Podcasts about Davide

A modern faith healer's scandal-plagued ministry faces accusations of forced labor and money laundering. Prelude: Kathryn Kuhlman's miracle healings are analyzed and imitated. –––-–---------------------------------------- BECOME A VALUEDLISTENER™ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Patreon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ –––-–---------------------------------------- DONATE: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SwindledPodcast.com/Support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ CONSUME: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SwindledPodcast.com/Shop⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ –––-–---------------------------------------- MUSIC: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Deformr⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ –––-–---------------------------------------- FOLLOW: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SwindledPodcast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Thanks for listening. :-) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

“In this sense, human and AI means a synergy where teams of humans and AI together lead to superior outcomes than either the human or the AI operating in isolation.” – Davide Dell'Anna About Davide Dell'Anna Davide Dell'Anna is Assistant Professor of Responsible AI at Utrecht University, and a member of the Hybrid Intelligence Centre. His research focuses on how AI can cooperate synergistically and proactively with humans. Davide has published a wide range of leading research in the space. Webiste: davidedellanna.com LinkedIn Profile: Davide Dell'Anna University Profile: Davide Dell'Anna What you will learn The core concept of hybrid intelligence as collaborative human-AI teaming, not replacement Why effective hybrid teams require acknowledging and leveraging both human and AI strengths and weaknesses How lessons from human-human and human-animal teams inform better design of human-AI collaboration Key differences between humans and AI in teams, such as accountability, replaceability, and identity The importance of process-oriented evaluation, including satisfaction, trust, and adaptability, for measuring hybrid team effectiveness Why appropriately calibrated trust and shared ethics are central to performance and cohesion in hybrid teams The shift from explainability to justifiability in AI, emphasizing actions aligned with shared team norms and values New organizational roles and skills—like team facilitation and dynamic team design—needed to support successful human-AI collaboration Episode Resources Transcript Ross Dawson: Hi Davide. It’s wonderful to have you on the show. Davide Dell’Anna: Hi Ross, nice to meet you. Thank you so much for having me. Ross: So you do a lot of work around what you call hybrid intelligence, and I think that’s pretty well aligned with a lot of the topics we have on the podcast. But I’d love to hear your definition and framing—what is hybrid intelligence? Davide: Well, thank you so much for the question. Hybrid intelligence is a new paradigm, or a paradigm that tries to move the public narrative away from the common focus on replacement—AI or robots taking over our jobs. While that’s an understandable fear, more scientifically and societally, I think it’s more interesting and relevant to think of humans and AI as collaborators. In this sense, human and AI means a synergy where teams of humans and AI together lead to superior outcomes than either the human or the AI operating in isolation. In a human-AI team, members can compensate for each other’s weaknesses and amplify each other’s strengths. The goal is not to substitute human capabilities, but to augment them. This immediately moves the discussion from “what can the AI do to replace me?” to “how can we design the best possible team to work together?” I think that’s the foundation of the concept of hybrid intelligence. So hybrid intelligence, per se, is the ultimate goal. We aim at designing or engineering these human-AI teams so that we can effectively and responsibly collaborate together to achieve this superior type of intelligence, which we then call hybrid intelligence. Ross: That’s fantastic. And so extremely aligned with the humans plus AI thesis. That’s very similar to what I might have said myself, not using the word hybrid intelligence, but humans plus AI to say the same thing. We want to dive into the humans-AI teaming specifically in a moment. But in some of your writing, you’ve commented that, while others are thinking about augmentation in various ways, you point out that these are not necessarily as holistic as they could be. So what do you think is missing in some of the other ways people are approaching AI as a tool of augmentation? Davide: Yeah, so I think when you look at the literature—as a computer scientist myself, I notice how easily I fall into the trap of only discussing AI capabilities. When I talk about AI or even human-AI teams, I end up talking about how I can build the AI to do this, or how I can improve the process in this way. Most of the literature does that as well. There’s a technology-centric perspective to the discussion of even human-AI teams. We try to understand what we can build from the AI point of view to improve a team. But if you think of human-AI teams in this way, you realize that this significantly limits our vocabulary and our ability to look at the team from a broader, system-level perspective, where each member—including and especially human team members—is treated individually, and their skills and identity are considered and leveraged. So, if you look at the literature, you often end up talking about how to add one feature to the AI or how to extend its feature set in other ways. But what people often miss is looking at the weaknesses and strengths of the different individuals, so that we can engineer for their compensation and amplification. Machines and people are fundamentally different: humans are good at some things, AI is good at others, and we shouldn’t try to negate or hide or be ashamed of the things we’re worse at than AI, and vice versa. Instead, we should leverage those differences. For instance, just as an example, consider memory and context awareness. At the moment, at least, AI is much more powerful in having access to memory and retrieving it in a matter of seconds—AI can access basically the whole internet. But often, when you talk nowadays with these language model agents, they are completely decontextualized. They talk in the same way to millions across the world and often have very little clue about who the specific person is in front of them, what that person’s specific situation is—maybe they’re in an airport with noise, or just one minute from giving a lecture and in a rush. The type of things you might say also change based on the specific situation. While this is a limitation of AI, we shouldn’t forget that there is the human there. The human has that contextual knowledge. The human brings that crucial context. Sometimes we tend to say, “Okay, but then we can build an AI that can understand the context around it,” but we already have the human for that. Ross: Yes, yes. I don’t think that’s what I call the framing. Framing should come from the human, because that’s what we understand—including the ethical and other human aspects of the context, as well as that broader frame. It’s interesting because, in talking about hybrid intelligence, I think many who come to augmentation or hybrid intelligence think of it on an individual basis: how can an individual be augmented by AI, or, for example, in playing various games or simulations, humans plus AI teaming together, collaborating. But the team means you have multiple humans and quite probably multiple AI agents. So, in your research, what have you observed if you’re comparing a human-only team and a team which has both human and AI participants? What are some of the things that are the same, and what are some of the things that are different? Davide: Yes, this is a very interesting question. We’ve recently done work in collaboration with a number of researchers from the Hybrid Intelligence Center, which I am part of. If you’re not familiar with it, the Hybrid Intelligence Center is a collaboration that involves practically all the Dutch universities focused on hybrid intelligence, and it’s a long project—lasting around 10 years. One of the works we’ve done recently is to try to study to what extent established properties of effective human teams could be used to characterize human-AI teams. We looked at instruments that people use in practice to characterize human teams. One of them is called the Team Diagnostic Survey, which is an instrument people use to diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of human teams. It includes a number of dimensions that are generally considered important for effective human teams. These include aspects like members demonstrating their commitment to the team by putting in extra time and effort to help it succeed, the presence of coaches available in the team to help the team improve over time, and things related to the satisfaction of the members with the team, with the relationships with other members, and with the work they’re doing. What we’ve done was to study the extent to which we could use these dimensions to characterize human-AI teams. We looked at different types of configurations of teams—some had one AI agent and one human, others had multiple agents and multiple humans, for example in a warehouse context where you have multiple robots helping out in the warehouse that have to cooperate and collaborate with multiple humans. We tried to understand whether the properties of—by the way, we also looked at an interesting case, which is human-animal-animal teams, which is another example that’s interesting in the context of hybrid intelligence. You see very often in human-animal interaction—basically two species, two alien species—interacting and collaborating with each other. They often manage to collaborate pretty effectively, and there is an awareness of what both the humans and the animals are doing that is fascinating, at least for me. So, we tried to analyze whether properties of human teams could be understood when looking at human-AI teams or hybrid teams, and to what extent. One of the things we found is that some concepts are very well understood and easily applicable to different types of hybrid teams. For example, the idea of interdependence—the fact that members in the team, in order to be a team, need to be mutually dependent, at least to some extent. Otherwise, if they’re all doing separate jobs, there’s a lack of common goal. There are also things related to having a clear mission or a clear objective as a team, and aspects related to the possibility of exhibiting autonomy in the operation of the team and taking initiative. Also, the presence and awareness of team norms, like a shared ethical code or shared knowledge about what is appropriate or not. These were things that we found people could easily understand and apply to different configurations of teams. Ross: Just actually, one thing—I don’t know if you’re familiar with the work of Mohammad Hussain Johari, who did this wonderful paper called “What Human-Horse Interactions May Teach Us About Effective Human-AI Interactions.” Again, these are the cases where we can have these parallels—learning how to do human-AI interactions from human-human and human-animal interactions. But again, it comes back to that original question: what is the same? I think you described many of those facets of the nature of teams