser0:01:48 Intro0:05:42 Who is Nadav Amir?0:08:15 Why we can't separate goals from descriptions0:15:32 The Ugly Duckling Theorem & why taxonomy is not reality0:25:07 Evolution, karma, and non-conceptual awareness0:31:04 If selfhood is wrong, when is it practical?0:34:14 Suffering without a self & the value of wrong descriptions0:38:14 Non-conceptual experience & active inference0:41:07 Multiple nested hierarchical descriptions in minds & economies0:46:07 What's missing from current approaches?0:50:09 Does greater agency mean better optimization or greater adaptability?0:57:04 Empowerment-based causal learning without a ground truth0:59:06 Intermission0:59:58 Transformative experiences & multiple levels of granularity1:05:19 No fixed models, no fixed environments1:10:55 Fundamental tradeoffs1:16:57 Reverse-engineering the centered self1:19:54 Does AI need goals to be intelligent and can we control AI if it has them?1:26:47 Does Nadav's framework pertain for all possible minds?1:32:37 Mind as a property of collectives & goals as embedded in environments1:41:33 How can Nadav's framework improve AI governance discourse?1:48:59 OutroMentioned ResourcesA Dharmakīrtian Model of Relevance Realization in Cognitive Agentsby Nadav Amir & John DunneAn exchange of letters on the role of noise in collective intelligenceby Daniel Kahneman et al.Cognitive glues are shared models of relative scarcities: the economics of collective intelligenceby Michael Levin & Benjamin LyonsReverse-Engineering The Centered Selfby L.A. Paul et al.Agency and Experience: Buddhist and Cognitive Perspectivesa Yin Cheng Conference @ PrincetonKnowing and Guessingby Satosi WatanabeOntological Laughter: Comedy as Experimental Possibility Spaceby Timothy MortonSelves as Perspectives: From Biological Life to Superintelligence and a Bodhisattva Projectby Thomas Doctor et al.What The Frog's Eye Tells The Frog's Brainby J. Y. Lettvin et al.The Center for the Study of Apparent SelvesExplore the entire open-access special issue here:And whether you read the papers or not, be sure to check out this illuminating interactive discourse map by Van Bettauer of Ideoscopic to help you navigate where these researchers agree, disagree, and point toward future study:(Long-time fans will also want to check out his re-imagined interface for AskFutureFossils.com, complete with simulated debates between my guests!) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelgarfield.substack.com/subscribe

From the archive: In this 2019 episode, Sam Harris speaks with Daniel Kahneman at the Beacon Theatre in NYC. They discuss the replication crisis in science, System 1 and System 2, where intuitions reliably fail, expert intuitions, the power of framing, moral illusions, anticipated regret, the asymmetry between threats and opportunities, the utility of worrying, removing obstacles to wanted behaviors, the remembering self vs the experiencing self, improving the quality of gossip, and other topics. If the Making Sense podcast logo in your player is BLACK, you can SUBSCRIBE to gain access to all full-length episodes at samharris.org/subscribe.

Last week I told you to stick with things. This week I want to tell you about the afternoon Daniel Kahneman sat in a room, was handed the exact information that should have made him quit, and carried on as if nothing had happened. It cost him eight years, and the thing they were building was never used. I try to work out honestly which one of us is right.Crossroads Publishing Group is my press. If you're sitting on a manuscript, a proposal, or an idea you can't shake loose, take a look at crossroadspublishing.group. And if you decide it isn't for you, that's a real answer and a good one. The difficulty in life is the choice. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit chadprevost.substack.com

My next book, Productiveness, arrives this September. It's about the difference between doing more and doing what matters, and how we lost the ability to tell them apart. I'll send the release date the day it's set. Visit https://mikevardy.com/productiveness to learn more.Logic is beautiful and it's also almost never enough. That's the tension running through this entire conversation — the idea that we want our decisions to be purely logical because it's simple and concrete, but almost no real situation in a human life actually has the structure logic requires. I've believed for a long time that reason lives somewhere in the nuanced middle between logic and emotion, and I wanted to sit down with someone who's spent a career studying exactly that boundary.Tom Griffiths is a Princeton professor and the author of the new book The Laws of Thought: The Quest for a Mathematical Theory of the Mind. If you know his earlier book, Algorithms to Live By, this one is the foundation underneath it — the deeper, denser history of how mathematics has tried, and often failed, to fully capture how minds work. We covered logic's limits, David Hume's riddle about induction, why AI systems fail in strange and "jagged" ways humans don't, and how a 200-year-old idea from George Boole ended up, several generations later, inside modern neural networks through his own great-great-grandson.Six Discussion PointsLogic only works when you already have all the information you need and the conclusion is certain — which describes almost none of the decisions we actually make as humans.Amos Tversky's early work on similarity (a horse is more "like" a camel than a camel is "like" a horse) laid the groundwork for the heuristics-and-biases research he later did with Daniel Kahneman."Productivity," in the cognitive science sense, means a system's ability to generate something genuinely new — which is closer to creativity than to output.David Hume's riddle of induction shows we can't logically justify assuming the future will resemble the past — we simply have a habit of expecting it to.AI systems demonstrate "jagged intelligence": strong on one problem, mysteriously weak on the problem right next to it, because they arrive at solutions through a completely different process than human brains do.Reading old, "outdated" books remains valuable specifically because they capture the right questions — not just today's most efficient answers.Three Connection PointsThe Laws of Thought by Tom GriffithsAlgorithms to Live By by Tom Griffiths and Brian ChristianStop Managing Your Time, Start Crafting Your Time InsteadIf there's one thing to sit with after this conversation, it's that fuzziness isn't a flaw in how we think — it's often the most accurate description available. Tom's book gives you the historical throughline for why that's true, and honestly, it's a book you want to take your time with, not tear through. Give it the same patience the ideas in it deserve.Your inbox is a receiving dock, not a warehouse. Three moves, seconds a message, and only what needs you today is left standing. That's the promise of The 10 Second Inbox. Get it at https://mikevardy.com/10secondinbox today.

Ep 300 Peacewarts Social Chemistry 101 - The Cracked Cauldron (Orientation & Class 1) We open the Department of Social Chemistry with an orientation on the alchemy of connection and the dangers of the toxic brew of righteousness. We explore how high-stress biology narrows human perception through the auditory gate and tunnel hearing. Using the contrast between the 1853 Crimean Crisis and the 1896 Battle of Adwa, we examine how to stabilize volatile reactions by addressing biology before logic. Homework: Look up the term auditory gating and its relation to stress. Write down one question about any of this episode's topics. If you don't have a question, write 'no question.' Optional: Journal about a personal experience with tunnel hearing or perception narrowing. Books: If you'd like to read more on this subject, some book suggestions are Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, an essential landmark work detailing how high-arousal stress causes cognitive narrowing and shifts processing away from logical analysis, and The Chemistry of Connection by Judith E. Glaser, an insightful exploration of how neurochemistry dictates social trust, communication barriers, and relational stability under pressure. Learning Topics: The Alchemy of Connection; Empathy as a Scientific Tool; The Auditory Gate and Tunnel Hearing; The Trap of the Toxic Brew; The 1853 Crimean Crisis; The Battle of Adwa (1896). Join the Community / Get the Books: www.AvisKalfsbeek.com Podcast Music: Javier Peke Rodriguez “I am late, madame Curie” https://open.spotify.com/artist/3QuyqfXEKzrpUl6b12I3KW

