Podcasts about Ethics

In this episode, Travis sits down with his producer Eric for a candid, unscripted conversation reacting to viral clips and debates around church finances, nonprofit transparency, and leadership accountability. Drawing from his personal experience growing up in a megachurch environment and his perspective as a business owner, Travis breaks down the complex intersection of money, mission, and ethics—highlighting the challenges leaders face when managing large organizations without financial training, and why transparency is essential whether you're running a church, nonprofit, or business. On this episode we talk about: The conflicting messages about money in church culture and how it shapes people's beliefs about wealth The importance of financial transparency in nonprofits, religious organizations, and leadership roles Why lack of financial education can lead to mismanagement—even with good intentions The ethical complexity of pastor salaries and compensation based on value and leadership impact Alternative models for growing communities without massive overhead and multi-million dollar buildings Top 3 Takeaways Transparency builds trust. Whether you're running a church, nonprofit, or business, people deserve clarity on how their contributions are being used. Leadership requires financial competence. Vision alone isn't enough—understanding finances is critical when managing organizations with significant revenue. Compensation should reflect value—but accountability matters. Leaders deserve to be paid for the value they create, but openness and ethical stewardship are essential when others fund that compensation. Notable Quotes "When you're looking for reasons to be less transparent, it's not a good look—especially when people are trusting you with their money." "He built something incredible and deserves to be compensated—but transparency makes that easier to trust." "Money only solves your money problems—but it's easier to solve the rest of your problems when you have money in the bank." Connect with Travis Chappell: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travischappell Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/travischappell Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/travischappell Other: https://travischappell.com  Travis Makes Money is made possible by High Level – the All-In-One Sales & Marketing Platform built for agencies, by an agency.  Capture leads, nurture them, and close more deals—all from one powerful platform.  Get an extended free trial at gohighlevel.com/travis Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I am Rolf Claessen and together with my co-host Ken Suzan I welcome you to Episode 172 of our podcast IP Fridays. Today's interview guests are Co-Founder & CEO of Inception Point AI, Jeanine Whright, and Mark Stignani, who is Partner & Chair of Analytics Practice at Barnes & Thornburg LLP. https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeaninepercivalwright https://www.linkedin.com/in/markstignani Inception Point AI But before the interview I have news for you: The Unified Patent Court (UPC) ruled on Feb 19, 2026, that specialized insurance can cover security for legal costs. This is vital for firms, as it eases litigation financing and lowers financial hurdles for patent lawsuits by removing the need for high liquid assets to enforce rights at the UPC. On Feb 12, 2026, the WIPO Coordination Committee nominated Daren Tang for a second six-year term as Director General. Tang continues modernizing the global IP system, focusing on SMEs, women, and digital transformation. His confirmation in April is considered certain. An AAFA study from Feb 4 reveals 41% of tested fakes (clothing/shoes) failed safety standards. Many contained toxic chemicals like phthalates, BPA, or lead. The study highlights that counterfeiters increasingly use Meta platforms to sell unsafe imitations directly to consumers. China's CNIPA 2026 report announced a crackdown on bad-faith patent and trademark filings. Beyond better examination quality, the agency will sanction shady IP firms and stop strategies violating “good faith” to make China’s IP system more ethical and innovation-friendly. Now, let's hear the interview with Jeanine Whright and Mark Stignani! How AI Is Rewiring Media & Entertainment: Key Takeaways from Ken Suzan's Conversation with Jeanine Wright and Mark Stignani In this IP Fridays interview, Ken Suzan speaks with two repeat guests who look at the same phenomenon from two angles: Jeanine Wright, Co-Founder & CEO of Inception Point AI, as a builder of AI-native entertainment, and Mark Stignani, Partner and Chair of the Analytics Practice at Barnes & Thornburg LLP, as a lawyer advising clients who are trying to use AI without stepping into a legal (or ethical) crater. What emerges is a clear picture: generative AI is not just “another tool.” It is rapidly becoming the default infrastructure for creative work—while the rules around ownership, consent, and accountability lag behind. 1) What “AI-generated personalities” really are (and why that matters) Jeanine's company is not primarily “cloning” real people. Instead, Inception Point AI creates original, fictional personalities—characters with backstories, ambitions, and evolving arcs—then deploys them into the world as podcast hosts and content creators (and eventually actors and musicians). Her key point: the creative work still starts with humans. Writers and creators define the concept, tone, audience, and story engine. What AI changes is speed, cost, and iteration—and therefore what is economically feasible to produce. 2) The “generative content pipeline” isn't a magic button A recurring misconception Ken raises is the idea that someone “pushes a button” and content pops out. Jeanine explains that real production looks more like a hybrid studio: A creative team defines character, voice, format, and storyline. A technical team builds what she calls an “AI orchestration layer” that combines multiple models and tools. The “stack” differs by format: the workflow for a long-form audio drama is different from a short-form beauty clip. This matters because it reframes AI content not as a single output, but as a pipeline decision: which tools, which data sources, which QA, and which governance steps are used—and where human review happens. 3) The biggest legal questions: origin, liability, ownership, and contracts Mark doesn't name a single “top issue.” He describes a cluster of problems that repeatedly show up in client conversations: Training data and “origin story” Clients keep asking: Can I legally use AI output if the tool was trained on copyrighted works? Even if the output looks new, the unease is about whether the tool's capabilities are built on unlicensed inputs. Liability for unintended harm Mark flags risk from AI content that inadvertently infringes, defames, or carries bias. The legal exposure may not match the creator's intent. Ownership and protectability He points to a big gap: many jurisdictions are still reluctant to grant classic IP rights (copyright or patent-style protection) to purely AI-generated material. That creates uncertainty around whether businesses can truly “own” what they produce. Old contracts weren't written for AI A final, practical point: many agreements—talent contracts, author clauses, data licenses—predate generative AI and simply don't address it. That leads to disputes about scope, permissions, and—crucially—indemnities. 4) Are we at a tipping point? The “gold rush” vs. “next creative era” views Jeanine frames AI as “the world's most powerful creative tool”—comparable to previous step-changes like animation, special effects, and CGI. For her, the strategic implication is simple: creators who learn to use AI well will expand what they can build and test, faster than ever. Mark's metaphor is more cautionary: he calls the moment a “gold rush” where technology is sprinting ahead of law. Courts are getting flooded with foundational disputes, while legislation is fragmented—he notes that states may move faster than federal frameworks, and that labor agreements (e.g., union protections) will be a key pressure point. 5) Democratization: more creators, more niche content, more experimentation One of the most concrete themes is access. Jeanine argues AI will: Lower production barriers for independent filmmakers and storytellers. Reduce the need for “hit-making only” economics that dominate Hollywood. Make micro-audience content commercially viable. Her example is intentionally niche: highly localized, specialized content (like a “pollen report” for many markets) that would never have made financial sense before can now exist—and thrive—because the production cost drops and personalization scales. 6) Likeness, consent, and “digital performers”: what happens when AI resembles a real actor? Ken pushes into a sensitive area: what if someone generates a performance that closely resembles a living actor without consent? Mark outlines the current (imperfect) toolbox—because, as he emphasizes, most laws weren't built for this scenario. He points to practical claims that may come into play in the U.S., such as rights of publicity and false endorsement-type theories, and notes that whether something is parody or “too close” can become a major fault line. Jeanine explains her company's operational approach: They focus on original personalities, designed “from scratch.” They build internal checks to avoid misappropriating known names, likenesses, or recognizable identities. If they ever work with real people, the model would be licensing their likeness/voice. A subtle but important business point also appears here: Jeanine expects AI-native characters themselves to become licensable assets—meaning the entertainment economy may expand to include “celebrity rights” for fully synthetic personalities. 7) Ethics: the real line is “deception,” not “AI vs. human” The ethical core of the conversation is not “AI is bad” or “AI is good.” It's how AI is used—especially whether audiences are misled. Mark highlights several ethical risks: Misuse of tools to manipulate faces and content (“AI slop” and political misuse). Displacement of creative workers without adequate transition support. A concern that AI often optimizes toward “statistical averages,” potentially flattening originality. Jeanine agrees ethics must be designed into the system. She describes regular discussions with an ethicist and emphasizes a principle: transparency. Her company discloses when content or personalities are AI-generated. She argues that if people understand what they're engaging with and choose it knowingly, the ethical problem shifts from “AI exists” to “Are we tricking people?” Mark adds a real-world warning: deepfakes are now credible enough to enable serious fraud—he references a case-like scenario where a synthetic video meeting deceived an employee into authorizing a payment. The point is clear: authenticity and verification are no longer optional. 8) The “dead actor” hypothetical: legal permission vs. moral intent Ken raises a provocative scenario: an actor's estate authorizes an AI-generated new performance, but the actor opposed such technology while alive. Neither guest offers a simplistic answer. Jeanine suggests that even if the estate holds legal rights, a company might choose to avoid such content out of respect and because the ethical “overhang” could damage the storytelling outcome. She also notes the harder question: people who died before today's capabilities may never have been able to meaningfully consent to what AI can now do—raising questions about how we interpret legacy intent. Mark underscores the practical contract problem: many rights are drafted “in perpetuity,” but that doesn't automatically settle the ethical question. 9) Five-year forecast: “AI everywhere,” but audiences may stratify Ken closes with a prediction question: in five years, how much entertainment content will significantly involve AI—and will audiences care? Jeanine predicts AI becomes the default creative layer for most content creation. Mark is slightly more conservative on the percentage, but adds an important nuance: the market will likely stratify. Low-cost, high-volume content may become saturated with AI, while premium segments may emphasize “human-made” as a differentiator—especially if disclosure norms become standard. Bottom line for business leaders and creators This interview lands on a pragmatic conclusion: AI will change how content is made at scale, and the competitive edge will go to teams that combine creative taste, operational discipline, and legal/ethical governance. If you're building, commissioning, or distributing content, the questions you can't dodge anymore are: What's the provenance of the tools and data you rely on? Who is responsible when output harms, infringes, or misleads? What rights can you actually claim in AI-assisted work? Do your contracts and disclosures match the new reality? Ken Suzan: Thank you, Rolf. We have two returning guests to the IP Friday’s podcast. Joining me today is Janine Wright and Mark Stignani. Our topic for discussion, how is AI transforming the media and entertainment industries today? We look at the issues from differing perspectives. A bit about our guests, Janine Wright is a seasoned board member, CEO, global COO and CFO. She’s led organizations from startup to a $475 million plus revenue subsidiary of a public company. She excels in growth strategy, adopting innovative technologies, scaling operations and financial management. Janine is a media and entertainment attorney and trial litigator turned technologist and qualified financial expert. She is the co-founder and CEO of Inception Point AI, a growing company that is paving new ground with AI-generated personalities and content through developing technology and story. Mark Stignani is a partner with Barnes & Thornburg LLP and is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is the chair of the data analytics department with a particular emphasis on artificial intelligence, machine learning, cryptocurrency and ESG. Mark combines the power of artificial intelligence and machine learning with his skills as a corporate and IP counsel to deliver unparalleled insights and strategies to his clients. Welcome, Janine and Mark to the IP Friday’s podcast. Jeanine Whright: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for having me and fun to be back. It feels nostalgic to be here. Ken Suzan: That’s right. And you both were on the program. So it’s fantastic that you’re both back again. So our format, I’m going to ask a question to Janine and or Mark and sometimes to both of you. So that’s going to be how we proceed. Let’s jump right in. Janine, your company creates AI-generated actors. For listeners who may not be familiar, can you briefly explain what that means and what’s now possible that wasn’t even two years ago? Jeanine Whright: Sure. Yeah, we are creating AI-generated personalities. So new characters, new personalities from scratch. We design who these personalities are and will be, how they will evolve. So we give them complex backstories. We give them hopes and dreams and aspirations. We every aspect of them, their families, how they’re going to evolve. And in the same way that, say, you know, Disney designs the character for its next animated feature or, you know, an electronic arts designs a character for its next major video game. We are doing that for these personalities and then we are launching them into the world as podcast hosts, content creators on social platforms like YouTube, Instagram and TikTok. And even in the future, you know, actors in feature length films, musicians, etc. Ken Suzan: Very fascinating. Mark, from your practice, what’s the single biggest legal question or dispute you’re seeing clients wrestle with when it comes to AI and media creation? Mark Stignani: Well, I think that, you know, it’s not just one thing, it’s like four things. But most of them tend to be kind of the origin story of AI data or AI tools that they use because, you know, but for the use of AI tools trained on copyrighted materials, the tools wouldn’t really exist in their current form. So a lot of my clients are wondering about, you know, can I legally use this output if it’s built upon somebody else’s IP? The second ask, the second flavor of that is really, is there liability being created if I take AI content that inadvertently infringes or defames or biases there? So there’s the whole notion of training bias from the training materials that comes out. The third phase is really, you know, can I really own this? Because much of the world does not really give IP rights into AI-generated inventions, copyrighted materials. It’s still kind of a big razor. Then at the end of the day, you know, if it’s an existing relationship, does my contract even contemplate this? So everything from authors contracts on up to just use of data rights that predate AI. Ken Suzan: And Janine and Mark, a question to both of you. How would you describe where we are right now in the AI revolution in media and entertainment? Are we approaching a tipping point? And if so, what are the things we need to watch for? Jeanine Whright: Yeah, I definitely think that we’re at a phase where people are starting to come to the realization that AI is the world’s most powerful creative tool. But that, you know, storytelling and point of view is what creates demand and audiences. And AI doesn’t threaten or change that. But it does mean that as people evolve in this medium, they’re very likely going to need to adopt, utilize and figure out how to hone their craft with these AI-generated content and these AI-generated toolings. So this is, you know, something that people have done certainly in the past in all sorts of ways in using new tools. And we’ve seen that make a significant change in the industry. So you look at, you know, the dawn of animation as a medium. You look at use of special effects, computer-generated imagery in the likes of Pixar. And this is certainly the next phase of that evolution. But because of the power of the tool and what will become the ubiquity of the tool, I think that it’s pretty revolutionary and all the more necessary for people to figure out how to embrace this as part of their creative process. Ken Suzan: Thank you, Janine. Mark, your thoughts? Mark Stignani: Yeah, I mean, I liken this to historically to like the California gold rush right now, because, you know, the technology is so far outpaced in any of the legal frameworks that are available. And so we’re just trying to shoehorn things in left and right here. So, I mean, the courts are beginning to start to engage with the foundational questions. I don’t think they’re quite there yet. I just noticed Anthropic got sued again by another group of people, big music group, because of the downloaded works they’ve done. I mean, so the courts are, you know, the courts are certainly inundated with, you know, too many of these foundational questions. Legislatively, hard to tell. I mean, federal law, the federal government is not moving uniformly on this other than to let the gold rush continue without much check and balance to it. Whereas states are now probably moving a lot faster. Colorado, Illinois, even Minnesota is attempting to craft legislation and limitations on what you can do with content and where to go with it. So, I mean, the things we need to watch for any of the fair use decisions coming out here, you know, some of the SAG-AFTRA contract clauses. And, you know, again, the federal government, I just, you know, I got a big shrug going as to what they’re actually going to come up with here in the next 90 to 100 days. So, but, you know, I think they’ll be forced into doing something sooner than later. Ken Suzan: Okay, let’s jump into the topic of the rise of generative content pipelines. My first question to Janine. Studios and production companies are now building what some call generative content pipelines. This is where AI systems produce everything from scripts to visual effects to voice performances. What efficiencies and creative possibilities does this unlock for the industry? Jeanine Whright: Yeah, so this is quite a bit of what we do. And if I could help pull the curtain back and explain a little bit. Ken Suzan: That’d be great. Jeanine Whright: Yeah, there’s this assumption that, you know, somebody is just sitting behind a machine pushing a button and an out pops, you know, what it is that