and collaboration, which means they are the same. But there are, of course, some differences. One of the many differences is accountability, essentially, where the AI agents are not accountable, whereas the humans are. That’s one thing. So, this allocation of decision rights across different participants—human and AI—needs to take into account that they’re not equal participants. Humans have accountability, and AI does not. That’s one possible example. Davide: Yeah, definitely. I totally agree, and I remember the paper you mentioned. I agree that human-animal collaboration is a very interesting source of inspiration. When looking at this paper, we looked at the case of shepherds and shepherd dogs. I didn’t know much about it before, but then I started digging a little bit. Shepherd dogs are trained at the beginning, but over time, they learn a type of communication with the shepherd. Through whistles, the shepherd can give very short commands, and then the shepherd dogs—even in pairs—can quickly understand what they need to do. They go through the mountains, collect all the sheep, and bring them exactly as intended by the shepherd, with very little need for words or other types of communication. They manage to achieve their goals very effectively. So, I think we have a lot to learn from these cases, even though it’s difficult to study. But just to mention differences, of course—one of the things that emerged from this paper is the inherent human-AI asymmetry. Like you mentioned, accountability is definitely one aspect. I think overall, we should always give the human a different type of role in the team, similar to the shepherd and the shepherd dogs. There is some hierarchy among the members, and this makes it possible for humans to preserve meaningful control in the interactions. This also implies that different rules or expectations apply to different team members. Beyond these, there is asymmetry in skills and capabilities, as we mentioned earlier, and also in aspects related to the identity of the members. For instance, some AI could be more easily replaceable than humans. Think, for example, of robots in a warehouse. In a human team, you wouldn’t say you “replace” a team member—it’s not the nicest way to say you let someone go and bring someone else in. But with robots, you could say, “I replace this machine because it’s not working anymore,” and that’s fine. We can replace machines with little consequence, though this doesn’t always hold, because there are studies showing that people get attached to machines and AI in general. There was a recent case of ChatGPT releasing a new version and stopping the previous one, and people complained because they got attached to the previous version. So, in some cases, replacing the AI member would work well, but in others, it needs to be done more carefully. Ross: So one of the other things looked at is the evaluation of human-AI teams. If we’re looking at human teams and possibly relative performance compared to human-AI teams, what are ways in which we can measure effectiveness? I suppose this includes not just output or speed or outcomes, but potentially risk, uncertainty, explainability, or other factors. Davide: Yes, this is an interesting question, and I think it’s still an open question to some extent. From the study I mentioned earlier, we looked at how people measure human team effectiveness. There are aspects concerning, of course, the success of the team in doing the task, but these are not the only measures of effectiveness that people consider in human teams. People often consider things related to the satisfaction of the members—with their teammates, with the process of working together, and with the overall goals of the team. This often leads to reflection from the team itself during operation, at least in human teams, where people reassess and evaluate their output throughout the process to make sure satisfaction with the process and relationships goes well over time. In general, there are aspects to measure concerning the effectiveness of teams related to the process itself, which are often forgotten. It’s a matter, at least from a research point of view, of resources, because to evaluate a full process over time, you need to run experiments for longer periods. Often people stop at one instant or a few interactions, but if you think of human teams, like the usual forming, storming, norming, and performing, that often goes over a long time. Teams often operate for a long time and improve over time. So, the process itself needs to be monitored and reassessed over time. This is a way to also measure the effectiveness of the team, but over time. Ross: Interesting point, because as you say, the dynamics of team performance with a human team improve as people get to know each other and find ways of working. They can become cohesive as a team. That’s classically what happens in defense forces and in creating high-performance teams, where you understand and build trust in each other. Trust is a key component of that. With AI agents, if they are well designed, they can learn themselves or respond to changing situations in order to evolve. But it becomes a different dynamic when you have humans building trust and mutual understanding, where that becomes a system in which the AI is potentially responding or evolving. At its best, there’s the potential for that to create a better performing team, but it does require both the attitudes of the humans and well the agents. Davide: Related to this—if I can interrupt you—I think this is very important that you mentioned trust. Indeed, this is one of the aspects that needs to be considered very carefully. You shouldn’t over-trust another team member, but also shouldn’t under-trust. Appropriate trust is key. One of the things that drives, at least in human teams, trust and overall performance is also team ethics. Related to the metrics you mentioned earlier, the ability of a team to gather around a shared ethical code and stick to that, and to continuously and regularly update each other’s norms and ensure that actions are aligned with the shared norms, is crucial. This ethical code significantly affects trust in operation. You can see it very easily in human teams: considering ethical aspects is essential, and we take them into account all the time. We respect each other’s goals and values. We expect our collaborators to keep their promises and commitments, and if they cannot, they can explain or justify what they are doing. These justifications are also a key element. The ability to provide justifications for behavior is very important for hybrid teams as well. Not only the AI, but also the human should be able to justify their actions when necessary. This is where the concept of hybrid teams and, in general, hybrid intelligence requires a bit of a philosophical shift from the traditional technology-centric perspective. For example, in AI, we often talk about explainability or explainable AI, which is about looking at model computations and understanding why a decision was made. But here, we’re talking about a different concept: justifiability, which looks at the same problem from a different angle. It considers team actions in the context of shared values, shared goals, and the norms we’ve agreed upon. This requires a shift in the way we implement AI agents—they need to be aware of these norms, able to learn and adapt to team norms, and reason about them in the same way we do in society. Ross: Let’s say you’ve got an organization and they have teams, as most organizations do, and now we’re moving from classic human teams to humans plus AI teams—collaborative human-AI teams. What are the skills and capabilities that the individual participants and the leaders in the teams need to transition from human-only teams to teams that include both humans and AI members? Davide: This is a complicated question, and I don’t have a full answer, but I can definitely reflect on different skills that a hybrid team should have. I’m thinking now of recent work—not published yet—where we started moving from the quality model work I mentioned earlier towards more detailed guidelines for human-AI teams. There, we developed a number of guidelines for organizations for putting in place and operating effective teams. We categorized these guidelines in terms of different phases of team processes. For instance, we developed guidelines related to structuring the teamwork—the envisioning of the operations of the team, which roles the team members would have, which responsibilities the different team members should have. Here, I’m talking about team members, but I’m still referring to hybrid teams, so this applies to both humans and AI. This also implies different types of skills that we often don’t have yet in AI systems. For example, flexible team composition is a type of skill required to make it possible at the early stage of the team to structure the team in the right way. There are also skills related to developing shared awareness and aspects related to breaking down the task collaboratively or ensuring a continuous evolution of the team over time, with regular reassessment of the output. If you think of these notions, it’s easy to think about them in terms of traditional organizations, but when you imagine a human-AI team or a small hybrid organization, then this continuous evolution, regular output assessment, and flexible team composition are not so natural anymore. What does it mean for an LLM agent to interact with someone else? Usually, LLM architectures rely on static roles and predefined workflows—you need to define beforehand the prompts they will exchange—whereas humans use much more flexible protocols. We can adjust our protocols over time, monitor what we’re doing, and reassess whether it works or not, and change the protocols. These are skills required for the assistants, but also for the organization itself to make hybrid teaming possible. One of the things that emerges in this recent work is a new figure that would probably come up in organizations: a team designer or a team facilitator. This is not a team member per se, but an expert in teams and AI teammates, who can perhaps configure the AI teammates based on the needs of the team, and provide human team members with information needed about the skills or capabilities of the specific AI team member. It’s an intermediary between humans and AI, with expertise that other human team members may not have, and could help these teams work together. Ross: That’s fantastic. It’s wonderful to learn about all this work. Is there anywhere people can go to find out more about your research? Davide: Yeah, sure. You can look me up at my website, davidedellanna.com. That’s my main website—I try to keep it up to date. Through there, you can see the different projects I’m involved in, the papers we’re working on, both with collaborators and with PhD and master students, who often bring great contributions to our research, even in their short studies. That’s the main hub, and you can also find many openly available resources linked to the projects that people may find useful. Ross: Fantastic. Well, it’s wonderful work—very highly aligned with the idea of hybrid intelligence, and it’s fantastic that you are focusing on that, because there’s not enough people yet focusing in the area. So you and your colleagues are ahead, and I’m sure many more will join you. Thank you so much for your time and your insights. Davide: Thank you so much, Ross. Pleasure to meet you. The post Davide Dell'Anna on hybrid intelligence, guidelines for human-AI teams, calibrating trust, and team ethics (AC Ep33) appeared first on Humans + AI.