The Learning Leader Show with Ryan Hawk www.LearningLeader.com This is brought to you by Insight Global. If you need to hire one person, hire a team of people, or transform your business through Talent or Technical Services, Insight Global's team of 30,000 people around the world has the hustle and grit to deliver. My Guest: Jack Raines is a writer and investor. At 24, he quit his corporate finance job at UPS, bought a one-way ticket to Barcelona, and spent the next year traveling through 25 countries while writing a newsletter that grew to hundreds of thousands of readers. He went on to earn an MBA from Columbia, help build Sherwood News at Robinhood, and join the venture capital firm Slow Ventures, where he invests in creators. His first book, Young Money: A Field Guide to Finding Wealth and Purpose in Your Twenties, is out now. Key Learnings Jack's Grandma Ruth took him to Africa when he was 11. She was in her late 60s. She had the money. She said: "I can spend it on you now or leave it to you when I'm dead. This is better." Money has no value until you exchange it for something. We need to decide what we want that to be. Every year of your 20s is worth $10 million. (Nikita Bier) You'll never have this window of flexibility again. Say yes to interesting experiences in your 20s. Your income is going to climb exponentially anyway. Don't save $500 at the cost of a memory. Move to where the action is. Jack moved to New York for business school. Then San Francisco for a job. Then back to New York. High slope of learning. High slope of contact with good people. Network amplifies ability. It doesn't create it. A million times zero is still zero. A million times two is two million. The only real risk is not doing anything. Every opportunity in life comes through a person. The best networking tool is doing great work. How did Gracie Abrams open for Taylor Swift on the Eras Tour? She wrote great music. Taylor noticed. Taylor called. In your 20s, potential is valued at a premium. In your 30s and beyond, proof of work matters more. Experimenting when you are young speed-runs the learning curve. You develop the skill of taking shots. That skill compounds.  It's much harder to start being risk-on at 35 if you weren't risk-on at 25. Personal finance is simple. Spend less than you make. Build a six-month emergency fund. Take the 401(k) match. Contribute to your IRA. Don't gamble on individual stocks. Stay invested. Stay employed. Don't go into credit card debt. Don't get divorced. User error interrupts compounding more than anything else. Set up the boring foundation. Then stop touching it. Most retirees never touch the principal. (Nick Maggiulli) They stack money out of fear, then die with more than they started with. Daniel Kahneman on loss aversion: the pain of losing $100 is twice as strong as the joy of gaining $100. That's why people over-save. Your burn rate at 70 is way lower than at 45. No kids at home. No tuition. Less energy to do stuff. Plan accordingly. Bill Perkins' Die with Zero philosophy... A useful insight was in the first chapter: his best friend took a payday loan at 23 to backpack Europe for three months. Same career trajectory as Bill. Just way more fun at 24. People don't want to think about their mortality. So they focus on making the number go up. If you actually internalized that you're going to die, you'd be more intentional about your time and money. Jack's champagne moment a year from now: He sells a ton of copies of it. And it's still relevant. Reflection Questions Where are you spending your best years earning money you'll never actually enjoy? What would change if you accepted that your peak-energy window is closing? Where are you standing still because the risk of moving feels bigger than the risk of staying? What does the only real risk (not doing anything) look like in your life right now? What is the great work you could do that would make the right person notice you?  More Learning #539: Jack Raines - Playing Infinite Games, Living Life Backwards & Building Your Platform #548: Nick Maggiulli - The Power of Compounding #373: Bill Perkins - How To Get All You Can From Your Money & Your Life Podcast Chapters 00:00 The Price of Becoming - Pre-Order Now!  01:38 Meet Jack Raines  03:27 Grandma Ruth Took Him to Africa When He Was 11  08:04 Why Every Year of Your 20s Is Worth $10 Million  12:12 Quitting UPS at 24 for a One-Way Ticket to Barcelona  15:10 How to Increase Your Surface Area for Luck  20:00 Where You Live Is Who You Become  22:00 Why Memories Compound Faster Than Money  26:23 The Financial Stability Basics Nobody Wants to Hear  29:00 Get the Boring Stuff on Autopilot  31:15 Why Retirees Never Touch the Principal  34:02 The Bad Trade of Saving During Your Best Years  37:36 The Bill Perkins Die With Zero Debate  39:15 Experimentation, Agency, and the Only Real Risk  42:53 The Best Networking Tool in the World: Do Great Work  44:10 The Champagne Question: Making the Book Matter a Year From Now  45:53 EOPC

In this episode, theoretical neuroscientist Vivienne Ming discusses her new book, Robot Proof - When Machines Have All the Answers, Build Better People.  The conversation examines the intersection of artificial intelligence and knowledge work, exploring how professionals can adapt to an increasingly automated economy. The discussion contrasts the limitations of basic AI task automation with the advantages of human-AI collaboration—the "cyborg" model—for solving complex, ill-posed problems. Ming highlights her research on forecasting market outcomes, the critical role of endogenous motivation, and how the legal industry and other elite professions must rethink entry-level training. Key Topics Discussed Theoretical Neuroscience and Early AI: Ming's background and the evolution of machine learning models from early academic research to modern agentic AI. The Polymarket Experiment: An analysis comparing the forecasting accuracy of standalone AI, unassisted humans, and human-AI collaborators, revealing the superiority of deep human-machine integration. Automation vs. Augmentation: The pitfalls of the traditional "human-in-the-loop" model and why replacing menial tasks often neglects essential human problem-solving skills. Well-Posed vs. Ill-Posed Problems: Identifying the specific areas where AI excels (algorithmic, factual answers) and where human intelligence remains superior (navigating uncertainty and undefined parameters). Labor Disruption and Economic Shifts: Examining historical technological revolutions, the Jevons paradox, and the future demand for specific, highly adaptable human skill sets. Endogenous Motivation: How internal drivers like curiosity, resilience, and perspective-taking predict professional success more accurately than standard extrinsic incentives. Practical AI Strategies: Actionable methods for professionals to refine their skills, including using AI as a critical "nemesis" to challenge assumptions and encourage deep, effortful processing. The Future of Elite Professions: The macro-level challenges facing organizations in developing junior talent—such as associate attorneys—when the entry-level tasks traditionally used for training are automated. Things We Talk About in this Episode Socos: Vivienne Ming's philanthropy and research newsletter (socos.org). Thinking, Fast and Slow: Authored by Daniel Kahneman. Anthropic Research: A study published in Science detailing the productivity of AI-assisted programmers. BCG AI Study: Research analyzing AI integration and performance among management consultants. Raj Chetty: Economic research regarding peer role modeling, education, and socioeconomic mobility.  

This is A Fan Favorite Rerun Episode I had an incredible conversation with Chris Voss, a former FBI hostage negotiator, in this week's episode of Successful with ADHD. Chris shared so many valuable insights on communication, empathy, and understanding - topics that are very relevant for the ADHD community.Chris is a former Lead FBI Negotiator and dynamic speaker who debunks the biggest myths around negotiation. Chris engages all groups with captivating stories, insights, and useful tips for business and everyday life. Chris has lectured on negotiation at business schools across the country and has been seen on ABC, CBS, CNN, and Fox News. Chris has also been featured in Forbes, Time, Fast Company, and Inc. Chris's Keynotes are based on his book Never Split The Difference©.Episode Highlights:[01:06] – Starstruck by my guest Chris Voss and why his book means so much to me and my husband.[02:48] - Chris emphasizes the importance of listening and paying attention to more than just words in a conversation.[03:50] - Strategies Chris suggests for people with ADHD to improve focus when listening intently.[06:37] - How turning communication into a "game" can help capture wandering attention.[08:39] - The challenges of reading body language accurately via video calls compared to in-person interactions.[10:00] - Tips for maintaining engagement and energy on long video calls.[11:05] - Using the "mirroring" technique to bring attention back to key points you may have missed.[13:52] - Why some personalities may not enjoy being "mirrored" and prefer different approaches.[17:22] - The strategic use of apologies before interruptions or assertions.[19:10] - Why apologies shouldn't necessarily be seen as a sign of weakness.[20:10] - Whether communication tactics can be used effectively when both parties are aware of them.[21:33] - Chris explains prospect theory and loss aversion based on the work of Daniel Kahneman.[25:14] - The importance of empathy and appreciation when using the powerful tool of invoking loss.[26:34] - The benefits of handwriting over typing for memory retention and focus.[29:49] - Practicing mental hygiene to counter our innate negativity bias.[32:33] - Tuning into emotions rather than words when listening.[35:33] - Paying attention to the "emotional timeline" based on the type of feelings being expressed.[36:01] - Strategies for bridging disagreements by ensuring people feel truly heard.[40:03] - Thoughts on reducing conflict through understanding and empathy for all sides.[40:56] - Whether world peace can ever be achieved.[43:13] - The importance of making people feel heard in communication.Connect with Chris Voss:•Black Swan Ltd - Chris Voss's company website: www.blackswanltd.com•The Edge weekly email newsletter - get free negotiation tips from Chris•Never Split the Difference - Chris's bestselling bookI loved diving into so many facets of communication and empathy with an expert like Chris. Let me know if you found this episode valuable by leaving a review! And don't forget to follow along on social media @coachingwithbrooke. See you next time!