we’re producing. There’s actually quite a bit of humans still in the loop in the process. You know, we have my team as creators. The other half of my team is the technologists. And those creators are working largely at what we describe as the the tip of the sphere. So they’re, of course, coming up with the concepts of who are these personalities? What are these personalities, characters, backgrounds going to be a lot of like rich personality development? And then they’re creating like what are the formats? What are the kind of story arcs? What is the kinds of content that this this character wants to tell? And what are the audiences they’re desiring to reach and what’s most going to resonate with them? And then what we built internally is what we refer to as an AI orchestration layer. So that allows us to pull from basically all of the different models and then all of these different really cool AI tools. And put those together in such a way and combine those in such a way that we can have the kind of output that our creative team envisions for what they want it to be. And at the end of the day, what you what the stack looks like for, say, a long form audio drama, like the combination of LLMs that we’re going to use in different parts of scripting and production and, you know, ideating and all of that. And the kinds of tooling that we use to actually make it and get it to sound good and have the kinds of personality characteristics that we want to be in an authentic voice for a podcast is going to be different than the tech stack and the tool stack that we might use for a short form Instagram beauty tip reel. And so there’s a lot of art in being able to pull all of these tools together to get them to do exactly what you want them to do. But I think the second part of your question is just as interesting as the first. I mean, what is what possibilities is this unlocking? So of course you’re finding efficiencies in the creative production process. You can move faster. You can do things were less expensive, perhaps, and you were able to do it before. But on the creator side, I think one thing that hasn’t been talked about enough is how it is really like blown wide the aperture of what creators can do and can envision. Traditionally, you know, Hollywood podcasting, many of these businesses that become big businesses have become hit making businesses where they need to focus on a very narrow of wide gen pop content that they think is going to get tens of millions, hundreds of millions in, you know, fans and dollars in revenue for every piece of content that they make. So the problem with that is, is that it really narrows the kinds of things that ultimately get made, which is why you see things happening in Hollywood, like the Blacklist, which is, you know, this famous list of really exceptional content that remains unpredited, unproduced, or why you see things like, you know, 70 to 80% of the top 100 movies being based on pre-existing IP, right? Because these are such huge bets that you need to feel very confident that you’re going to be able to get big, big audiences and big, big dollars from it. But with AI, and really lowering the barrier to entry, lowering the costs of production and marketing, the experimentation that you can do is really, really phenomenal. So, you know, my creative team, if they have an idea, they make it, you know, they don’t have to wring their hands through like a green lighting process of, you know, should we, shouldn’t we, like we, we can make an experiment with lots of different things, we can do various different versions of something. We can see what would this look like if I placed it in the 1800s, or what if I gave this character an Australian accent, and it’s just the power of being able to have this creative partner that can ideate with you and experiment with you at rocket speed. With the creators that are embracing it, you can see how it is really fun for them to be able to have this wide of a range of possibility. Ken Suzan: Mark, when you hear about these generative pipelines, what are the immediate red flags or concerns that come to mind from a legal standpoint? How about ethics underlying all of this? Well, Mark Stignani: that was not, that’s the number one red flag because I mean, we are seeing not just that in the entertainment industry, but it literally at political levels, and the kind of the phrase, to turn the phrase AI slop being generated, we’re seeing, you know, people’s facial expressions altered. In some cases, we’re seeing AI tools being misused to exploit various groups of individuals and genders and age groups. So I mean, there’s a whole lot of things ethically that people are using AI for that just don’t quite cover it. Especially in the entertainment industry, I mean, we’re looking at a fair amount of displacement of human workers without adequate transition support, devaluation of the creative labor. I mean, the thing though that I’m always from a technical standpoint is AI is simply a statistical average of most everything. So it kind of devalues the benefit of having a human creator, a human contribution to it. That’s the ethical side. But on the legal side, I see chain of title issues. I mean, because these are built on very questionable IP ownership stages, I mean, in most of these tools, there has been some large copying, training and taking of copyrighted materials. Is it transformational? Maybe. But there’s certainly not a chain of title, nor is there permission granted for that training. I mentioned SAG-AFTRA earlier, I think there’s a potential set of union contract aspects to this that if you know many of these agreements and use sub-licenses for authors and actor agreements, they weren’t written with AI in mind. So that’s another red flag. And also I just think in indemnification. So if we ultimately get to a point where groups are liable for using content without previous license, then who’s liable? Is the tool maker the liable group or the actual end user? So those are probably my top four red flags. But I think ethics is probably my biggest place because just because we can do something from an ethical standpoint doesn’t mean we should. Jeanine Wright: Yeah, if I can respond to both of those points. I mean, one from a legal perspective, just to be very clear, I mean, we are always pulling from multiple different models and always pulling from multiple different sources. And we even have data sources that we license or use for single source of truth on certain pieces of information. So we’re always pulling things together from multiple different sources. We also have built into our process, you know, internal QAing and checking to make sure that we’re not misappropriating the name or likeness of any existing known personality or character. We are creating original personalities there. We design their voice from scratch. We design their look from scratch. So we’re not on our personality side, we’re not pulling or even taking inspiration from existing intellectual property that’s already out there in creating these personalities. On the ethical side, I agree. I mean, when we came out of stealth, we came out of stealth in September. There was certainly quite a bit of backlash from folks in my—I previously co-founded a company in the audio space. I mean, there’s been many rounds of layoffs in audio and in many other parts of the entertainment industry. So I’m very sensitive to the feedback around, like, is this job displacement? I mean, I do think that the CEO of NVIDIA said it right when he said, you’re likely not going to lose your job to AI, but you will lose your job to somebody who knows how to use AI. I think these tools are transforming the way that content is made and that the faster that people can embrace this tooling, the more likely they’re going to be having the kinds of roles that they want in, you know, in content creation and storytelling in the future. And we are hiring. I’m hiring AI video creators, AI audio creators. I’m hiring AI developers. So people who are looking for those roles, I mean, please reach out to me, we would love to work with you and we’d love to grow with you. We also take the ethics very seriously. For the last few months or so, I’ve met regularly with an ethicist, we talk about all sorts of issues around, you know, is designing AI-generated people, you know, good for humanity? And what about authenticity and transparency and deception, and how are we in building in this space going to avoid some of the problems that we’ve seen with things like social media and other forms of technology? So we keep that very top of mind and we try to build on our own internal values-based system and, you know, continue to elevate and include the humanity as part of the conversation. Ken Suzan: Thank you, Janine. Janine, some argue that AI content pipelines will level the field for filmmaking, giving independent creators access to tools that were once available only to major studios. Is that the future you envision? Jeanine Wright: I do think that with AI you will see an incredible democratization of access to technology and access to these capabilities. So I do think, you know, rise of independent filmmakers, you won’t have as many people who are sitting on a brilliant idea for the next fantastic script or movie that just cannot get it made because they will be able to with these tools, get something made and out there, at least to get the attention of somebody who could then decide that they want to invest in it at a studio kind of level in the future. The other thing that I think is really interesting is that I think, you know, AI will empower more niche content and more creators who can thrive in micro-communities. So it used to be because of this hit generation business model, everything needed to be made for the masses and a lot of content for niche audiences and micro-communities was neglected because there was just no way to make that content commercially viable. But now, if you can leverage AI—we make a pollen report podcast in 300 markets, you know, nobody would have ever made that before, but it is very valuable information, a very valuable piece of content for people who really care about the pollen in their local community. So there’s all sorts of ways that being able to leverage AI is making it more accessible both to the creator and to the audience that is looking for content that truly resonates with them. Ken Suzan: Mark, let’s talk about the legal landscape right now. If someone creates an AI-generated performance that closely resembles a living actor without their consent, what legal recourse does that actor have? Mark Stignani: Well, I mean, I think we can go back to the OpenAI Scarlett Johansson thing where, you know, if it’s simply—well, the “walks like a duck, quacks like a duck” type of aspect there. You know, I think it’s pretty straightforward that they need to walk it back. I mean, the US doesn’t have moral rights, really, but there’s a public visage right, if you will. And so, one of the things that I find predominantly useful here is that these actors likely have rights of publicity there, we probably have a Lanham Act false endorsement claim, and you know, again, if the performance is not parody, and it’s so close to the original performance, we probably have a copyright discussion. But again, all of these laws predate the use of AI, so we’re going to probably see new sets of law. I mean, we’re probably going to see “resurrection” frameworks, we’ll probably have frameworks for synthetic actors and likenesses, but the rules just aren’t there yet. So, unfortunately, your question is largely predictive versus well-settled at this point. Ken Suzan: Janine, your company works with AI actors. How do you navigate the questions of consent and likeness compensation when creating digital performers? Jeanine Wright: I mean, if we—so first of all, if we were to work with a person who is an existing real-life person or was an existing real-life person, then we would work with them to license their name and likeness or their voice or whatever aspects of it we were going to use in creating content in partnership with them. Not typically our business model; we are, as I said, designing all of our personalities from scratch and making all of our content originally. So, we’ve not had to do that historically. Now, you know, the flip side is: can I license my characters as if they’re similar to living characters? Like will I be able to license the name and likeness and voice of my AI-generated personalities? I think the answer is yes and we’re already starting to do that. Ken Suzan: Let’s just switch gears into ethics and AI because I find this to be a really fascinating issue. I want to look at a hypothetical. And this is to both of you, Janine and Mark: an AI system creates a new performance by a beloved actor who passed away decades ago, and the actor’s estate authorizes it, but the actor was known to have expressed opposition to such technology during their lifetime. Is this ethical? Jeanine Wright: This feels like a Gifts, Wills, and Trusts exam question. Ken Suzan: It sounds like it, that’s right. Jeanine Wright: Throwing me back to my law school days. Exactly. What are your thoughts? It’d be interesting to see like who has the rights there. I mean, I think if you have the legal rights, the question is around, you know, is it ethical to go against what you knew was somebody’s wishes at the time? I guess the honest answer is I don’t know. It would depend a lot on the circumstances of the case. I mean, if we were faced with a situation like that where there was a discrepancy, we would probably move away from doing that content out of respect for the deceased and out of a feeling that, you know, if this person felt strongly against it, then it would be less likely that you could make that storytelling exceptional in some way—it would color it in a way that you wouldn’t want in the outcome. And I feel like there’s—I mean, certainly going forward and it’s already happening—there are plenty of people I think who have name, likeness, and voice rights that they are ready to license that wouldn’t have this overhang. Ken Suzan: Mark, your thoughts? Mark Stignani: Yeah, I mean, again, I have to kind of go back to our property law—the Rule Against Perpetuities. You know, from a property standpoint to AI rights and likenesses—since most of the digital replica contracts that I’ve reviewed generally do talk about things in perpetuity. But if it’s not written down for that actor and the estate is doing this—is it ethical? You know, that is the debate. Jeanine Wright: Well, gold star to you, Mark, for bringing up the Rule Against Perpetuities. There’s another one that I haven’t heard for many years. This is really taking me back to my law school days. Ken Suzan: It’s a throwback. Jeanine Wright: The other thing that’s really interesting is that this technology is really so revolutionary and new that it’s hard to even contemplate now what it is going to be in a decade, much less for people who have passed away to have contemplated what the potential for it could be today. So you could have somebody who is, perhaps, a deceased musician who expressed concerns about digital representations of themselves or digital music while they were alive. But now, the possibility is that you could recreate—certainly I could use my technology to recreate—that musician from scratch in a very detailed way, trained on tons of different available data. Not just like a digital twin or a moving image of them, but to really rebuild their personality from scratch, so that they and their music could be reintroduced to totally new generations in a very respectful and authentic way to them. It’s hard to know, with the understanding that that is possible, whether or not somebody who is deceased today would or would not agree to something like that. I mean, many of them might want, under those circumstances, for their music to live on. These deceased actors and musicians could live forever with the power of AI technology. Mark Stignani: Yeah, I really just kind of go to the whole—is deep-faking a famous actor the best way to preserve them or keep them live? Again, that’s a bit more of an ethical question because the deep fakes are getting good enough right now to create huge problems. Even zoom meetings in Hong Kong where a CFO was on a call with five synthetic actors who all looked like his coworkers and they sent a big check out based upon that. So again, the technology is getting good enough to fool people. Jeanine Wright: I think that’s right, Mark, but I guess I would just highlight the same way that it always has been: the ethical line isn’t AI versus human, the ethical line is about deception. Like, are you deceiving people? And if people know what it is that they’re getting and they’re choosing to engage with it, then I think it isn’t about the power of the technology. In our business, we have elected—not everybody has—but we have elected to be AI transparent. So we tell people when they listen to our show, we include it in our show notes, we include it on our socials. Even when we’re designing our characters to be very photo-realistic, we make an extra point to make sure that people know that this is AI-generated content or an AI personality. Like, our intention is not to deceive and to be candid. From a business model perspective, we don’t need to. I mean, there’s already people who know and understand that it is AI, and AI is different than people. Because it is AI, there’s all sorts of things that you can do with it that you would not be able to do with a real person. You know, we get people who ask us on the podcast side, we get all sorts of crazy funny requests. You know, people who say, “Can I text with this personality? Can I talk to them on the phone? Can they help me cook in the kitchen? Can they sing me Happy Birthday? Can they show up at my Zoom meeting today because I think my boss would love it?” You know, all sorts of different ways that people are wanting to engage with these characters. And now we’re in the process of rolling out real-time personalities so people will be able to engage with our personalities live. It is a totally different way that people are able to engage with content, and people can, as they choose, decide what kind of content they want to engage with. Ken Suzan: Jeanine and Mark, we’re coming to the end of this podcast. I would love to keep talking for hours but we have to stay to our timetable here. Last question: five years from now, what percentage of entertainment content do you predict will involve significant AI generation, and will audiences care about that percentage? Jeanine? Jeanine Wright: I mean, I would say 99.9%. I mean, already you’re seeing—I think YouTube did a survey—that it was like 90% of its top creators said that they’re using AI as material components of their content creation process. So, I think this will be the default way that content is created. And content that is not made with AI, you know, there’ll be special film festivals for non-AI generated content, and that will be a special separate thing than the thing that everybody is doing now. Ken Suzan: Mark, your thoughts? Mark Stignani: Yeah, I go a little lower. I mean, I think Jeanine is right that we’re seeing, especially in the low-quality content creation and like the YouTube shorts and things like that, you know, there’s so much AI being pushed forward that the FTC even acquired an “AI slop” title to it. I do think that disclosure will become normalized, that the industries will be pushed to say when something is AI and what is not. And I think it’s very much like, you know, do you care about quality or not? If you value the human input or the human factor in this, there will be an upper tier where it’s “AI-free” or low AI assistant. I think that it’s going to stratify because the stuff coming through the social media platforms right now—I can’t be on it right now just because there’s so much nonsense. Even my children, who are without much AI training at all, find it just too unbelievable for them. So, I think it will become normalized, but I think that we’re going to see a bunch of tiers. Ken Suzan: Well, Jeanine and Mark, this has been a fantastic discussion of an ever-evolving field in IP law. Thank you to both of you for spending time with us today on the IP Friday’s podcast. Jeanine Wright: Thank you so much for having me. Mark Stignani: Appreciate your time. Thank you again.