TLDR Torna Davide, il nostro esperto di CNV — già ospite nel primo episodio sulla comunicazione non violenta. Questa volta entriamo nel vivo: come stare davanti a un no, come gestirlo e come tornare in relazione in maniera efficace. I bisogni La CNV parte da qui. I bisogni sono universali — li abbiamo tutti, sono tutti ugualmente importanti, nessuno è più legittimo di un altro. E soprattutto: i bisogni non sono mai davvero in conflitto tra loro. Quello che va in conflitto sono le strategie — il come cerchiamo di soddisfarli. Questa distinzione cambia tutto. Se litigo con qualcuno non è perché i nostri bisogni si escludono, ma perché le strategie che stiamo usando in quel momento non riescono a contenerli entrambi. E questo apre uno spazio completamente diverso per il dialogo. Quindi: cosa c’è dietro quel NO? Che bisogno sta esprimendo chi mi sta davanti? La rabbia copre altro Questa è quella che ci ha colpito di più. La rabbia è quasi sempre un sentimento di copertura — sotto c’è tristezza, paura, frustrazione. Cose che fanno meno rumore ma pesano di più. Di fronte ad un no secco ed inaspettato spesso emerge la rabbia. Ma cosa c’è sotto? La rabbia ti attiva, ti dà energia, ti tiene sul pezzo. Ma se impari ad ascoltarla davvero, scopri che è sempre la porta di accesso a qualcosa di più profondo. E più alleni questo dialogo interno, più la rabbia dura meno — non perché la reprimi, ma perché entra subito in contatto col bisogno reale che c’è sotto. La causa è dentro di me In un confronto difficile o in una incomprensione, finché vedi l’altro come il colpevole rimani bloccato. Non se ne esce. Lo stimolo viene dall’esterno, questo è ovvio. Ma la causa — quello che si accende dentro, i pensieri che alimentano la rabbia, l’intensità con cui brucia — quella è tua. È fatta del tuo passato, dei tuoi bisogni insoddisfatti, di quello che stai portando in quel momento. E finché non te ne prendi la responsabilità, non c’è modo di progredire nel dialogo e nella soddisfazione dei bisogni di entrambi. Fermi nei bisogni, flessibili nelle strategie La frase da portarsi a casa: non tutti i bisogni possono essere soddisfatti qui, ora, tutti insieme — e va bene così. L’importante è che vengano presi tutti sul serio, riconosciuti, inclusi nel dialogo. Mai ignorati. Quando sei davanti a un no — o quando devi dare un no — la domanda utile non è “come la spunto?” ma “cosa sta difendendo l’altro con quel no? Quale bisogno sta proteggendo?”. E da lì, invece di forzare la strategia, si esplora insieme. Qualcosa di diverso quasi sempre emerge. Buon ascolto! Se non hai ascoltato il primo episodio con Davide, lo puoi recuperare qui: Comunicazione Non Violenta con Davide.