What would Dee Kei and Lu actually do if they had to start their music careers completely over today — same age, same responsibilities, but zero industry knowledge, zero connections, and zero credits? That's the question at the center of this episode, and the answers get surprisingly deep.The conversation starts practical: Lu makes the case for going straight to the top and finding the most credible working professional you can — shadowing, interning, and learning how the industry actually moves before spending a dime on gear. Dee adds his own counterpoint, arguing that hands-on reps with real people, even local ones, build something an internship can't always give you early on. The two go back and forth on the internship vs. DIY debate in a way that's genuinely useful for anyone trying to figure out where to start.But the episode goes further than tactics. Dee pulls from Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman to break down how self-control, delayed gratification, and the ability to focus attention are more predictive of long-term success than raw intelligence — and what that means for how you show up in the early days of your career. They also get into the fatherhood premium, what motivation looks like when the stakes are real, and why community college might be one of the most underrated networking moves for someone starting over in their 30s.The episode closes on something more philosophical: the difference between genuinely wanting a career in music and just thinking you should have one — and why knowing that distinction early could save you years of wasted energy or redirect you toward something even more sustainable.Whether you're 19 with a laptop and a dream or 35 reconsidering your path, this episode will challenge how you think about starting.SUBSCRIBE TO OUR PATREON FOR EXCLUSIVE CONTENT!⁠SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE⁠Join the ‘Mixing Music Podcast' Discord!HIRE DEE KEIHIRE LU⁠HIRE JAMES⁠Find Dee Kei and Lu on Social Media:Instagram: @DeeKeiMixes @MasteredbyLu @JamesParrishMixesTwitter: @DeeKeiMixes @MasteredbyLuThe Mixing Music Podcast is sponsored by ⁠Izotope⁠, ⁠Antares (Auto Tune)⁠, Sweetwater, ⁠Plugin Boutique⁠, ⁠Lauten Audio⁠, ⁠Filepass⁠, & ⁠Canva⁠The Mixing Music Podcast is a video and audio series on the art of music production and post-production. Dee Kei, Lu, and James are professionals in the Los Angeles music industry having worked with names like Odetari, 6arelyhuman, Trey Songz, Keyshia Cole, Benny the Butcher, carolesdaughter, Crying City, Daphne Loves Derby, Natalie Jane, charlieonnafriday, bludnymph, Lay Bankz, Rico Nasty, Ayesha Erotica, ATEEZ, Dizzy Wright, Kanye West, Blackway, The Game, Dylan Espeseth, Tara Yummy, Asteria, Kets4eki, Shaquille O'Neal, Republic Records, Interscope Records, Arista Records, Position Music, Capital Records, Mercury Records, Universal Music Group, apg, Hive Music, Sony Music, and many others.This podcast is meant to be used for educational purposes only. This show is filmed and recorded at Dee Kei's private studio in North Hollywood, California. If you would like to sponsor the show, please email us at ⁠deekeimixes@gmail.com⁠.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Get the 200+ Page Optimal Living Daily Workbook (PDF) — Free. Want to turn today's episode into an actionable plan? Join the Optimal Living Weekly newsletter and I'll send you our 200-page digital workbook immediately. It's packed with the best takeaways from the show, formatted for easy reading and implementation at home. Get your free PDF workbook here: ⁠⁠https://oldpodcast.eo.page/join⁠ Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 4088: Stephen Warley argues that replacing goals with intentions can reduce anxiety and create more lasting personal change by shifting the focus from chasing temporary outcomes to building habits that support how you want to feel every day. Through personal stories and practical examples, he shows why intentions encourage curiosity, flexibility, and fulfillment while helping you stay motivated regardless of the final result. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://lifeskillsthatmatter.com/stop-making-goals-set-intentions/ Quotes to ponder: "Goals are hits of sugar that make you feel a temporary high. Intentions are wholesome meals that make you feel satisfied all the time." "Goals feel like an obligation. Intentions feel like an invitation to explore." "Chasing goals makes you feel like you are never enough. Intentions empower you to be yourself." Episode references: Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton – High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1011492107 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Get the 200+ Page Optimal Living Daily Workbook (PDF) — Free. Want to turn today's episode into an actionable plan? Join the Optimal Living Weekly newsletter and I'll send you our 200-page digital workbook immediately. It's packed with the best takeaways from the show, formatted for easy reading and implementation at home. Get your free PDF workbook here: ⁠⁠https://oldpodcast.eo.page/join⁠ Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 4088: Stephen Warley argues that replacing goals with intentions can reduce anxiety and create more lasting personal change by shifting the focus from chasing temporary outcomes to building habits that support how you want to feel every day. Through personal stories and practical examples, he shows why intentions encourage curiosity, flexibility, and fulfillment while helping you stay motivated regardless of the final result. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://lifeskillsthatmatter.com/stop-making-goals-set-intentions/ Quotes to ponder: "Goals are hits of sugar that make you feel a temporary high. Intentions are wholesome meals that make you feel satisfied all the time." "Goals feel like an obligation. Intentions feel like an invitation to explore." "Chasing goals makes you feel like you are never enough. Intentions empower you to be yourself." Episode references: Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton – High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1011492107 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Get the 200+ Page Optimal Living Daily Workbook (PDF) — Free. Want to turn today's episode into an actionable plan? Join the Optimal Living Weekly newsletter and I'll send you our 200-page digital workbook immediately. It's packed with the best takeaways from the show, formatted for easy reading and implementation at home. Get your free PDF workbook here: ⁠⁠https://oldpodcast.eo.page/join⁠ Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 4088: Stephen Warley argues that replacing goals with intentions can reduce anxiety and create more lasting personal change by shifting the focus from chasing temporary outcomes to building habits that support how you want to feel every day. Through personal stories and practical examples, he shows why intentions encourage curiosity, flexibility, and fulfillment while helping you stay motivated regardless of the final result. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://lifeskillsthatmatter.com/stop-making-goals-set-intentions/ Quotes to ponder: "Goals are hits of sugar that make you feel a temporary high. Intentions are wholesome meals that make you feel satisfied all the time." "Goals feel like an obligation. Intentions feel like an invitation to explore." "Chasing goals makes you feel like you are never enough. Intentions empower you to be yourself." Episode references: Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton – High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1011492107 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Cet été, Émotions (au travail) prend des vacances. Mais pendant ce temps-là, découvrez chaque semaine un épisode du podcast Émotions qui résonne particulièrement avec notre vie professionnelle.Cet épisode a été initialement diffusé le 5 janvier 2026 sur le flux ÉmotionsLa nouvelle année commence, et on veut changer sa vie pour la rendre meilleure. Est-ce qu'il vaut mieux opter pour les bonnes vieilles résolutions, ou prendre de grandes décisions pour changer carrément de direction ? Trancher rapidement et nettement, un peu comme un pansement qu'il faut retirer d'un coup sans laisser trop de place à la peur ? Est-ce qu'il vaut mieux peser le pour et le contre ou faire enfin confiance à son intuition ?Pour répondre à ces questions, Marie Misset fait appel au psychologue du travail Adrien Chignard, qui s'est penché sur la question des changements de trajectoire et qui a coordonné l'ouvrage Burn Out. Des histoires vécues pour le prévenir, l'éviter, s'en sortir. Elle interroge également le psychiatre Frédéric Fanget, auteur du livre Oser. Thérapie de la confiance en soi, et l'économiste Olivier Sibony, professeur à HEC et à Oxford, notamment co-auteur de Noise. Pourquoi nous faisons des erreurs de jugements et comment les éviter avec le prix Nobel d'économie Daniel Kahneman. À travers les témoignages de Sarah, Lize et Vianney qui ont changé de vie du jour au lendemain, elle questionne les notions d'intuition et d'impulsion, la théorie du step by step, notre propre expertise sur nous-mêmes, notre rapport au risque et les biais cognitifs avec lesquels nous devons composer.Pour aller plus loin : L'article “The Art of Decision-Making” de Joshua Rothman paru dans le New Yorker L'article d'Audrey Parmentier sur les “repentis de la reconversion professionnelle” paru dans Le MondeEt si vous ne savez pas quoi écouter ensuite, on vous suggère l'épisode "Peut-on être sûr·e d'avoir pris la bonne décision ?"Si vous aussi vous voulez nous raconter votre histoire dans Émotions, écrivez-nous en remplissant ce formulaire ou à l'adresse hello@louiemedia.comÉmotions est un podcast de Louie Media. Marie Misset a tourné, écrit et monté cet épisode. La réalisation sonore est de Guillaume Girault. Le générique est réalisé par Clémence Reliat, à partir d'un extrait d'En Sommeil de Jaune. Elsa Berthault est en charge de la production.Publicités et Partenariats : creative@louiemedia.comPour avoir des news de Louie, des recos podcasts et culturelles, abonnez-vous à notre newsletter en cliquant ici. Vous souhaitez soutenir la création et la diffusion des projets de Louie Media ? Vous pouvez le faire via le Club Louie. Vous pouvez aussi vous abonner à Louie+ sur Apple Podcasts pour écouter les épisodes sans publicités et nos séries en avant-première. Chaque participation est précieuse. Nous vous proposons un soutien sans engagement, annulable à tout moment, soit en une seule fois, soit de manière régulière. Au nom de toute l'équipe de Louie : MERCI !Suivez Émotions sur Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Deezer.Suivez Louie Media sur Instagram, Facebook, et YouTube.Mots-clés : décisions - changements de vie - psychologie - émotions - choix de vie Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