While its origin is murky, the adage "Take nothing but photographs, leave nothing but footprints, kill nothing but time," is at the heart of this wide-ranging discussion about ethical practices in wildlife photography. From exotic safaris to local birding expeditions, interest in this subject matter has grown tremendously in recent years. Ever advancing camera technologies and increasing ease of use make stunning pictures more accessible than ever, but when these advantages combine with an unbridled enthusiasm for getting the shot, it can often put wildlife at risk. After defining conservation photography as an act that extends beyond image capture to effect a change in the world, we delve into questionable practices that can threaten animal safety and compromise natural behaviors. From avoiding obvious red flags of baiting an animal with food or using audio lures to trigger photogenic results, to more subtle actions of approaching too quickly, getting too close, or staying too long—our guests shed light on alternative methods for ethical behavior in the field. As Melissa states, "You just have to become a part of the landscape and feel yourself within this community of other beings whose voices and whose messages are as filled with meaning as ours are, but we really have yet to tap into it." Guests: Melissa Groo & Bobby Stormer Episode Timeline: 3:56: Defining the term conservation photographer and making a distinction with the term wildlife photographer. 5:25: Melissa's career shift to focus on animal research and her early days photographing wildlife. 12:15: Bobby's expansion from fine art to photography, his shift to photographing animals, plus his passion for local wildlife & animal rescue. 16:49: Bobby's rescue of a fox and her kits, and his work with rehabbers to rehabilitate animals in need. 20:04: The ethics of photographing wildlife, best practices to consider, and mistakes photographers can make that cross ethical lines. 28:59: An increased awareness of wildlife ethics and the importance of sharing best practices in photographing animals to help educate one another. 36:04: Truth in image captioning and the question of sharing detailed location details, plus the distressing truth behind wildlife game farms. 44:42: Episode Break 46:24: The cameras, lenses, and related photo gear Melissa and Bobby pack, plus their camera set-ups. 56:09: Bobby and Melissa talk focusing, aperture, shutter speed, ISO and other considerations for settings. 102:45: Ethical considerations beyond baiting animals and staging wildlife photo-ops at a time when nature and animal photography has gained huge traction. 1:05:57: Concerns related to captive animal photography, plus distinctions between various facilities—from zoos to sanctuaries to animal havens to wildlife game farms. 1:11:08: Wildlife rescue, the path to becoming a licensed animal rehabber, plus discussing the upsurge in interest in wildlife photography during the pandemic. 1:25:45: Advice for anyone seeking to become a professional wildlife or conservation photographer.              Guest Bios: Melissa Groo is a photographer, writer, and conservationist dedicated to telling stories of the natural world. As a leading voice and consultant on ethics in wildlife photography, it's her mission to inspire conservation of the animals she's privileged to witness, and the habitat crucial to their survival. A Sony Artisan of Imagery since 2024, Melissa also serves as an Associate Fellow with the International League of Conservation Photographers, an advisor to the National Audubon Society, and a contributing editor for Audubon magazine. In 2023, Melissa received the "Jay N. Ding Darling Memorial Award for Wildlife Stewardship Through Art," from The Wildlife Society. In 2017, she received NANPA's Vision Award, in recognition of early career excellence, vision and inspiration to others in nature photography, conservation, and education. Her award-winning fine art prints are widely exhibited and featured in both personal and corporate collections. Additionally, Melissa has served as a juror for numerous competitions—from the Audubon Photography Awards to Wildlife Photographer of the Year and beyond. As an ambassador for Project Coyote, Melissa is equally invested in the importance of carnivores in our landscapes, continually advocating for co-existence with, and appreciation of, these animals.. She also serves on the Advisory Council for Wyoming Untrapped, the Board of Directors for The Little Egg Foundation, and as a volunteer photographer at the Cornell Wildlife Hospital, near her home in Ithaca, New York. Bobby Stormer first picked up a camera in 2010, transitioning from traditional art to photography as a new creative outlet. Born and raised just outside New York City, his early work focused on urban exploration and automotive shoots, but everything changed six years ago when he took a deep dive into wildlife photography. Shaped by both cityscapes and suburban ecosystems, Bobby developed a unique approach to capturing local wildlife, from foxes and owls to black bears, often within minutes of home. His mission is to show others the beauty hidden in their own backyards and foster a sense of coexistence with the wild. But what truly sets Bobby apart is his hands-on commitment to animal welfare. Apart from the image making, he's helped rescue and rehabilitate hundreds of animals. For Bobby, the photo is just a keepsake, his real reward is the moment itself, while letting empathy and respect guide his every frame.   Stay Connected: Melissa Groo Website: https://www.melissagroo.com/ Melissa Groo Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/melissagroo/ Melissa Groo Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/melissa.groo Melissa Groo LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/melissa-groo-23252324/ Melissa Groo Linktree: https://linktr.ee/melgroo   Bobby Stormer Website: https://robertstormer.smugmug.com/ Bobby Stormer Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/b.stormer/ Bobby Stormer Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/bobby.stormer/ Bobby Stormer Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobby_stormer32/   National Audubon Guide to Ethical Bird Photography: https://www.audubon.org/photography/awards/audubons-guide-ethical-bird-photography-and-videography Melissa's Rolling Stone article on Game Farms: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/photography-game-farms-exploiting-wild-animals-1235002275/ B&H Explora article on the Ethics of Wildlife Photography: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/the-ethics-of-wildlife-photography   Credits: Host: Derek Fahsbender Senior Creative Producer: Jill Waterman Senior Technical Producer: Mike Weinstein Executive Producer: Richard Stevens  