"Rassegna Stramba" con Claudio Zuliani. Ospite: Davide Torchia.

"Rassegna Stramba" con Claudio Zuliani. Ospite: Davide Torchia.

Cinq Héros Bibliques 3/5 (Jésus) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Les mythes bibliques 4/4 (fin du monde) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Les mythes bibliques 3/4 (l'humain-Dieu) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Les mythes bibliques 2/4 (Faire un peuple) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Les mythes bibliques 1/4 (origines du monde) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Cinq héros bibliques 4/5 (Marie-Madeleine) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Cinq héros bibliques 5/5 (Paul) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Cinq Héros Bibliques 2/5 (Rébecca) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Cinq Héros Bibliques 1/5 (Noé) avec Davide Pesenti (RTS) introduction à la conférence by Je cherche Dieu

Rowan van Dijk of Moersleutel interviews Davide Callegari of Brew York.This Episode is Sponsored by:Berkeley YeastOur Tropics yeast is based on a London Ale strain, but we added a new gene to its genome that codes for a unique thiol-releasing enzyme. The enzyme converts the precursors in barley to free thiols that smell and taste like passionfruit and grapefruit. It's super clean. No off-flavors like burnt rubber or other sulfurous notes. Just tropical aromatics. You don't have to do anything unusual either, like mash hopping. Just pitch dry Tropics and supercharge your hazy IPA.SennosSennos is redefining fermentation intelligence. Their new SennosM3 is a multi-parametric, in-tank sensor that delivers real-time fermentation insights and predictive analytics—so brewers can monitor critical variables, catch issues early, and get consistent results every batch. Brew smarter, waste less, and profit more with Sennos. Turn your tank into a smart tank. Order your SennosM3 at sennos.com Malteurop Malting CompanyMalteurop Malting Company (MMC) is based in North America—specializing in growing and producing quality malts for the craft beer and distilling industries. With local farms and Malthouses spread across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, MMC's commitment to excellence is fully ingrained into every batch it produces, ensuring breweries and distilleries of any size can create the finest beverages on the planet. Visit www.malteuropmaltingco.com to learn how MMC can support your malting needs. Contact MMC at customersuccess@malteurop.com or (844) 546-MALT (6258) for questions or to place your order.All About BeerAt All About Beer, we're honored to share the stories that define the beer community, and we couldn't do it without the generous support of our underwriting sponsors. Their commitment helps sustain independent beer journalism, allowing us to highlight the people, places, and passion behind every pint. Their partnership ensures these stories continue to inspire, connect, and celebrate the craft we all love. Join our underwriters today and help make an impact on independent journalism covering the beer industry.Host: Rowan van DijkGuest:  Davide Callegari Sponsor:  Malteurop Malting Co., Berkeley Yeast, Sennos, All About BeerTags: Brewing, Cask Ale, Hops, IPAPhoto Credits: Courtesy of  Davide Callegari and Rowan van DijkThe following music was used for this media project:Music: Hip Hop Intro 06 by TaigaSoundProdFree download: https://filmmusic.io/song/9533-hip-hop-intro-06License (CC BY 4.0): https://filmmusic.io/standard-licenseArtist website: https://linktr.ee/taigasoundprod ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Un thriller storico nella Venezia del '400 tra feste, inganni e tradimenti