John continues his conversation with Don Weber. They dig into body language, how to tell if someone is comfortable or stressed, and why leaders must learn to really listen and watch for small signals in people's faces and behavior. Don also shares some simple habits for better communication. In the previous episode, Don shared how he unexpectedly entered the world of intelligence, the dangers he faced, the lessons he learned about trust, motivation, and human behavior, and why communication is one of the most important skills anyone can develop. Listen to this episode to learn more: [00:00] - Why body language is an underused communication skill [03:05] - "If somebody pauses, they're lying." [05:50] - Why leaders need to understand body language and micro-expressions [07:54] - The best source of information [08:28] - Essential components of great communication [10:14] - You don't always have to speak [12:40] - Why so many people are bad at communication [14:12] - Customer service with AI [15:20] - Role of faith in Don's work and business   [18:49] - "I was wrong" vs. "I'm sorry" [20:05] - Don's time in intelligence work was very dangerous [22:30] - PTSD-like effects Don had to deal with [23:15] - Is there a book coming? [25:04] - What success really means [26:42] - #1 daily habit [29:27] - Traits of a great leader [31:09] - Best way to connect with Don [34:28] - Wrap-up NOTABLE QUOTES: "If we just learn to love, love your neighbor as yourself, just the Golden Rule: treat others the way you want to be treated, we'd live in such a paradise. It would be such a better world." "If you want to get your agenda across, if you want to get something done, you're not going to do it fighting; you're going to get it done through collaboration." "A great leader can't do everything themselves. They need people to do it, and you've got to be able to delegate to the right people. So, you have to be very good at reading character and choosing the right people to do your work." "If you don't have the bad, you don't have anything to compare from. If you've only had it good, you have nothing to compare it to." "If you want to change your emotions, the quickest way is to change your body. Take care of your physiology, and that should help take care of your emotions." "You have freedom of speech, but I think it's a lot smarter to think about what you're going to say before you say it." "Do what you say you're going to do, even if people don't like it." BOOK MENTIONED: Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (https://a.co/d/06NodgCe) USEFUL LINKS: https://drwebercoaching.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/don-weber/ https://www.instagram.com/drweberspeaks/ https://www.facebook.com/DRWeberPerformance https://www.youtube.com/@drweberspeaks https://linktr.ee/drwebercoach CONNECT WITH JOHN Website - https://iamjohnhulen.com    LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnhulen Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/johnhulen    Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/johnhulen    X - https://x.com/johnhulen    YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLX_NchE8lisC4NL2GciIWA    EPISODE CREDITS Intro and Outro music provided by Jeff Scheetz - https://jeffscheetz.com/ 

In the final episode of our Robert Cialdini series, we explore the extraordinary legacy of one of behavioral science's most influential thinkers. We revisit the seven Principles of Influence through real-world business examples, hear how Cialdini's ideas inspired organizations around the world, and learn why colleagues like Angela Duckworth, Adam Grant, Dan Pink, and Katie Milkman believe his greatest contribution goes far beyond research. Join us as we celebrate the ideas and the person who helped shape modern behavioral science. Topics [0:00] From Utility Bills to Global Impact [9:17] Full Cycle Social Psychology Explained [16:00] Why Business Became a Partner in Behavioral Science [22:47] The Seven Principles in Action [30:20] Behavior Change for Good and Real-World Research [45:49] The Ethical Compass Behind Influence [52:39] Why Influence Still Matters Today [58:02] A Career That Changed Behavioral Science [1:04:08] Daniel Kahneman on Cialdini's Legacy [1:08:04] Closing Thoughts ©2026 Behavioral Grooves Links Join us on Substack! Join the Behavioral Grooves community Subscribe to Behavioral Grooves on YouTube Support Behavioral Grooves

Ethical persuasion expert Patrick Van Der Burght reveals why most business "nos" are really indecision in disguise, and how entrepreneurs can turn hesitation into a yes. In this episode of Play Big Faster, Patrick, a Cialdini Institute founding member with 25+ years training persuasion science, breaks down Daniel Kahneman's System One and System Two thinking behind why up to 95% of decisions happen on autopilot. You'll learn the seven universal principles of persuasion, how reciprocity and unity build trust, why social proof works best when testimonials mirror your audience, the authority mistake most business owners make, and a scarcity tactic that can double response rates. Watch the full conversation with Patrick Van Der Burght now on Play Big Faster.