In this episode, we sit down with Tom Hardin, also known as "Tipper X," the former hedge fund analyst who became one of the most prolific informants in the largest insider trading crackdown in U.S. history. Tom walks us through his journey from rule-following soccer referee in Georgia to Ivy League graduate and rising Wall Street analyst—before crossing the line into insider trading at age 29. What makes this conversation so compelling is not just the crime, but how ordinary it felt at the time. Tom explains how small rationalizations, cultural pressures, ambition, and the normalization of questionable behavior gradually eroded his ethical boundaries. After being arrested and recruited by the FBI, he wore a wire 48 times and helped build over 20 cases in Operation Perfect Hedge, exposing widespread misconduct across the hedge fund industry. We explore the psychology of ethical failure, the "fraud triangle," moral licensing, and the difference between ethics in the classroom and ethics in the real world. Tom also reflects on redemption, forgiveness, mentorship, and how he now defines success after losing his finance career.   Key Points From This Episode: (0:04) Introduction to Tom Hardin, former hedge fund analyst turned FBI informant. (5:15) Tom's conviction: One count of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy after four illegal trades netting $46,000. (6:11) Early life as a rule-following soccer referee and how ambition shaped his identity. (8:07) The hedge fund world as a meritocracy—high pressure, high stakes, and performance-driven culture. (9:13) How insider trading networks operated openly in certain hedge fund circles. (12:21) The legal definition of insider trading: material non-public information and breach of fiduciary duty. (15:25) How difficult it is to consistently generate returns without some form of edge. (16:26) The first insider tip—and the rationalizations that followed. (19:03) The "fraud triangle": pressure, opportunity, and rationalization. (22:16) Placing the first illegal trade—and feeling almost nothing. (24:39) Peer validation and the normalization of wrongdoing. (28:38) The 6:30 a.m. arrest and being approached by the FBI. (31:43) Deciding to cooperate—and becoming "Tipper X." (36:24) Learning to wear a wire and extract incriminating statements over multiple meetings. (38:26) Inside Operation Perfect Hedge: 81 individuals charged, 32 cooperators. (39:28) The chilling effect on hedge funds and the possible decline of illicit "edge." (42:12) Being publicly unmasked as Tipper X and the personal cost to his family. (44:02) Why ethical failures are incremental—not sudden transformations. (45:11) The gap between academic ethics and real-world psychological pressure. (46:57) The role mentorship could have played—and how culture shapes behavior. (50:29) Tom's view on hedge funds for retail investors: high fees, limited liquidity, and questionable value. (52:04) Ethical drift, rationalization, and warning signs to watch for. (52:35) Redemption: Owning mistakes fully and learning to forgive yourself. (55:02) Redefining success—relationships, honesty, and meaningful contribution.   Links From Today's Episode: Meet with PWL Capital: https://calendly.com/d/3vm-t2j-h3p Rational Reminder on iTunes — https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-rational-reminder-podcast/id1426530582. Rational Reminder on Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/rationalreminder/ Rational Reminder on YouTube — https://www.youtube.com/channel/ Benjamin Felix — https://pwlcapital.com/our-team/ Benjamin on X — https://x.com/benjaminwfelix Benjamin on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjaminwfelix/ Dan Bortolotti — https://pwlcapital.com/our-team/ Dan Bortolotti on LinkedIn — dan-bortolotti-8a482310  Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (https://thepodcastconsultant.com)