Isaia 55 è uno dei capitoli più belli e potenti della Bibbia: Dio invita tutti gratuitamente all'acqua viva, al pane, al vino, alla gioia, promettendo un'alleanza eterna più solida di quella con Davide. In questo tredicesimo appuntamento della serie Spirito 413 (Commento 12 su Isaia) analizziamo versetto per versetto questo testo straordinario, scoprendo il suo significato profondo, il richiamo alla conversione, la gratuità della salvezza e come tutto questo trova compimento in Gesù Cristo.

Sarà il vicentino Davide Ghiotto, medaglia d'oro nell'inseguimento a squadre di pattinaggio di velocità a fare il portabandiera alla cerimonia di chiusura delle Olimpiadi Invernali all'Arena dio Verona domenica sera 22 febbraio. Con lui, un'altra campionessa, la biathleta Lisa Vittozzi.

Mercoledì significa solo una cosa: torna AROUND THE POP! Oggi i nostri speaker Stefano e Claudia hanno affrontato una puntatona con le news della settimana tra nuovi album in uscita e le experience dell'imminente Sanremo. Sono stati anche raggiunti in cabina da Davide Dose che ha raccontato i retroscena del format Spaghetti Unplugged! Per recuperare questo e tanto altro non vi resta che ascoltare la puntata!

"Rassegna Stramba" con Claudio Zuliani. Ospite: Paolo Aicardi, Davide Torchia, Camillo Demichelis

La stagione NFL 2025 è storia, Dopo la vittoria di Seattle nel Super Bowl XL al Levis's Stadium di Santa Clara.Si pensa ià al futuro: a San Francisco si parla di nuovo Defensive Coordinator e di International Games in Australia e in Messico.In collegamento Enzo, Igi, Stefano e Davide.Disponibile su tutte le piattaforme e nelle Live YouTube e Facebook

"Davide Torchia'' ospite a Rassegna Stramba.

"Rassegna Stramba" con Claudio Zuliani. Ospite: Paolo Aicardi, Davide Torchia, Camillo Demichelis

"Davide Torchia'' ospite a Rassegna Stramba.

Non ce n'è per il team degli Stati Uniti nella finale dell'inseguimento a squadre del pattinaggio di velocità alle Olimpiadi invernali: con una incredibile progressione, gli azzurri capitanati dal vicentino Davide Ghiotto si portano a casa l'oro. Un ottimo riscatto per Ghiotto, andato male nei diecimila.

本書作者大衛．桑格是《紐約時報》國家安全與白宮資深記者，長年對柯林頓、小布希、歐巴馬、川普、拜登五任總統的外交與軍事決策團隊，以及數百位美國與盟邦高層、情報官員與科技企業人士進行一系列精彩的採訪，並圍繞這個時代的關鍵問題展開引人入勝的歷史敘事。《新冷戰》不只是一本國際新聞或政治評論，也是一部當代史的初稿，記錄恐怖主義退場後的二十一世紀，世界如何重回大國對抗的結構性競爭。本書深刻剖析美國五任總統在戰略上試圖與俄羅斯建立合作、推動中國融入國際秩序，卻在關鍵時機屢次錯失調整與應對的契機，而映照出美國國內政治分裂與制度失能對全球戰略的限制與焦慮。 以上內容擷取自博客來網路書店

本書作者大衛．桑格是《紐約時報》國家安全與白宮資深記者，長年對柯林頓、小布希、歐巴馬、川普、拜登五任總統的外交與軍事決策團隊，以及數百位美國與盟邦高層、情報官員與科技企業人士進行一系列精彩的採訪，並圍繞這個時代的關鍵問題展開引人入勝的歷史敘事。《新冷戰》不只是一本國際新聞或政治評論，也是一部當代史的初稿，記錄恐怖主義退場後的二十一世紀，世界如何重回大國對抗的結構性競爭。本書深刻剖析美國五任總統在戰略上試圖與俄羅斯建立合作、推動中國融入國際秩序，卻在關鍵時機屢次錯失調整與應對的契機，而映照出美國國內政治分裂與制度失能對全球戰略的限制與焦慮。 以上內容擷取自博客來網路書店

In questo episodio del Podcast della Rivista di Psicoanalisi dialogheremo con la Dottoressa Rachele Mariani, redattrice della rubrica Ricerca e Metodo.Rachele Mariani ci parlerá del rapporto fra Psicoanalisi e Ricerca utilizzando la formulazione del caso clinico come fil rouge del suo discorso. Si discuterá del P.D.M.3 e si accennerà ai due contributi presenti nella sezione Ricerca e Metodo del numero 4/2025 della Rivista di Psicoanalisi. In questi due lavori la Dottoressa Muzi e la Dottoressa Tanzilli illustreranno l'applicazione del P.D.M.3 a due differenti casi clinici. 