AI is changing how leaders think, decide, and work with their teams. But as John Cutler points out in this conversation, the real shift is not simply about faster answers or more productivity. It is about becoming more aware of the judgment systems we already use, often without noticing.In this episode of the Unlearn Podcast, I'm joined again by John Cutler, product thinker, systems explorer, and Head of Product at Dotwork. We explore how AI can help leaders expose their thinking, pressure test decisions, and build stronger team judgment, while also making it easier to accelerate poor habits, shallow work, and false confidence.John shares practical examples from product prioritization, survey design, objection handling, and team collaboration to show where AI can genuinely improve decision quality. We also get into the tradeoffs: why AI can make work feel like “hard mode,” why downtime still matters, and why intentionality is becoming one of the most important leadership skills in this moment.Key TakeawaysAI exposes how leaders make decisions: AI tends to amplify the decision system already there. When a leader's thinking is clear, AI can help make it visible and reusable; when it is vague, AI can make that vagueness move faster.Judgment is built differently depending on the situation: John explains that some judgment comes from repetition and tacit pattern recognition, while other judgment develops through coaching, discussion, and working alongside people with more experience.AI can help turn intuition into something teams can use: John's example of documenting his product prioritization heuristic shows how AI can help make internal judgment concrete. The value comes from helping others understand why certain decisions matter, not just what the decision is.Better AI use starts with knowing what you know: John contrasts product prioritization, where he has deep experience, with survey design, where he knows there is established expertise to draw from. The skill is recognizing whether AI should extend your own judgment or help you borrow from a domain expert.Teams using AI well can raise decision quality: Barry shares how AI can help teams pressure test assumptions, run scenarios, and ask disconfirming questions without losing momentum. The real advantage comes when AI strengthens collaboration rather than replacing it.AI can also accelerate bad instincts: John warns that AI can make poor thinking look polished. A team can paste AI onto an existing process and call it transformation without changing how decisions are actually made.Intentionality matters more than productivity: AI can reduce friction, but it can also remove the pauses where judgment forms. Leaders need to design space for reflection, not just optimize for more output.Additional InsightsIndividual metacognition: This is understanding how you think and make decisions. John's examples show that leaders get more value from AI when they can first make their own judgment system visible.Social metacognition: This is understanding that other people think, perceive, and engage differently. AI becomes more useful when it supports the conversation between people instead of flattening everyone into the same process.Computational metacognition: This is understanding what LLMs are good at, where they fail, and how to work with them responsibly. John argues that leaders need this skill so they know when to trust AI, when to challenge it, and when to bring in human expertise.Objection handling as a repeatable system: John's team did not ask AI to create a generic sales guide. They role-played real objections, captured the discussion, compared their responses against best practices, and turned that into a system that could review future calls.The deeper lesson: AI becomes more useful when it is connected to real work, real context, and a team's actual judgment. Without that grounding, it risks creating more output without improving the quality of decisions.Episode Highlights00:00 – Episode RecapJohn Cutler opens with a story about how judgment often comes from repetition and tacit signals, not neat frameworks. The episode explores what happens when AI starts making those hidden decision systems visible.02:02 – Guest Introduction: John CutlerBarry welcomes back John Cutler, product thinker, systems explorer, and Head of Product at Dotwork, for a conversation about judgment, decision making, and collaboration in the age of AI.04:59 – How Judgment Gets BuiltJohn explains that judgment develops differently depending on the context: through individual practice, repeated exposure, mentorship, team discussion, and comparison against examples of quality.08:58 – Making Prioritization Thinking VisibleJohn shares how he used AI to document his own scoring heuristic for product prioritization, giving a teammate deeper insight into why certain ideas mattered more than others.12:11 – Knowing When to Borrow ExpertiseUsing survey design as an example, John explains how AI can help access existing expert knowledge when you are not the expert yourself. The key is being honest about the limits of your own judgment.13:56 – From Answers to Better QuestionsBarry reflects on the shift from using AI to get answers toward using it to challenge thinking, improve decisions, and bring stronger questions to colleagues.18:04 – Why Better Surveys Lead to Better DecisionsJohn explains how improving a survey from average to strong can materially change the quality of insight a team gets back, which then affects the quality of product decisions.23:04 – Teams, AI, and Decision AdvantageBarry shares how AI can help teams maintain momentum during ideation by quickly pressure testing scenarios, asking disconfirming questions, and bringing outside information into the room.27:48 – Turning Objection Handling into a SystemJohn describes how his team recorded a live objection-handling exercise, analyzed it against best practices, and turned the team's collective knowledge into a reusable system.31:32 – The Three Forms of MetacognitionJohn introduces individual, social, and computational metacognition as three skills leaders need to work effectively with AI and with each other.35:19 – AI Exposes Leadership SystemsBarry and John discuss why AI can feel uncomfortable for leaders: it reveals whether there is a real decision-making system underneath the confidence.37:34 – When AI Makes Every Decision Feel HardJohn raises an important limitation: AI can remove small pauses in the workday, leaving people constantly operating at high cognitive load.41:58 – Productivity Fatigue and Agent OverloadBarry and John discuss the temptation to run too many AI-assisted tasks at once, and why that can create more noise rather than better outcomes.44:23 – Designing Time to ThinkBarry shares how he intentionally creates time for walking, exercise, and reflection to avoid over-optimizing for fast, reactive decisions.46:38 – Intentionality Over Process TheaterJohn explains why intentionality is different from rigid process. The opportunity is to design better systems without flattening the richness of how teams actually work.50:11 – Closing ReflectionsBarry wraps the conversation by reflecting on the opportunity for leaders to use AI not just to move faster, but to become more aware of how they think, decide, and scale judgment across teams.Useful ResourcesDotwork – John Cutler's work focuses on helping teams and organizations better understand how work, decisions, and systems connect.Artificial Organizations – Barry references the book and the CSTA loop as part of his work on AI, decision making, and organizational performance.Daniel Kahneman's System 1 and System 2 Thinking – Referenced in the discussion on snap decisions, deeper thinking, and productivity fatigue.Pugh Analysis – John mentions this as an example of a prioritization approach originally intended to help experts independently rate options and then discuss differences in judgment.Follow the HostLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/barryoreillyPersonal site:

Lightning Round: Top 10 Ways to Deal with Margin Pressure Question: Jason in Denver asks, "I just lost it with a prospect. We had talked, she was interested, asked me to do a proposal —which I did—took hours, then nothing. I called, emailed, texted and nothing. Finally I wrote her a less than professional email, this time she responded. Told me she had a lot going on in her life, and was not blowing me off. She actually wanted to move forward UNTIL she got my email. Clearly, I need a better strategy for dealing with getting ghosted."  Book: Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.