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 20th century existentialist and feminist philosopher, novelist, essayist, and playwright Simone de Beauvoir's book, The Ethics of Ambiguity It focuses specifically on her explanation of what it means for a person to "will themselves free" and to "will that there be being", which concludes her discussions in part 2 of the work. As it happens, both of these willing involve willing the freedom of other people as well. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler Purchase De Beauvoir's Ethics of Ambiguity - https://amzn.to/32IbKya

What if your spirit team has been communicating with you your whole life, and in the exact way you are most able to receive? In this episode of Soul Elevation, I sit down with Lorenda Carr, an evidential medium, psychic, trance channel, and practitioner of past life regression and QHHT. We explore how psychic and mediumistic abilities develop over time, how spirit teams are constructed, and why ethics matter so much in psychic mediumship. Lorenda shares the wild series of "signs" that pushed her to finally embrace this path, including a moment involving John Edward that changed everything. We also talk about energetic hygiene, boundaries, and how spirit will meet you exactly where you are, even if you think you are not psychic at all. Plus, you will hear about Lorenda's work with Camp Chesterfield and what platform mediumship is really like. If you have ever wondered how to trust what you receive, how to discern responsibly, or how to deepen your connection with your guides, this conversation will support you. Connect with Lorenda Carr https://www.youtube.com/@lorendacarrmedium  https://www.lorendacarr.com/  Find Lorenda on YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram: Lorenda Carr Medium Live show: The Crowned Medium (Thursdays, 10am to 12pm Eastern)   Explore my offerings and resources at https://www.karagoodwin.com, including my book Your Authentic Awakening, free guided meditations, and upcoming summits and workshops. Support the show Your likes, comments, shares, and subscriptions help Soul Elevation reach more people and uplift the frequency of these conversations.  

August 2026 is closer than you think, and the changes could work in your favor or catch you off guard. Whether you're deep in exam prep or just starting your licensure journey, this conversation will help you decide whether to test now or wait and why that decision matters more than you think. In this episode, Peter Fenger and Sharlee Dixon break down exactly what's shifting, from fewer questions and a new three-area content structure to a heavier emphasis on ethics over academic memorization. We dig into what it really means that Values and Ethics is now the most heavily weighted section, how the shorter exam format creates both opportunity and new traps for overthinking, and how to honestly assess whether the current exam or the new version plays to your natural strengths. We also tackle the bigger picture, from racial and socioeconomic pass rate disparities to the push for universal licensing, and why this shift may signal that the profession is finally being tested the way it's actually practiced. Walk away with a clear strategy, honest self-reflection questions, and the confidence to take your next step toward licensure.   Follow Behavioral Health Today on Instagram at: https://www.instagram.com/behavioralhealthtoday/ Follow us on TikTok at: https://www.tiktok.com/@behavioralhealthtoday Follow us on Threads at: https://www.threads.net/@behavioralhealthtoday Or watch us live on YouTube at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvOeCMGsF7B2gNBHuWxt-fQ

Today Allie discusses her impressions of Trump's State of the Union address, praising its patriotic tone and strategic juxtaposition of Democratic and Republican policies. She highlights key moments, including Trump's condemnation of illegal immigration, his proposal for Delilah's Law, and his support for IVF, which she criticizes due to ethical concerns. Allie also commends Trump's stance on crime, citing a 125-year low in murders, and his opposition to indoctrinating children into gender ideology. Trump also hosted special guests, including Erika Kirk and the USA men's hockey team. Allie criticizes Democrats for their lack of support on issues that should be unifying and emphasizes the importance of policy in protecting American citizens. Share the Arrows 2026 is on October 10 in Dallas, Texas! Tickets are on sale now at: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://sharethearrows.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Buy Allie's book "Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion": ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.toxicempathy.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ — Timecodes: (00:00) Intro (04:30) Honoring USA Men's Hockey Team (07:15) Ethics of IVF (11:45) Condemnation of Illegal Immigration (16:40) Upholding ICE (22:30) Protecting the Vulnerable (27:10) Honoring Erika Kirk (30:45) Blocking Transgender Surgeries — Related Episodes: Ep 575 | Quick SOTU Reaction, Big-Picture Encouragement & Q&A https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-575-quick-sotu-reaction-big-picture-encouragement-q-a/id1359249098?i=1000552741431 Ep 751 | Biden's Absurd State of the Union Address https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-751-bidens-absurd-state-of-the-union-address/id1359249098?i=1000598716140 Ep 1125 | God Bless 47! Here's What's Next | Guest: Kevin Roberts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-1125-god-bless-47-heres-whats-next-guest-kevin-roberts/id1359249098?i=1000684742923 — Buy Allie's book "You're Not Enough (and That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love": ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.alliebethstuckey.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Relatable merchandise: Use promo code ALLIE10 for a discount: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Casey Harper is joined by Dr. David Prentice, who is one of the founders for Science Alliance For Life and Technology (SALT) and The Washington Stand’s Jared Bridges to discuss the current ethical concerns surrounding lab-created embryos. David shares why he started SALT, the development and dangers of gene screening and modification, and the role AI is currently playing in embryo selection.

Voice agents are moving from novelty to true revenue infrastructure—and businesses that treat them like strategic roles instead of talking FAQs are pulling ahead. In this episode, John Jantsch sits down with Ryan Murha of Yodify to explore how purpose-built voice AI agents can qualify leads, guide buyers, facilitate conversations, and even create new revenue streams for creators and brands. They break down how multi-layered LLM orchestration, brand voice alignment, and AI guardrails reduce hallucinations and improve real-world performance. If you're curious about using voice AI for business development, customer experience automation, or scalable personalization, this conversation shows why voice AI is finally ready for prime time. Today we discussed: 00:00 Voice AI Fundamentals 02:32 Prompt Strategy, Personas, and Sales Roles 05:17 Critically Thinking Voice Agents 08:33 Voice Agent Framework 10:02 AI Transparency, Ethics, and Trust 11:43 Building and Testing AI Agents 14:59 Guardrails, Gemini, and Limitations 16:41 Integration, Monetization, and Pilots 19:59 Closing Thoughts and Contact Info Rate, Review, & Follow If you liked this episode, please rate and review the show. Let us know what you loved most about the episode. Struggling with strategy? Unlock your free AI-powered prompts now and start building a winning strategy today!

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 20th century existentialist and feminist philosopher, novelist, essayist, and playwright Simone de Beauvoir's book, The Ethics of Ambiguity It focuses specifically on ways in which certain intellectuals can fall into an inauthentic existence that attempts to escape the ambiguity of existence. She discusses two different forms that this takes: critical thought and creative activity. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler Purchase De Beauvoir's Ethics of Ambiguity - https://amzn.to/32IbKya

Host Casey Harper is joined by Dr. David Prentice, who is one of the founders for Science Alliance For Life and Technology (SALT) and The Washington Stand's Jared Bridges to discuss the current ethical concerns surrounding lab-created embryos. David shares why he started SALT, the development and dangers of gene screening and modification, and the role AI is currently playing in embryo selection.

Rev. Dr. Virgil Woods joins JC and Matt to discuss the use of AI (artificial intelligence) in congregational life. Dr. Woods is a pastor, author and tech consultant for congregations who believes that AI can be helpful but guardrails are required. We also answer our first ever mailbag question: how can we implement programming so that it serves everyone in our congregation? Email us at podcast@centerforcongregations.org with questions, reactions, resources or suggestions. Resources Rev. Dr. Virgil Woods' website "Human Centered AI" (article) "The Role of AI in The Church" (article)

Host Casey Harper is joined by Dr. David Prentice, who is one of the founders for Science Alliance For Life and Technology (SALT) and The Washington Stand’s Jared Bridges to discuss the current ethical concerns surrounding lab-created embryos. David shares why he started SALT, the development and dangers of gene screening and modification, and the role AI is currently playing in embryo selection.

Thanks to our Partners, Shop Boss and AppFueledMost shops say they “do the right thing.” Mark Lowe from Yeck's Auto Repair went out and proved it by earning the BBB Torch Award for Ethics. In this conversation, we dig into what the award actually measures (hint: it's way more than reviews), what the application process revealed about their business, and how the recognition boosted team pride and customer confidence once that trophy hit the front counter.We also connect the dots to something shop owners can't ignore anymore: AI-driven recommendations. If ChatGPT (and the tools built around it) are looking for trust signals, the BBB can be one of the loudest ones in the room, and Mark shares exactly how they've leveraged the award on their website and marketing to lower people's guard and get them in the door.If you want more trust, better positioning, and a marketing angle that isn't just “$XX off an oil change,” hit play and listen to this episode.Show Notes with TimestampsIntroduction and Origin of the Episode (00:00:10) Brian introduces Mark Lowe, explains how the episode came from an AI class discussing BBB trust signals.Winning the BBB Torch Award for Ethics (00:01:41) Mark shares about receiving the 2024 BBB Torch Award for Ethics in Omaha, Midwest region.Torch Award Application Process and Criteria (00:01:59) Discussion of the rigorous application process, including community involvement, shop culture, and ethical practices.Community Involvement and Veteran Programs (00:02:59) Mark describes their community giveback and veteran support programs as part of the award submission.History with the BBB (00:03:23) Mark recounts how long they've been involved with the BBB and the value of active participation.Impact of BBB Membership Before the Award (00:04:07) Mark discusses limited customer impact from BBB membership prior to winning the award.Self-Reflection During Application (00:04:49) The application process prompted Mark to evaluate and improve business practices and staff support.Changes Made After Application (00:05:30) Mark highlights increased focus on employee training and development as a result of the process.Training and Team Building (00:06:16) Mark explains their approach to staff training, including attending Vision in Kansas City as a team.Award Ceremony and Recognition (00:07:28) Mark describes the award ceremony, online recognition, and displaying the award in the shop.Multiple Winners and Judging Process (00:08:31) Explanation of how multiple shops can win and the responsibility to judge future applicants.Award Eligibility and Reapplication (00:09:24) Mark clarifies the waiting period before reapplying for the Torch Award.