From Ruins to Renewal | Ezra's Mission and God's Hand - Davide Colletta by MCC

Meditazioni anchor.fm/giulio-maspero

AI agents aren't “coming” to Ethereum—they're already here, spinning up on dedicated machines, clicking through wallets, deploying contracts, and even building apps for themselves. In this episode, Ryan and David sit down with Davide Crapis and Austin Griffith to map the emerging agent stack: ERC-8004 as a decentralized identity + reputation layer, x402 as payment rails for agent-to-agent commerce, and the real-world “Clawdbot” experiments that show what happens when an agent gets a wallet, a codebase, and a mandate. Along the way: prompt-injection risks, why agents read calldata like it's their native language, and why it may be the best time in history to be a solo builder—even as it gets harder to be a junior dev. ---

Thomas and Kevin finally make good on a promise and get Davide Montebruno into the fray. The improvisor, voice actor, and funny fellow helps the boys navigate The Opposite Day Clause as they learn what the Opposite of Santa is. Kevin complains about Hidalgo and Thomas is reeling.They reminisce about Marble Slab Creamery and their work life.Thomas resists becoming Droz as Davide brings them into the Advertising Game. The trio sling Segments before diving into the lamentations of making their nut.0:00 Intro and Check In19:22 Worst Jobs31:44 The Advertisement Game40:55 Hungry Hungry Hypocrites Davide Montebruno:Soap Scum presents Space Quest! (Feb. 10th in Winnipeg):https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/soap-scum-presents-space-quest-tickets-1982077014707Kevin Ramberran:Club Soda Improv:https://www.instagram.com/clubsodaimprovSoda Pop! Pop Up Show @ The Saint (Winnipeg): https://3common.com/event/soda-pop-a-pop-up-improv-show/696969afc5471f8284c9fb14Thomas TolesTrigger Happy:https://www.instagram.com/triggerhappycomedy/Motorcycle Rocketship:https://www.instagram.com/motorcyclerocketship/Secret Family Sketch:https://www.instagram.com/secretfamilysketch/Blueprint (First Draft) @ IO Chicago:https://ioimprov.com/shows/Check out our DnD show: 'What We Do in the Basement': https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/what-we-do-in-the-basement/id1552947049Epic Emotional Music by AShamaluevMusichttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqCwWaebljgFOLLOW Oops All Segments on Instagram: www.instagram.com/oopsallsegmentsFOLLOW Oops All Segments on TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@oopsallsegmentsSUBSCRIBE to Oops All Segments on YouTube: www.youtube.com/@oopsallsegments

On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, Razib talks to Davide Piffer, whose Substack examines genetic differences between populations. Piffer has been publishing on human genetic variation for a decade, and recently started a Substack, Piffer Pilfer, exploring similar issues in detail over a series of posts. Razib asks Piffer about the difficulties in analyzing polygenic scores from quantitative traits in ancient DNA samples. How does he do in technical terms, from genome quality to imputation to ancient populations from modern ones? Then, they discuss some of Piffer's findings, in particular, his work on pigmentation. Piffer talks about how he discovered that modern European pigmentation, and in particular, light complexion, is the product of both admixture from different populations with different characteristics and natural selection over the millennia. Piffer talks about how he discovered that selection for lighter pigmentation continued into the Iron Age.

David E. Scheim is a director of management in information systems and has authored books relating to the death of president John F. Kennedy and matters relating to public health. David is a returning guest to the show and during this episode we explore some clips from the HSCA that deal with Burt Griffin that are more critical and less certain on the conclusion of the warren commission than what his view is now.

Change de carrière en 1 an avec le programme Nouvelles Voies : t.y/reconversionMerci à l'Institut Transitions de soutenir le podcast !__Ton lit est-il dangereux pour ton sommeil, ta santé ET la planète ?? Il y a 9 chances sur 10 que oui. Voici comment y remédier avec Kipli, partenaire de cette vidéo.SOMMAIRE 01:07 Dors-tu assez ? 03:05 Le vrai danger des matelas 05:28 Une cata écolo 06:47 L'histoire de Davide 11:01 Le succès de Kipli 12:28 Des millions d'acariens ! 15:37 Anecdotes de dormeurs 17:08 Trop cher ? 21:53 Pollution intérieure 23:07 L'anti Ikea 28:49 Astuces pour un air intérieur sain __Le site officiel de Soif de SensSoutenir Soif de Sens via Tipeee Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Hi my loves!! In this solo, I'm opening up about something I've tiptoed around for years: how much I genuinely love being a mother. I talk about choosing joy over fear, parenting with intention, navigating privilege with humility, setting boundaries with Davide, reframing overwhelm, and the little mindset tricks that help me stay grounded- even on the days when Carlo is whining nonstop and Carmela can basically read my thoughts. This one is equal parts vulnerable, practical, and rooted in what's brought me the most happiness: autonomy, mastery, and purpose. I hope you enjoy!! Produced by Dear MediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Culto Canal Jovem - Janeirão - A Era do Espírito

Send us a textCavi di Lavagna, Italy: Sofia Peccora, a motorcycle mechanic, mourning the death of her adult son, Davide, from a drug overdose three years earlier. Her best friend, Carmen, convinces her to take a job at the local cafe, Pasticceria Fausto, as a pastry chef. Sofia accepts and quickly falls for the owner, Fausto, who turns out to be a criminal boss. Sofia and Fausto begin an affair, despite the reservations of her friends and her adult daughter, Paola. Fausto's role as a drug dealer threatens their relationship.B is for Bisexual - short stories by Laura P. Valtorta

Nel secondo turno dell'Happy Slam, la Rod Laver arena propone due confronti improbabili: Francesco Maestrelli (numero 141 del mondo) sfida Novak Djokovic, mentre Jannik Sinner affronta il 34enne australiano James Duckworth. In programma anche il derby azzurro Musetti-Sonego.