Nobel laureate, best-selling author, and groundbreaking psychologist Daniel Kahneman is also a friend and former business partner of Steve's. In discussing Danny's new book Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment, the two spar over inconsistencies in criminal sentencing and Danny tells Steve that “Your attitude is unusual” — no surprise there. This episode originally aired on May 14th, 2021. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A Note from James:If I could tell my children to read one post of mine, it would be this post.Influence is how they will navigate a world of uncertainty.Robert Cialdini is the most influential person in the world. And by that I mean, he wrote the book Influence, which sold 3 million copies and defines the six critical aspects of all influence.Now he has a new book, Pre-Suasion, going 10x deeper into the concepts of persuasion. I got him on my podcast so I could ask the 1,000 questions I have.Small story from the book:If you name a restaurant “Studio 97” instead of “Studio 17,” people are more likely to tip higher.If you ask a girl for her phone number outside a flower store, triggering feelings of romance, she is more likely to give it to you than if you ask her outside a motorcycle store.And 500 other stories.The environment is just as important as what you say.Before the podcast began, I gave him a book as a gift: The Anxiety of Influence, a history of poetry.What would poetry have to do with influence and marketing?In all art, since the beginning of time, artists have built on the work of the artists of the generation before them.Beethoven depended on a Mozart to be a Beethoven. Picasso depended on a Cézanne. Without Michelson, there would be no Einstein.But poets, for some reason, would deny being influenced.“I never even read Ezra Pound,” shouted one poet at a critic.Poets want to be seen as original.Nobody is 100% original.This is the anxiety of influence.Almost all of our decisions, and even our creativity, are outsourced to the people around us who influence us: peers, teachers, religion, parents, bosses, etc.Our personality is our own particular mishmash of influences.How we deal with that anxiety, how we recognize the influences, learn from them, and build from them, is the birth of all of our creativity.Let me summarize the seven aspects of influence:Reciprocity: If you give someone a Christmas card, they will want to return the favor.Likability: Make yourself trustworthy. For instance, outline the negatives of dealing with you.Consistency: Ask someone for a favor. Now they will say to themselves, “I am the type of person who does James a favor.”Social Proof: If you are trying to get someone to do X, show them that “a lot of your peers do X.” For instance, if you are at a bar and you are a guy trying to meet women, bring your women friends and not your guy friends with you.Authority: “Four out of five dentists say…”Scarcity: “Only 100 iPhones left at this store!”Unity: You and I are the same because of location, values, religion, etc.I've used each of the above in business.They work.They will make you money.The entire purpose of language is to influence.We are not strong animals. We are weak.The language of influence saved us.Probably a word like “Run!” was the first word spoken.A word of influence.And it worked.I'm still running from the things I fear.So speak to influence.Don't speak to call a flower yellow.Speak to breathe spirit into an idea, to be enthusiastic, to convey emotion, to influence.This is the only way to have an impact with your unique creativity.I gave Robert the book as a gift — reciprocity — assuming we would have a great podcast.And we did.But then I thought later, I can't even remember how Robert got on my podcast.I highly recommend his book in the podcast and even in this post.As he got into his car after the podcast in order to go to his next interview, I started thinking:“Hmmm, who influenced who?”Episode Description:Robert Cialdini wrote the book on persuasion — literally. His classic Influence became one of the defining books on why people say yes, how decisions get shaped, and why the smallest cue in the room can change the outcome of a conversation.In this episode from the archive, James talks with Cialdini about Pre-Suasion, the idea that persuasion starts before the actual pitch. It begins with what people notice, what they feel, what is in the environment, and what frame has already been set before the first real ask is made.They talk about flower shops, restaurant names, voting booths, Warren Buffett's shareholder letters, Anwar Sadat's negotiation instincts, and the rabbi who helped save thousands of lives with one sentence. But the episode is not just about marketing. It is about how people make decisions under uncertainty — and how to use influence ethically, whether you are asking for a job, building a business, negotiating a deal, writing a sales letter, or trying to become more trusted.What You'll Learn:Why persuasion often begins before the message — and how small cues in the environment can make people more receptive.How Cialdini's original six principles of influence work: reciprocity, consistency, social proof, scarcity, authority, and liking.Why Cialdini added a seventh principle, unity — the feeling that “we are the same” — and why it can be even stronger than liking.When to use social proof versus authority, and how to decide which kind of evidence matters most in a given situation.Why admitting weakness first can build trust, and how Warren Buffett uses honesty as a persuasion tool instead of a liability.Timestamped Chapters:[00:00] Introduction and episode preview[01:25] Interview begins — James introduces Robert Cialdini and Pre-Suasion[03:12] The flower shop study: why context changes the answer before the question is asked[05:48] Valentine Street and the hidden power of unrelated cues[06:42] Wine stores, voting booths, and fluffy cloud mattresses[08:10] Are humans irrational, or are shortcuts necessary?[10:17] How the pictures on your wall can change what you write[11:36] The six — now seven — principles of influence[12:00] Reciprocity: the Hare Krishna flower example and the power of personalized gifts[16:40] Consistency: Anwar Sadat, Henry Kissinger, and giving people a reputation to live up to[19:30] Cialdini's undercover research with sales organizations[23:30] Social proof: medical no-shows, restaurant menus, and what happens when a message backfires[26:43] Social proof as feasibility: “people like me can do this”[29:07] Authority: when expert endorsement beats crowd validation[33:55] Why companies lose with better products when they fail to frame the decision properly[35:10] Building authority from zero by using honesty and scarcity[37:05] The Avis “We're number two” campaign and the trust value of admitting weakness[38:24] Warren Buffett's shareholder letters and the persuasive power of leading with mistakes[41:30] Unity: Cialdini's seventh principle of influence[44:24] The rabbi, the Japanese tribunal, and the sentence that saved a community[48:30] Applying unity in job interviews, dating, and negotiations[51:10] Loss aversion and how uncertainty changes persuasion[55:00] Why long sales letters can outperform short ones[55:30] Cialdini's practical framework: find what is true, direct attention to it, then make the case[59:00] Fake scarcity and why false urgency destroys trust[65:00] Closing thoughts on ethical influence and genuine specificityAdditional Resources:Robert Cialdini — Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion — Cialdini's classic book on the core principles of persuasion and compliance. Robert Cialdini — Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade — the follow-up book discussed throughout the episode, focused on what happens before the persuasive message itself. Berkshire Hathaway Shareholder Letters — referenced in the episode as a real-world example of trust-building through candor and weakness-first communication. Daniel Kahneman and Prospect Theory — Cialdini references the role of loss aversion and uncertainty in persuasion; Kahneman received the 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for integrating psychological research into economic decision-making. Chiune Sugihara — the Japanese diplomat connected to the story Cialdini uses to explain unity and shared identity. The Avis “We're Number Two” Campaign — discussed as an example of turning a weakness into credibility by being honest before making the positive case.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, Adam Torres interviews Matei Zatreanu, CEO & Founder of System2. Matei shares how System2 helps hedge funds integrate data and AI into investment decisions while exploring the opportunities and risks of emerging technologies, including robotics, automation, and the future role of humans in an AI-driven economy.  About Matei Zatreanu Matei is the founder of System2. He previously started the data initiative of a $20bn hedge fund. Matei started his career in investment banking at Lehman Brothers. Matei holds an M.A. in Mathematics from Columbia University and B.A.s in Psychology, Mathematics, Government, and Economics from Cornell University. About System2 System2 is a data and AI-driven research firm that helps fundamental investors make better investment decisions by combining human expertise with advanced analytics. Founded by Matei Zatreanu, the company partners with hedge funds, asset managers, and institutional investors to uncover insights that traditional research methods may miss. Inspired by Daniel Kahneman's concept of "System 2" thinking—the deliberate, analytical process behind rational decision-making—System2 empowers investment teams to validate hypotheses, explore complex questions, and leverage alternative data and artificial intelligence to gain a deeper understanding of companies, industries, and market trends. For more than a decade, System2 has been helping some of the world's leading investors navigate increasingly complex markets through a blend of technology, data science, and human judgment.  Watch Full Episode on ⁠Youtube⁠. --- Follow Adam on Instagram at ⁠https://www.instagram.com/askadamtorres/⁠ for up to date information on book releases and tour schedule. Apply to be a guest on our podcast: ⁠https://missionmatters.lpages.co/podcastguest/⁠ Visit our website: ⁠https://missionmatters.com/⁠ More FREE content from Mission Matters here: ⁠https://linktr.ee/missionmattersmedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode, Adam Torres interviews Matei Zatreanu, CEO & Founder of System2. Matei shares how System2 helps hedge funds integrate data and AI into investment decisions while exploring the opportunities and risks of emerging technologies, including robotics, automation, and the future role of humans in an AI-driven economy.  About Matei Zatreanu Matei is the founder of System2. He previously started the data initiative of a $20bn hedge fund. Matei started his career in investment banking at Lehman Brothers. Matei holds an M.A. in Mathematics from Columbia University and B.A.s in Psychology, Mathematics, Government, and Economics from Cornell University. About System2 System2 is a data and AI-driven research firm that helps fundamental investors make better investment decisions by combining human expertise with advanced analytics. Founded by Matei Zatreanu, the company partners with hedge funds, asset managers, and institutional investors to uncover insights that traditional research methods may miss. Inspired by Daniel Kahneman's concept of "System 2" thinking—the deliberate, analytical process behind rational decision-making—System2 empowers investment teams to validate hypotheses, explore complex questions, and leverage alternative data and artificial intelligence to gain a deeper understanding of companies, industries, and market trends. For more than a decade, System2 has been helping some of the world's leading investors navigate increasingly complex markets through a blend of technology, data science, and human judgment.  Watch Full Episode on ⁠Youtube⁠. --- Follow Adam on Instagram at ⁠https://www.instagram.com/askadamtorres/⁠ for up to date information on book releases and tour schedule. Apply to be a guest on our podcast: ⁠https://missionmatters.lpages.co/podcastguest/⁠ Visit our website: ⁠https://missionmatters.com/⁠ More FREE content from Mission Matters here: ⁠https://linktr.ee/missionmattersmedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Un pequeño homenaje y reconocimiento a Daniel Kahneman premio Nobel de Economía y autor del libro Pensar Rápido Pensar Despacio Salvador Mingo Conocimiento Experto CONECTA CONMIGO: salvador@conocimientoexperto.com https://conocimientoexperto.com https://www.youtube.com/@conocimientoexperto https://spoti.fi/2yS9p38 https://www.instagram.com/salvadormingo/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/salvadormingoce/