“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.

Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcher Tune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein #TheManilaTimes #KeepUpWithTheTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The man who helped design the surveillance state is perfectly fine with it—until his daughter calls covered in blood with a dead boyfriend on the floor. The Price of Safety, Michael C. Bland's award-winning sci-fi novel, is set in 2047, where cameras are everywhere, your optics can be hacked, and the system was built by someone who genuinely thought he was keeping people safe. Matthew sits down with Michael to ask the question the book won't let you avoid: how much liberty are we actually willing to trade for safety—and what happens when the people holding the keys decide your freedom is the price?They dig into the mechanics of how surveillance reshapes behavior (the terror isn't being watched—it's not knowing when), why grief and helplessness after loss quietly raise our tolerance for control, and how every character in the book, including the ones doing terrible things, genuinely believes they're the hero of their own story. Michael also shares the moment his fictional DNA scanner turned real: he wrote it into his second book, and a month after publication, a California company announced they'd built it.The conversation keeps landing uncomfortably close to the present—and that's exactly the point.Website**************************************************************************This episode is a production of Superhero Ethics, an Ethical Panda podcast and part of the TruStory FM Entertainment Podcast Network. Check out our website to find out more about this show and our sister podcast Star Wars Generations.We want to hear from you! Keep up with our latest news and send us feedback, questions, or comments via social media or email.TikTok · Twitter/X · Instagram · Facebook · EmailJoin the conversation in the Star Wars Generations and Superhero Ethics channels on the TruStory FM Discord.Want even more content while supporting the podcast? Become a member! For $5 a month or $55 a year you get access to bonus episodes and bonus content at the end of most episodes — and you can even give membership as a gift. Sign up here.You can also support us through our sponsors:Purchase a lightsaber from Level Up Sabers, run by friend of the podcast Neighborhood Master Alan.Use Audible for audiobooks. Sign up for a one-year membership or gift one through this link.Purchase any media discussed this week through our sponsored links.

Get Tactacam Cameras for 15% off with code HA152026 - https://www.tactacam.com/Get 20% Off Pnuma Outdoors Gear here: https://pnumaoutdoors.com/?rfsn=8534842.ba528aUse code HNTA15 for 15% Off Out On A Limb MFG products: https://outonalimbmfg.com/ Use code HA10 for 10% VPA Broadheads: vparchery.com Check out Alberta Professional Outfitters Society for Hunting Alberta: https://www.apos.ab.ca/ Follow our socials: TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@huntersadvantage Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hunters_advantage Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Thehuntersadvantage Gmail: thehuntersadvantage@gmail.com

Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Opportunities, Risks, and GuardrailsIn this episode of The Pediatric Lounge, the hosts welcome back Dr. Rani Gareige, director of medical education and designated institutional official at Nicklaus Children's Hospital and a clinical professor at Florida International University, to discuss artificial intelligence in medical education now and in the future. They preview Nicklaus Children's Hospital's 61st annual postgraduate pediatrics CME conference in Fort Lauderdale (Hilton Marina Resort, March 20–22), highlighting sessions on IBD, short stature, dermatology, psychological screening, AI in practice management, social media communication, genetic testing/personalized medicine, and Florida's new requirement for EKG screening to clear athletes starting ninth grade. The conversation covers common AI tools learners use (ChatGPT, Claude, OpenEvidence) and institutional concerns about HIPAA/PHI, including blocking public tools and using a secure in-house system (“Ask Nick”) and closed or constrained approaches (e.g., tools that search only approved sources or documents provided, such as Google Notebook). They explore concerns about de-skilling and when to introduce AI in training, faculty development needs, and a precepting framework (DEFT-AI: Diagnosis, Evidence, Feedback, Teaching, and Recommendations for AI use) to assess clinical reasoning. The episode also discusses AI for simulated patient interactions (bad news delivery, motivational interviewing), ambient AI scribing pilots, clinician responsibility to review notes, and AI-driven coding that may reduce undercoding and administrative burden. The discussion concludes that AI will not replace physicians, but clinicians who use AI wisely may replace those who do not, stressing the importance of policies, ethics, transparency, and maintaining empathy and the art of medicine.00:00 Podcast Intro and Guest02:25 CME Conference Details03:13 Hot Topics and New Laws04:44 EKG Screening Program07:42 AI Tools in Training11:42 IRB and Data Privacy14:39 Meeting Minutes Automation16:48 Closed Models for Clinicians19:13 AI Hallucinations and References24:16 Deskilling and Timing AI30:11 Teaching Frameworks for AI32:46 Back to Evidence Basics33:40 Questioning the Evidence34:48 AI and Human Empathy37:45 AI as Clinical Assistant41:01 Recertification in the AI Era46:32 Ethics and Prompting50:40 AI Scribing and Guardrails54:35 Coding and Care Gaps57:15 Future of Medical Education01:01:13 Virtual Trials and Wrap-Up01:0Support the show

Subscribe to the podcastSomeone complained about the time it took to sync his Bitcoin node recently. Rollo was given the "opportunity" to resync his node and see if the complaints were warranted.Learn about Bitcoin at a trickleBitcoinTrickle.comSponsorLiberty MugsKeep in touch with us everywhere you areJoin our Telegram groupLike us on FacebookFollow us on Twitter: @libertymugs (Rollo), @Slappy_Jones_2Check us out on PatreonLearn everything you need to know about Bitcoin in just 10 hours10HoursofBitcoin.comPodcast version

The team returns after the launch of Paul's new book, The AI Ready Human, and this time Matt plays the role of interviewer! In this episode Matt and Paul discuss the book's core framework: the “Magnificent Seven” stacked capabilities—readiness, organization, control, balance, motivation, resilience, and adaptability—created in response to programs that treat AI only as a tool and overemphasize prompt engineering.The explore how to truly create evergreen skills in a world that is ever changing, and how to manage a form of AI that feels neither particularly artificial or intelligent.They explore concerns about AI training on mixed-quality internet data, the possibility of moving from broad AI to narrower, task-specific systems, and the accelerating growth of AI-generated content. And they look at how the themes from the book have broader applicability to work and life.Resources mentioned in this episode:The AI-Ready Human on AmazonThe AI-Ready Human on Barnes and NobleThe AI-Ready Human on (the awesome) Bookshop.orgA Signed Hardback Copy of The AI-Ready Human00:00 Show Returns and Book Launch01:00 Special Episode Setup02:29 Why 90 Days Format05:48 Magnificent Seven Skills06:25 Beyond Prompt Engineering11:50 Evergreen Yet Changing14:32 Maestro Leadership Metaphor20:40 AI as Unreliable Teammate25:02 Bias Data and Narrow AI31:15 Ethics and authorship32:28 AI content flood34:42 AI traps and trust36:52 Context and memory41:41 Naming your AIs45:41 Confidence and hallucinations47:05 Autonomy mastery purpose49:23 Rebuilding mastery at work53:28 Adapting your human role57:07 Wrap up and next topicsHumanity Working is a podcast focused on helping individuals, teams and organizations be ready for the future of work by maximizing their human potential.For more information, and access to our weekly newsletter, visit us at humanityworking.net.

If you're a VP of Sales watching your revenue team paste customer data into ChatGPT, you don't have an adoption problem - you have a governance crisis. Your best people are uploading signed NDAs to Claude and feeding pipeline data into Perplexity because 70% of their day is admin drag, and AI is the only thing fast enough to keep them above water. Financial services tried to ban AI. It failed spectacularly. So they built governance frameworks that let teams move faster and sleep at night. Dr. Angela Murphy - known as Payments Elsa - reveals the "Amnesty and Orchestration" playbook she architected for banks navigating the GENESIS Executive Order. She's a PhD strategist, 2024 PayTech Women Emerging Trendsetter, and advisor to financial institutions on AI governance and ethical AI mandates. You'll learn the three-step governance audit every Revenue Leader should run this quarter - before Legal does. Angela shares real stories of teams using ChatGPT for payment disputes and compliance workflows, creating massive liability. She reveals the conversation framework to surface Shadow AI without triggering panic, the three policies you can implement in 30 days, and why explainability isn't compliance theater - it's revenue protection. This isn't a "fire your team and replace them with bots" episode. Angela proves ethical AI can surface hidden revenue channels, identify products to sunset, and reveal sales cycle biases costing you deals. The regulatory hammer is coming. Financial services just got hit first. Will you architect governance now, or audit the damage later? Download the Executive Guide to Shadow AI at theaihat.com/shadow-ai. Subscribe to AI for Revenue Leaders: The AI Hat Podcast and stop being a Pilot Purgatory statistic. CHAPTERS 00:00 Ethical AI = Revenue Growth: Find Gaps, Biases & New Channels 01:24 Show Intro & Theme Song: Welcome to The AI Hat Podcast 02:56 The Shadow AI Compliance Time Bomb (Real-World Examples) 03:43 Meet Dr. Angela Murphy (Payments Elsa) + Why Banks Try to Ban AI 07:41 Shadow AI in the Back Office: Spreadsheets, PII, and Manual Ops Risks 11:04 Why Revenue Leaders Should Watch FinTech: Payments Rails & Stablecoins 13:04 Genesis Executive Order Explained: “Suggestulation” and What's Coming 16:24 From Fear to Frameworks: Finding Low-Hanging AI Wins with Guardrails 19:24 Resource Break: Executive Guide to Shadow AI 20:33 Orchestration 101: Tool Inventory, Training, and Policy from Existing Governance 23:33 Explainable AI: Decisions You Can Defend (Underwriting Example) 27:51 Ethics, Bias & Revenue Outcomes: Avoid Lawsuits and Unlock Better Decisions 31:19 Biggest Misconceptions: You Can't Ban AI—and Education Isn't Optional 37:30 Monday Morning Action Plan: Start the AI Policy, Audit Tools, Target Pain Points 40:46 Where to Find Angela + Final Wrap and Next Steps Show Notes & Full Transcript: https://theaihat.com/why-your-sales-teams-shadow-ai-is-a-lawsuit-waiting-to-happen-a-fintech-cros-governance-playbook/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stefan Molyneux looks at how artificial intelligence is reshaping law, healthcare, and creative fields. He thinks about the ways AI disrupts intellectual property rights and how it could make legal work more accessible for people seeking justice. He touches on ethical issues in healthcare, along with finding a middle ground between AI's efficiency and the need for human involvement. He wraps up by pushing for adaptation to these developments, while keeping human rights in focus and continuing conversations on AI's place in society.GET FREEDOMAIN MERCH! https://shop.freedomain.com/SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneuxFollow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!https://peacefulparenting.com/Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!See you soon!https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025

Ethical challenges in sport horse medicine can be especially difficult for early-career veterinarians to navigate. A panel at the 2025 American Association of Equine Practitioners convention presented four common scenarios and how to handle them. Read the full article: https://equimanagement.com/business-development/client-management/performance-horse-ethics-guiding-the-next-generation/Mentioned in this episode:EquiManagement on Audio All the articles you have come to love in EquiManagement Magazine are now available in this podcast for free. Each article is released as its own separate episode to make them quick and easy to listen to. EquiManagement always has the latest insights on equine health, veterinary practice management, and veterinarian wellness.