Rebecca Shaffer & Davide Weaver, chicken slams, and saving for the future!- h2 full 2125 Wed, 21 Jan 2026 21:13:22 +0000 ml5ikPNYC7pLnKtraA399loqwgqfMcOg comedy,religion & spirituality,society & culture,news,government The Dave Glover Show comedy,religion & spirituality,society & culture,news,government Rebecca Shaffer & Davide Weaver, chicken slams, and saving for the future!- h2 The Dave Glover Show has been driving St. Louis home for over 20 years. Unafraid to discuss virtually any topic, you'll hear Dave and crew's unique perspective on current events, news and politics, and anything and everything in between. © 2025 Audacy, Inc. Comedy Religion & Spirituality Society & Culture News Government False https://player

From Ruins to Renewal | Facing Opposition and Delay - Davide Colletta by MCC

Vorresti ricevere notizie, saluti, auguri dalle Apostole della Vita Interiore?Lasciaci i tuoi contatti cliccando il link qui sotto e con la nostra nuova rubrica digitale potremo raggiungerti.https://www.it.apostlesofil.com/database/- Premi il tasto PLAY per ascoltare la catechesi del giorno e condividi con altri se vuoi -+ Dal primo libro di Samuele +In quei giorni, Davide disse a Saul: "Nessuno si perda d'animo a causa di costui. Il tuo servo andrà a combattere con questo Filisteo". Saul rispose a Davide: "Tu non puoi andare contro questo Filisteo a combattere con lui: tu sei un ragazzo e costui è uomo d'armi fin dalla sua adolescenza". Davide aggiunse: "Il Signore che mi ha liberato dalle unghie del leone e dalle unghie dell'orso, mi libererà anche dalle mani di questo Filisteo". Saul rispose a Davide: "Ebbene va' e il Signore sia con te".Davide prese in mano il suo bastone, si scelse cinque ciottoli lisci dal torrente e li pose nella sua sacca da pastore, nella bisaccia; prese ancora in mano la fionda e si avvicinò al Filisteo.Il Filisteo avanzava passo passo, avvicinandosi a Davide, mentre il suo scudiero lo precedeva. Il Filisteo scrutava Davide e, quando lo vide bene, ne ebbe disprezzo, perché era un ragazzo, fulvo di capelli e di bell'aspetto. Il Filisteo disse a Davide: "Sono io forse un cane, perché tu venga a me con un bastone?". E quel Filisteo maledisse Davide in nome dei suoi dèi. Poi il Filisteo disse a Davide: "Fatti avanti e darò le tue carni agli uccelli del cielo e alle bestie selvatiche".Davide rispose al Filisteo: "Tu vieni a me con la spada, con la lancia e con l'asta. Io vengo a te nel nome del Signore degli eserciti, Dio delle schiere d'Israele, che tu hai sfidato. In questo stesso giorno, il Signore ti farà cadere nelle mie mani. Io ti abbatterò e ti staccherò la testa e getterò i cadaveri dell'esercito filisteo agli uccelli del cielo e alle bestie selvatiche; tutta la terra saprà che vi è un Dio in Israele. Tutta questa moltitudine saprà che il Signore non salva per mezzo della spada o della lancia, perché del Signore è la guerra ed egli vi metterà certo nelle nostre mani".Appena il Filisteo si mosse avvicinandosi incontro a Davide, questi corse a prendere posizione in fretta contro il Filisteo. Davide cacciò la mano nella sacca, ne trasse una pietra, la lanciò con la fionda e colpì il Filisteo in fronte. La pietra s'infisse nella fronte di lui che cadde con la faccia a terra.Così Davide ebbe il sopravvento sul Filisteo con la fionda e con la pietra, colpì il Filisteo e l'uccise, benché Davide non avesse spada. Davide fece un salto e fu sopra il Filisteo, prese la sua spada, la sguainò e lo uccise, poi con quella gli tagliò la testa. I Filistei videro che il loro eroe era morto e si diedero alla fuga.Parola del Signore.

Death changes how we see everything.In this episode, David Ferrugio speaks with writer Davide De Pierro about grief, impermanence, faith, doubt, and why loss isn't just about death — it's about meaning. Together, they explore how confronting death can clarify how we live, love, and choose purpose in the face of suffering.This is a conversation about grief beyond death, about perspective, and about why the awareness of mortality may be the greatest gift we're given.If you're looking for Grief Support check out our new ⁠Grief Journey App⁠⁠www.studio.com/griefjourney⁠Support the ShowJoin the ⁠DEAD Talks Patreon⁠ for just $2 to support the mission—and get episodes early & ad-free!Sign Up For E-Mail Updates Here > ⁠Submit Your Email⁠Hats, Shirts, Hoodies + More: ⁠Shop Here⁠ ⁠“Dead Dad Club” & “Dead Mom Club”⁠ – Wear your story, honor your people.Exclusive Discounts⁠10% off Neurogum⁠ – powered by natural caffeine, L-theanine, and vitamins B6 & B12 to boost focus and energy.About DEAD Talks DEAD Talks with David Ferrugio approaches death differently. Each guest shares raw stories of grief, loss, or unique perspectives that challenge the “don't talk about death” taboo. Grief doesn't end—it evolves. After losing his father on September 11th at just 12 years old, David discovered the power of conversation. Through laughter, tears, and honest dialogue, DEAD Talks helps make it a little easier to talk about death, mourning, trauma, and the life that continues beyond it.Connect with DEAD Talks⁠YouTube⁠ | ⁠Facebook⁠ | ⁠Instagram⁠ | ⁠TikTok⁠ | ⁠www.deadtalks.net