Vivemos na era das oportunidades infinitas. Nunca tivemos tanto acesso à informação, educação, carreira e tecnologia. E, paradoxalmente, nunca houve tanta gente frustrada. O problema talvez não esteja na realidade, mas na distância entre aquilo que esperamos dela e aquilo que ela realmente entrega. Neste episódio, Luciano Pires explora as ideias de Victor Vroom, Daniel Kahneman, Samuel Stouffer, Herbert Simon e Carol Dweck para mostrar como expectativas mal calibradas alimentam ansiedade, ressentimento e decepção. Uma reflexão sobre mérito, comparação, redes sociais e a difícil arte de enxergar o mundo como ele é.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We all want retirement success. But how do we achieve it? What if the best method is to identify possible *failures* first, and then simply work backward to avoid those failures?  Looking for a financial planner?  → PlanWithJesse.com In this follow-up episode, Jesse completes his inversion-based framework for retirement planning by outlining the remaining risks that can derail long-term financial outcomes, shifting from market and inflation concerns to more personal, behavioral, and systemic threats. He begins with shock spending and long-term care risk, emphasizing the scale and unpredictability of end-of-life care costs and arguing that insurance alone is often insufficient, making realistic cash flow modeling and programs like Medicaid more practical planning tools. He then covers cognitive decline risk, highlighting how reduced decision-making capacity can lead to fraud, mismanagement, and financial error, and recommends safeguards such as legal protections, trusted contacts, and automated, simplified financial systems. Behavioral risk is framed as the danger of emotional decision-making, with mitigation strategies including automation, written investment policies, and reduced exposure to market volatility. Jesse then addresses assumptions risk, warning that small inaccuracies in assumptions about markets, inflation, taxes, or even one's future self can compound significantly in retirement projections, advocating for base rates and disciplined "what-if" analysis. He explores policy, legislation, and tax risk as an unavoidable layer of uncertainty around Social Security, taxation, and healthcare policy, suggesting retirees stress test outcomes without overreacting to speculation. Identity and purpose risk follows, underscoring that retirement success depends heavily on structure, meaning, and social connection, not just financial security. Finally, he introduces "deep risks"—deflation, confiscation, and devastation—arguing that while rare, these systemic threats reinforce the central conclusion that no portfolio design eliminates all risks, and effective retirement planning ultimately comes down to balancing trade-offs and building resilience. Key Takeaways: • Shock spending risk includes large, unexpected expenses that can destabilize retirement plans. • Long-term care is one of the most significant and unpredictable retirement costs. • Cognitive decline can lead to financial mistakes, fraud vulnerability, and poor decision-making. • Behavioral risk stems from emotional and irrational financial decisions. • Assumptions risk arises from unrealistic expectations about markets, inflation, or personal behavior. • Policy and tax risk includes uncertainty around Social Security, taxes, and healthcare programs. • Identity and purpose risk highlights the psychological challenges of retirement. • Deep risks (deflation, confiscation, devastation) are rare but potentially catastrophic. • No single strategy can eliminate all risks—retirement planning is about balancing trade-offs and building resilience. Key Timestamps: (01:42) – 8: Shock Spending & Long-Term Care Risk (08:04) – Saving for the Coming $500,000 Expense (09:15) – Changing Expenses as We Age (10:24) – Medicare & Medicaid (12:44) – 9: Cognitive Decline Risk (15:43) – Building Backup Systems & Backup People (18:30) – 10: Behavioral Risk (22:48) – 11: Assumptions Risk (About Yourself & the World) (25:18) – Assumptions About the Future World (31:50) – 12: Policy, Legislation, & Tax Risk (36:17) – 13: Identity & Purpose Risk (39:16) – 14: The Deep Risks Key Topics Discussed: The Best Interest, Jesse Cramer, Wealth Management Rochester NY, Financial Planning for Families, Fiduciary Financial Advisor, Comprehensive Financial Planning, Retirement Planning Advice, Tax-Efficient Investing, Risk Management for Investors, Generational Wealth Transfer Planning, Financial Strategies for High Earners, Personal Finance for Entrepreneurs, Behavioral Finance Insights, Asset Allocation Strategies, Advanced Estate Planning Techniques Mentions:https://bestinterest.blog/e108/ Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman https://bestinterest.blog/the-crushing-cost-of-conservative-retirement-planning/ https://bestinterest.blog/e106/ If You Can: How Millennials Can Get Rich Slowly by William J. Bernstein The Intelligent Asset Allocator: How to Build Your Portfolio to Maximize Returns and Minimize Risk by William J. Bernstein A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped the World by William J. Bernstein The Four Pillars of Investing, Second Edition: Lessons for Building a Winning Portfolio by William J. Bernstein Deep Risk: How History Informs Portfolio Design by William J. Bernstein More of The Best Interest: Check out the Best Interest Blog at https://bestinterest.blog/ Contact me at jesse@bestinterest.blog Need a financial planner?  → PlanWithJesse.com  The Best Interest Podcast is a personal podcast meant for education and entertainment. It should not be taken as financial advice, and is not prescriptive of your financial situation.