Learn More about Raz at: https://razpatel.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/razpatelofficial Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheRazPatelShow Listen to her Podcast at: https://razpatelshow.podbean.com/ Show Notes:

Send a textIn this episode, Martin Waxman joins host Jason Mudd to discuss AI's impact on communications and marketing, why training matters, and how to avoid “AI slop” by pairing AI with real expertise.Meet Our Guest:Our episode guest is Martin Waxman, LinkedIn Learning instructor, adjunct professor at the York Schulich School of Business, and associate director of the Future of Marketing Institute. He writes an AI and digital marketing trends newsletter, delivers hands-on generative AI training workshops, and conducts AI research.Five things you'll learn from this episode:1. Why using AI only to offload tasks can lower quality and why thinking first matters2. What Martin predicted correctly about AI and what surprised him about its rapid adoption3. How to move beyond basic content generation to strategy and analytics4. Why subject-matter expertise is critical when using AI for insights and data5. How leaders can manage hype, train teams, and stay ethical as AI evolvesQuotables“Use their brains first so they can start to push themselves and then get AI tools to push them even farther.” — Martin Waxman“We have to prompt AI, but we also have to get AI to prompt us to think about things from a different perspective.” — Martin Waxman“You don't have to go at the pace of AI development, which is really fast, but you need to go at a much faster pace than we as communicators have been used to using.” — Martin Waxman“There's a new term called FOMO, fear of becoming obsolete, which is really real. Because we don't know what we need to learn to do our job successfully. So managing The hype is job number one, figuring out what's new, when it's going to start affecting us, and what can we do to prepare along the way.” — Martin Waxman“AI will take your job if you're the master and commander of it.” — Jason MuddIf you enjoyed this episode, please take a moment to share it with a colleague or friend. You may also support us through Buy Me a Coffee or by leaving us a quick podcast review.More About Martin WaxmanMartin Waxman writes a popular AI and digital marketing trends newsletter, delivers hands-on generative AI training workshops, and conducts AI research. He's a LinkedIn Learning instructor, adjunct professor at the York Schulich School of Business, and associate director of the Future of Marketing Institute.Guest's contact info and resources:@martinwaxman on X@martinwaxman on InstagramMartin Waxman on FacebookMartin Waxman on LinkedInFuture of Marketing InstituteThe Neuron newsletterAxios AI newsletterLinkedIn Learning course: Using Generative Support the show On Top of PR is produced by Axia Public Relations, named by Forbes as one of America's Best PR Agencies. Axia is an expert PR firm for national brands. On Top of PR is sponsored by ReviewMaxer, the platform for monitoring, improving, and promoting online customer reviews.

(0:00) Intro (1:29) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel. (2:15) Start of interview. *Reference to prior episode with Leo Strine (E100) (3:09) The Call of Conscience and The Current Moment (reference to his speech at the Weinberg Center in Oct of 2025) (5:18) Skepticism about Credibility of the Elite Among the Youth (7:02) The Ethical Muscle (8:20) Acknowledging Discrimination (8:56) The Climate Crisis (12:37) Shifts in Delaware Law (13:45) Return to Traditions. "What Delaware has done is return to its traditions that existed the entire time I was a judge." (14:28) The Controlled Company Debate and the MFW standard. (25:00) On the recent pushback against incorporating in Delaware: "I don't minimize the moment" (32:00) Section 220 Books and Records under SB21 (34:20) The statute was amended to provide more predictability. It actually looks like the Model Business Corporation Act. "I think both elements of this statute balance fairness and efficiency in a really good way." (39:54) Activist Judges and Delaware. "This was a nonpartisan initiative to restore confidence in Delaware's corporate law. I have the utmost respect for our judiciary, I'm proud to have been part of it, and I believe they will follow the law." (42:26) Delaware's Competitive Edge (48:25) The Rise of AI Companies (52:16) Energy Demand from AI. From guardrails to "trust us" (58:39) The Urgency of Leadership (1:01:59) Davos looks like a portrait of leadership failure "either eliminate it or make it real." Leo E. Strine, Jr., is Of Counsel at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. Prior to joining WLRK, he was the Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court from early 2014 through late 2019.   You can follow Evan on social media at:X: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__To support this podcast you can join as a subscriber of the Boardroom Governance Newsletter at https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Send a textIf you've ever done the right thing for your patient and then been told you have to write it off — this episode is for you.In 2025, Utah passed one of the most important laws in modern dentistry — part of HB 495 — that made it illegal for insurance companies to force write-offs for services that were already rendered.Support the show

Positioned for Miracles: The Faithful Steps God Uses to Do the Extraordinary Do miracles still happen today? And if they do — why do some believers seem to experience God's power while others never do? In this episode, we explore how ordinary, covenant-rooted faithfulness positioned Israel to experience extraordinary results — and what that means for believers today. It's not about chasing spectacle. It's about understanding the biblical pattern God has revealed. If you've ever longed to see God move in your life, this lesson will help you understand the practical steps Scripture models for being fully used by Him.

Lisa and Amy continue their look at the Ethics Rule this week with a dive into the idea of confidentiality. Don't miss it!

How are you creating impactful transcripts for your show? You've probably seen a bad podcast transcript. Maybe the creator was lazy in their transcription, maybe the AI was flummoxed by the proper nouns, punctuation, or audio labels—whatever the reason, such sub-par writing begs the question: is there even a point to having transcripts if they aren't very good? That's one of the queries Mary poses to podcast producer and consultant Jess Schmidt. It turns out Jess isn't just an expert in the industry, she's also a font of historical transcript knowledge, thanks in part to her past career generating closed captions for live television. Jess and Mary get into the importance of timestamps, SEO, and accessibility. They tackle the many issues facing platforms and creators alike as automated transcripts take centre stage and the continued importance of human eyes when it comes to rendering written versions of human speech. If you're not already a transcript nerd, you will be after this episode! Learn about the future of transcripts from the industry's storied past: The limitations of and issues with AI-generated transcripts on hosting platforms; How closed captioning is similar and different from transcripts; The fascinating history of YouTube's AI-generated "craptions"; Jess's hopeful daydream for the future of podcast transcription. Links worth mentioning from the episode: Read Jess's op-ed, "Podcasting's Money Problem": https://podthenorth.substack.com/p/op-ed-podcastings-money-problem WIRED, "The Problem with YouTube's Terrible Closed 'Craptions'": https://www.wired.com/story/problem-with-youtubes-terrible-closed-craptions/ The origin of automatic captioning on YouTube: https://research.google/blog/automatic-captioning-in-youtube/ Episode 69, "Intangible Values of a Podcast": https://www.organizedsound.ca/intangible-values-of-a-podcast-what-it-means-for-stats-metrics-and-monetization-episode-69/ Episode 88, "Accessibility in Podcasting for Hard-of-Hearing Listeners with Kellina Powell": https://www.organizedsound.ca/accessibility-in-podcasting-for-hard-of-hearing-listeners-with-kellina-powell-episode-88/ Episode 106, "Accessibility and Ethics in Podcasting with Meg Wilcox":  https://www.organizedsound.ca/accessibility-and-ethics-in-podcasting-with-meg-wilcox-episode-106 Engage with Jess Schmidt: Learn more about her work: https://www.jessdoespodcasting.com/ Connect on LinkedIn:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/jessschmidt/  Connect with Mary! Leave a voice note with your feedback at https://www.speakpipe.com/VisibleVoice or email visiblevoicepodcast@gmail.com Get the full transcript of the episode at http://www.visiblevoicepodcast.com Read up on more secrets with the Visible Voice Insights Newsletter https://www.organizedsound.ca/newsletter To learn more or work with Mary, check out https://www.organizedsound.ca Link up on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/marychan-organizedsound/ Engage on Instagram @OrganizedSoundProductions https://www.instagram.com/organizedsoundproductions Show Credits: Podcast audio design, engineering, and editing by Mary Chan of Organized Sound Productions Show notes written by Shannon Kirk of Right Words Studio Post-production support by Kristalee Forre of Forre You VA Podcast cover art by Emily Johnston of Artio Design Co.

I am hosting a panel at the Baylor Institute for Faith and Learning's "AI and Ethics" event this week. My friend, Ben Bajarin, who helped me put this panel together, cannot join us, so I thought I'd get his thoughts to spur on the panel conversation. Enjoy!!!