Vorresti ricevere notizie, saluti, auguri dalle Apostole della Vita Interiore?Lasciaci i tuoi contatti cliccando il link qui sotto e con la nostra nuova rubrica digitale potremo raggiungerti.https://www.it.apostlesofil.com/database/- Premi il tasto PLAY per ascoltare la catechesi del giorno e condividi con altri se vuoi -+ Dal Vangelo secondo Marco +In quel tempo, di sabato Gesù passava fra campi di grano e i suoi discepoli, mentre camminavano, si misero a cogliere le spighe.I farisei gli dicevano: "Guarda! Perché fanno in giorno di sabato quello che non è lecito?". Ed egli rispose loro: "Non avete mai letto quello che fece Davide quando si trovò nel bisogno e lui e i suoi compagni ebbero fame? Sotto il sommo sacerdote Abiatàr, entrò nella casa di Dio e mangiò i pani dell'offerta, che non è lecito mangiare se non ai sacerdoti, e ne diede anche ai suoi compagni!".E diceva loro: "Il sabato è stato fatto per l'uomo e non l'uomo per il sabato! Perciò il Figlio dell'uomo è signore anche del sabato".Parola del Signore.

Ottocento anni fa, il Poverello d'Assisi non moriva, ma “transitava“, passava cioè dalla vita terrena a quella eterna, con una gioia e una serenità che ancora oggi interrogano e ispirano. Celebrare questo centenario assume il significato non solo di ricordare un evento storico, ma immergersi nel significato profondo di una scomparsa che, come disse Gilbert Chesterton, fece sì che «le stelle non videro mai un uomo morire così felice».La morte di San Francesco, infatti, non fu un addio malinconico, ma un inno alla vita. Venti anni dopo la sua conversione, Francesco sentì l'ora della sua dipartita avvicinarsi. Lungi dall'essere turbato, chiese ai suoi frati più cari di cantare le lodi al Signore, intonando egli stesso un salmo di Davide. Conscio della fine imminente, ma soprattutto dell'inizio di una nuova vita, perdonò e benedisse tutti i suoi figli spirituali, presenti e assenti. Racconta la sua biografia che era «Circondato dai suoi frati, la sua anima si staccò dal corpo, ascendendo al cielo in una visione luminosa, come una stella che brilla più del sole» (cf. FF 508-14).Un disco intitolato Gloriosus Franciscus firmato dall'Anonima Frottolisti ci guida nel percorso. Ospite al microfono di Giovanni Conti sarà Massimiliano Dragoni.

As the Japanese police prepare for a raid on the Aum Shinrikyo compound, cult leader Shoko Asahara launches a desperate chemical weapons attack in downtown Tokyo. During the height of Monday morning rush hour, Aum terrorists target five commuter trains with sarin gas, killing 13 people and scarring the psyche of an entire nation. In the aftermath, survivors struggle to pick up the pieces of their lives and adapt to new realities.    SOURCES: Amarasingam, A. (2017, April 5). A history of sarin as a weapon. The Atlantic.  Brackett, D. W. Holy Terror: Armageddon in Tokyo. 1996. Cotton, Simon. “Nerve Agents: What Are They and How Do They Work?” American Scientist, vol. 106, no. 3, 2018, pp. 138–40.  Danzig, Richard; Sageman, Marc; Leighton, Terrance; Hough, Lloyd; Yuki, Hidemi; Kotani, Rui; Hosford, Zachary M.. Aum Shinrikyo: Insights Into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons . Center for a New American Security. 2011 “Former ER Doctor Recalls Fear Treating Victims in 1995 Tokyo Sarin Attack.” The Japan Times, March 18, 2025.. Gunaratna, Rohan. “Aum Shinrikyo's Rise, Fall and Revival.” Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses, vol. 10, no. 8, 2018, pp. 1–6.  Harmon, Christopher C. “How Terrorist Groups End: Studies of the Twentieth Century.” Strategic Studies Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 3, 2010, pp. 43–84. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26269787.  “IHT: A Safe and Sure System — Until Now.” The New York Times, 21 Mar. 1995. Jones, Seth G., and Martin C. Libicki. “Policing and Japan's Aum Shinrikyo.” How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al Qa'ida, RAND Corporation, 2008, pp. 45–62.  Kaplan, David E. (1996) “Aum's Shoko Asahara and the Cult at the End of the World”. WIRED.  Lifton, Robert Jay. Destroying the World to Save It: Aum Shinrikyo, Apocalyptic Violence, and the New Global Terrorism. 1999. Murakami, Haruki. Underground: The Tokyo Gas Attack and the Japanese Psyche. Translated by Alfred Birnbaum and Philip Gabriel. 2001. Murphy, P. (2014, June 21). Matsumoto: Aum's sarin guinea pig. The Japan Times.  Reader, Ian. Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan: The Case of Aum Shinrikyo.  2000. Tucker, Jonathan B. “Chemical/Biological Terrorism: Coping with a New Threat.” Politics and the Life Sciences, vol. 15, no. 2, 1996, pp. 167–83.  Ushiyama, Rin. “Shock and Anger: Societal Responses to the Tokyo Subway Attack.” Aum Shinrikyō and Religious Terrorism in Japanese Collective Memory., The British Academy, 2023, pp. 52–80.  Williams, Richard. 2003. “Marathon Man.” The Guardian, May 16, 2003. “Woman bedridden since AUM cult's 1995 sarin gas attack on Tokyo subway dies at 56.” The Mainichi (English), 20 Mar. 2020, “30 Years After Sarin Attack — Lessons Learned / Brother Kept Diary For Sister Caught in Sarin Attack, Chronicling Her 25-Year Struggle With Illness” The Japan News, 19 Mar. 2025, Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dai nostri archivi, l'intervista a uno degli sceneggiatori della serie TV "M - Il figlio del secolo", ancora disponibile su SBS On Demand.