🧭 REBEL Rundown 🔑 Key Points 🧩 Human Factors: The unseen behaviors, distractions and considerations critical in emergency medicine and the ICU, influencing patient care beyond just medical knowledge.🎯 System Design: Effective system design directly impacts team performance by creating environments that facilitate optimal decision-making. 🏥 Real-world Application: The application of human factors in healthcare leads to better team dynamics, reduced stress, and improved patient outcomes. 👷🏽‍️It’s Everyone’s Job: Building a culture of adaptability and openness to change can lead to better healthcare delivery, communication and interprofessional relationships🛠️ Practical Solutions: Start the conversation in departments for actionable and pragmatic changes to current healthcare environments to enhance practitioner efficiency and patient care quality. Click here for Direct Download of the Podcast. 👀Previously Covered and Related Content: REBEL EM: Titles Don’t Make LeadersREBEL MIND: Moving from Junior to Senior Leadership in Emergency CareREBEL MIND: The Dunning-Kruger EffectREBEL MIND: Growth vs Fixed Mindset 📝 Introduction Welcome back to Rebel MIND, the podcast where we sharpen the person behind the practitioner. MIND stands for Mastering Internal Negativity during Difficulty. This series emphasizes productivity, provider performance, and team optimization to ensure we are at our best during high-pressure situations. In this episode, host Dr. Mark Ramzy chats with special guests and master educators about the concept of human factors.Dr. Chris Hicks is an emergency physician and trauma team leader at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, Assistant Professor in the Department of Medicine at the University of Toronto, and co-founder of Advanced Performance Healthcare Design, a physician-led simulation and design group. Dr. Andrew Petrosoniak is an emergency physician and trauma team leader at St. Michael’s Hospital, and Medical Director of the Unity Health Toronto Simulation Program. He’s an Assistant Professor at the University of Toronto where his research focuses on simulation for systems and design improvement and optimizing the care of the bleeding patient. Along with Dr. Hicks, he’s also President of Advanced Performance Healthcare Design, a consulting firm that works with high-performance teams and uses simulation to enhance and design better healthcare spaces Cognitive Question How can the integration of human factors improve decision-making and performance in emergency medicine and critical care environments? ️What are Human Factors? In the context of healthcare, human factors encompass the interplay between humans, the systems they work within, and the effectiveness of their interactions. It includes elements like communication, system design, environmental conditions, and behavioral patterns affecting individual and team decision-making processes. It’s the collective impact of individual behaviors, team dynamics, and the physical environment on performance and outcomes. The aim is to eliminate issues arising from human error by creating systems and environments that naturally guide and support optimal performance. 🏥How This Applies to the Emergency Department or ICU? Efficient integration of human factors in high-pressure settings like the Emergency Department (ED) or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) helps mitigate the risks associated with stressful and chaotic environments. By focusing on system designs that account for human behavior, healthcare professionals can reduce errors, enhance team coordination, and ultimately improve patient care. This is crucial as teams are often required to make rapid, life-saving decisions in these environmentsThe design of clinical spaces can either hinder or help efficient care. Poorly arranged equipment or cluttered workspaces increase stress and impede decision-making. Implementing structured design principles, such as dedicated equipment zones and clear visual cues, can streamline workflows and enhance team coordinationIt actually helps pave the way for more efficiency because you end up “working smarter instead of harder”.It speaks directly to the Daniel Kahneman’s theory of Type 2 Thinking – which is a slow, analytical cognitive process requiring deliberate thoughtWe’ll likely create a whole dedicated episode to this but if you want to read more ahead of time on it, check out his book Thinking, Fast and Slow ⏩Immediate Action Steps for Your Next Shift **Assess Your Environment**: Take note of any clutter, noise, or layout issues in your workspace that could hinder optimal performance. Identify problem areas that could be optimized.**Recognizable Hard-Stop** – Implement a “Stop-Point” Check for areas or issues that involve more than just patient safety (ie. workflow inefficiencies, sign-out, throughput, etc). Use predefined benchmarks during procedures to ensure clarity and efficiency.**Foster Open Communication** – Encourage an environment where every team member feels comfortable discussing their thoughts and decisions without fear of judgment.**Prototype Solutions** – Work with colleagues to identify problems and brainstorm quick, cost-effective solutions that could be tested in your department.**Role Clarity and Preparation** – Ensure roles are clearly defined and team members are prepared with necessary resources readily available during high-stakes scenarios.**Test and Refine** – Conduct quick pilot tests of new setups or processes during quieter times and gather feedback from your team. Conclusion Human factors play a critical role in shaping healthcare outcomes. Through structured system designs and attention to team dynamics, it is possible to reduce inefficiencies and enhance both patient care and provider well-being. It requires a shift in perspective from seeing design and systems as separate from human behaviors, to seeing them as intricately linked. By incorporating these principles, healthcare professionals can create environments that inherently support better, safer, and more effective patient care. 🚨 Clinical Bottom Line Incorporating human factors into healthcare isn’t just about preventing errors—it’s about creating an ecosystem where the healthcare team is empowered to perform at their best, even under the most challenging conditions. Implementing small, iterative changes can create a meaningful impact, paving the way for improved systems and processes. This starts by redesigning systems and environments with human factors in mind, which can significantly improve both the efficiency of care delivery and the safety of the healthcare environment. Further Reading Petrosoniak A, Hicks C. M&M rounds 2.0: the future of performance improvement. CJEM. Feb 2025PMID: 39979684Petrosoniak A, Hicks CDesign, build, train, excel: Using simulation to create elite trauma systems. International Anesthesiology Clinics. Publish Ahead of Print.Request the Article herePetrosoniak A, Hicks C, et al. Design Thinking-Informed Simulation: An Innovative Framework to Test, Evaluate, and Modify New Clinical Infrastructure. Simul Healthc. 2020 Jun 2020.PMID: 32039946Bleetman A, et al.Human factors and error prevention in emergency medicine. Emerg Med J. May 2012PMID: 21565880Hayden EM, et al.Human Factors and Simulation in Emergency Medicine. Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Feb 2018PMID: 28925571 Meet the Authors Mark Ramzy, DO Co-Editor-in-Chief Cardiothoracic Intensivist and EM Attending RWJBH / Rutgers Health, Newark, NJ Chris Hicks, MD, Med Co-Founder of Advanced Performance Assistant Professor of Emergency Medicine, University of Toronto, Canada Andrew Petrosoniak, MD, MSc Co-Founder and President of Advanced Performance Medical Director of Unity Health Toronto Simulation Program Showing Slide 1 of 3 The post REBEL MIND – Human Factors: The Hidden Architecture of Emergency & Critical Care Medicine appeared first on REBEL EM - Emergency Medicine Blog.

Imagine you and your teenager are sitting down for a nice meal and she/he asks, “What do you know about depression?” and you're stumped for an answer.Faced with that question, D. (Doug) Earl Johnston set out to find the answer and, along the way, identified 271 additional and distinct emotional states that formed the basis of his latest book, Choosing Emotions: Thinking with Your Head and Acting with Your Heart.Doug shares what he learned about the amazing array of emotions all of us feel and how they protect us this week on Spirit Gym.Learn more about Doug and his work at his website and on social media via Instagram. Timestamps4:58 Doug's daughter asked him a question he couldn't answer: What do you know about depression?10:42 Identifying 272 distinct emotional states through famous quotes.21:41 Our emotions are tools that protect us.32:15 The fundamental misunderstandings people have about emotions.43:15 A consilience.47:35 Name it, blame it and tame it.56:30 “Fear is a reaction. Courage is a decision.”1:06:35 Where do you draw the line between an emotion, mood, condition, pattern or life?1:23:54 “Can you change a default emotion?”1:33:38 Doug's reckoning with ego.1:39:05 Vocabulary and emotions.1:48:03 The domains of the head, heart and gut.1:52:55 One of Paul's guiding principles he learned from a student.ResourcesAtlas of the Heart: Mapping Meaningful Connection and the Language of Human Experience by Brené BrownThe work of Rollo May, J.K. Rowling, Eckhart Tolle, Dr. Antonio Damasio, Jonathan Heidt, Daniel Kahneman, Niels Bohr, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Charles Kettering, Noam Chomsky, Dan Siegel, Stanley Krippner, Edgar Cayce and Sir Winston ChurchillPaul's podcast conversations with Rollin McCraty and Keith WittHow Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain by Lisa BarrettSwitch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard by Chip and Dan HeathFeelings Buried Alive Never Die by Karol TrumanThe Body Keeps The Score: Brain, Mind and Body in the Healing of Trauma by Dr. Bessel van der Kolk Tao Te Ching: A New English Version by Stephen MitchellThe Second Book of the Tao by Stephen MitchellFind more resources for this episode on our website.Music Credit: Meet Your Heroes (444Hz), Composed, mixed, mastered and produced by Michael RB Schwartz of Brave Bear MusicThanks to our awesome sponsors:PaleovalleyBIOptimizers US and BIOptimizers UK PAUL15Organifi CHEK20Wild PasturesPique LifeCHEK InstituteWe may earn commissions from qualifying purchases using affiliate links.

A ruthless (and ruthlessly efficient) industry is using digital tools to supercharge one of the world's oldest behaviors. We look at how the industry works, and ask the scam-fighters what they're doing about it.   SOURCES: Kati Daffan, former assistant director at the Federal Trade Commission's Division of Marketing Practices. Marti DeLiema, assistant professor of social work at the University of Minnesota. Mark Frank, professor of communications at the University at Buffalo.   RESOURCES: "Cambodian Scam Tycoon Wanted by U.S. Extradited to China," by Gabriele Steinhauser (Wall Street Journal, 2026). "The Rise and Fall Of Accused Cambodian Scam Kingpin Chen Zhi," by Low De Wei (Bloomberg, 2026). "Protecting Older Consumers 2024-2025," by the Federal Trade Commission (2025). "Meta is earning a fortune on a deluge of fraudulent ads, documents show," by Jeff Horwitz (Reuters, 2025). "Exposed to Scams: What Separates Victims from Non-victims?," by Marti DeLiema, Emma Fletcher, Christine Kieffer, Gary Mottola, Rubens Pessanha, and Melissa Trumpower (Stanford Center on Longevity, 2019). "Why do Nigerian Scammers Say They are from Nigeria?," by Cormac Herley (Microsoft Research, 2016). Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman (2013). FTC Fraud Reporting Portal. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.