In this episode:  Dr. Emi Barresi, Lee Crowson, Natasha Desjardines, Nicolas Krueger, Rich CruzI/O Career Accelerator Course: https://www.seboc.com/jobVisit us https://www.seboc.com/Follow us on LinkedIn: https://bit.ly/sebocLIJoin an open-mic event:ReferencesAshforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation. Organization Science, 1(2), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.2.177Bandura, A. (1999). Moral Disengagement in the Perpetration of Inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3Boakye, D., Sarpong, D., Meissner, D., & Ofosu, G. (2024). How TalkTalk did the walk-walk: strategic reputational repair in a cyber-attack. Information Technology & People (West Linn, Or.), 37(4), 1642–1673. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-08-2022-0589Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004De Roeck, K., & Farooq, O. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility and Ethical Leadership: Investigating Their Interactive Effect on Employees' Socially Responsible Behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(4), 923–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3656-6Dickson, M. W., Smith, D. B., Grojean, M. W., & Ehrhart, M. (2001). An organizational climate regarding ethics: the outcome of leader values and the practices that reflect them. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(2), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(01)00069-8“Open Letter from More than 60 CEOs of Minnesota-Based Companies | Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.” Mnchamber.com, 25 Jan. 2026, www.mnchamber.com/blog/open-letter-more-60-ceos-minnesota-based-companies.Liu, M.-L., Lin, C.-P., Chen, M.-L., Chen, P.-C., & Chen, K.-J. (2020). Strengthening knowledge sharing and job dedication: The roles of corporate social responsibility and ethical leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-06-2019-0278Ullah, I., Hameed, R. M., Kayani, N. Z., & Fazal, Y. (2022). CEO ethical leadership and corporate social responsibility: Examining the mediating role of organizational ethical culture and intellectual capital. Journal of Management & Organization, 28(1), 99–119. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2019.48Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988). The Organizational Bases of Ethical Work Climates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(1), 101--125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392857Weber, J., & Opoku-Dakwa, A. (2022). Ethical Work Climate 2.0: A Normative Reformulation of Victor and Cullen's 1988 Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 178(3), 629–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04778-4Williams, J. (2024). Greenwashing: Appearance, illusion and the future of ‘green' capitalism. Geography Compass, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12736

Want AI that works the first time instead of the tenth? We sit down with Andreas Schachl, co-founder of Responsible Annotation Services, to unpack the quiet truth behind reliable models: ethical, high-quality training data produced by people who take clarity and precision seriously. Andreas shares how a single internship sparked a company built around neurodivergent talent, turning data labeling from a churn task into a strategic advantage.We walk through why annotation isn't going anywhere, even with foundation models and smarter tools. When you're training on private, business-owned data across text, images, audio, video, and LiDAR, you need a human in the loop and documentation you can defend. Andreas explains how his team co-authors rigorous annotation handbooks with clients, translating fuzzy goals into exact rules, edge cases, and review procedures. The payoff is real: higher consistency, fewer iterations, and a clear compliance trail for regulators and auditors.Bias mitigation becomes a practice, not a promise. A neurodivergent lens exposes hidden assumptions and pushes for instructions that are unambiguous and testable. We explore practical systems—daily stand-ups, structured chat, and even “coffee calls” with agendas—that help people do their best focused work. We also confront the ethics of the global annotation supply chain and outline a different path: EU contracts, fair wages, social worker support, and leadership that values diligence over hype. From 2D images to complex 3D point clouds, we show how modern tooling plus human judgment builds AI you can trust.If you care about responsible AI, data quality, and making models perform sooner with less guesswork, this conversation is your blueprint. Subscribe, share with a colleague wrestling with training data, and leave a review with your biggest annotation challenge—we'll tackle it in a future episode.Send a textSupport the showFollow axschat on social media.Bluesky:Antonio https://bsky.app/profile/akwyz.com Debra https://bsky.app/profile/debraruh.bsky.social Neil https://bsky.app/profile/neilmilliken.bsky.social axschat https://bsky.app/profile/axschat.bsky.social LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/antoniovieirasantos/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/axschat/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/neilmilliken/Vimeohttps://vimeo.com/akwyzhttps://twitter.com/axschathttps://twitter.com/AkwyZhttps://twitter.com/neilmillikenhttps://twitter.com/debraruh

Special thanks to Undeceptions Season 16 major sponsor Zondervan Academic. In pop culture, we often enjoy watching - or reading - vice and virtue play out, with the former often far more exciting than the latter.But what about real life? Do we still find vice “sizzling” (as one writer described it), and virtue stale?At the heart of this lies a much deeper question: What good is there in pursuing the good?CREDITSUndeceptions is hosted by John Dickson, produced by Kaley Payne and directed by Mark Hadley. Alasdair Belling is a writer-researcher.Siobhan McGuiness is our online librarian. Lyndie Leviston remains John's wonderful assistant.  Santino Dimarco is Chief Finance and Operations Consultant. Peter Kozushko is our North American representative, a contact point for church pastors who are interested in engaging with our work here at Undeceptions.  Editing by Richard Hamwi.Our voice actors today were Yannick Lawry and Dakotah Love. Special thanks to our series sponsor Zondervan for making this Undeception possible. Undeceptions is the flagship podcast of Undeceptions.com - letting the truth out Undeceptions sponsors: Zondervan AcademicAnglican AidSelah Travel 

In response to a comment on Bunjie's Buffalo video, I discuss ethics and why this commenter's opinion on the topic doesn't matter to me! LOL In all seriousness, it's a good topic to discuss, and I hope my explanation clarifies what he might have missed. There's discussion of my One Gun philosophy here, which I believe is very relevant. All Hail Bunjie!

Real ethics is not a dogmatic system of principles, parameters, or prerogatives that one must strictly follow to achieve enlightenment. They instead constitute psychological ways of being that permeate our mind stream, atmosphere, relationships, and communities. By modifying our conditioned states of mind and curtailing states that produce suffering, we in turn ennoble ourselves and the people we interact with. However, such steps require diligent work in the techniques of mindfulness, self-observation, and self-remembering. See how through an exploration of ethics in the three levels of religion; energy as applied to attention and karma; comprehension in meditation as opposed to repression or justification; voluntary mental discipline vs. imposed systems of constraint; the tools and methods of self-reflection and understanding; methods of analyzing the mind; the nature of good and evil; and much more. Resources and References: https://chicagognosis.org/lectures/carefulness-and-vigilant Introspection-the-ethics-that-lead-to-genuine-freedom

Dirty Trivia Names MAFS ethics Epstein Monday's Palace Parody LINKS TICKETS TO MATT OKINE AUSTRALIAN COMEDY TOUR HERE If you've got something to add to the show, slide into our DMs @matt.and.alex at https://bit.ly/mattandalex-ig CREDITSHosts: Matt Okine and Alex Dyson Produced by: Bronwyn Dojcsak Post Production: Linc Kelly Find more great podcasts like this at www.listnr.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Amy Parker is the J. Reuben Clark Law Society Student Chapter Manager, and Jenna Crowther is the Student Board Chair. They answer frequently asked questions about how to find, start, and run JRCLS student chapters, as well as connecting students with the larger society.How to Organize a New JRCLS Student ChapterContact Amy at amy.parker@law.byu.eduContact the Student Board Chair at jrclsstudentboard@gmail.com

hiiii! This week Gill + Sheysel discuss the ethics and moral quandaries of using music & visual media streaming platforms. Thank you for listening :)

The Krewe wraps up Season 6 with an episode looking back at the highs, the lows, & what's to come! Join Doug & Jenn for listener feedback and behind-the-scenes stories as they put a bow on the 6th chapter of KOJ Podcast! ------ About the Krewe ------ The Krewe of Japan Podcast is a weekly episodic podcast sponsored by the Japan Society of New Orleans. Check them out every Friday afternoon around noon CST on Apple, Google, Spotify, Amazon, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.  Want to share your experiences with the Krewe? Or perhaps you have ideas for episodes, feedback, comments, or questions? Let the Krewe know by e-mail at kreweofjapanpodcast@gmail.com or on social media (Twitter: @kreweofjapan, Instagram: @kreweofjapanpodcast, Facebook: Krewe of Japan Podcast Page, TikTok: @kreweofjapanpodcast, LinkedIn: Krewe of Japan LinkedIn Page, Blue Sky Social: @kreweofjapan.bsky.social, Threads: @kreweofjapanpodcast & the Krewe of Japan Youtube Channel). Until next time, enjoy! ------ Support the Krewe! Offer Links for Affiliates ------ Use the referral links below & our promo code from the episode! Support your favorite NFL Team AND podcast! Shop NFLShop to gear up for football season! Zencastr Offer Link - Use my special link to save 30% off your 1st month of any Zencastr paid plan!  ------ JSNO Upcoming Events ------ JSNO Event Calendar Join JSNO Today!

Summary In this episode of the AI for Sales podcast, host Chad Burmeister interviews R.A. Wilson, author of 'In Search of the Master Prompt' and founder of Writers Forge. They discuss the transformative impact of AI on writing and customer experience, the misconceptions surrounding AI, and the importance of maintaining a personal touch in automated processes. R.A. shares insights on emerging AI technologies, the ethical considerations of AI use, and the significance of narrowing one's niche in writing. The conversation emphasizes the collaborative potential of AI in enhancing the writing process while retaining the essential human element. Takeaways AI has transformed the way creators connect with audiences. Personalization in marketing is increasingly important with AI. AI is a tool that requires teaching and collaboration. Misconceptions about AI include the belief that it can solve all problems. The human touch is essential in writing and marketing. Emerging AI technologies are combining various functionalities. Ethics in AI usage falls on the creators and users. Narrowing your niche can lead to greater success in writing. Empathy for humanity is crucial for writers using AI. AI can help refine manuscripts but human oversight is necessary. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to AI in Writing 01:35 Transforming Customer Experience with AI 03:48 The Role of AI in Book Writing 05:20 Misconceptions About AI 07:18 Balancing Automation and Personal Touch 08:40 Emerging AI Technologies 10:22 Ethics in AI Usage 12:27 Skills for Aspiring Authors 15:04 Finding Your Niche in Writing 16:58 Final Thoughts and Advice The AI for Sales Podcast is brought to you by BDR.ai, Nooks.ai, and ZoomInfo—the go-to-market intelligence platform that accelerates revenue growth. Skip the forms and website hunting—Chad will connect you directly with the right person at any of these companies.

Stefan Molyneux looks at the philosophical and moral sides of artificial intelligence, particularly where it crosses with copyright laws and its effects on society. He points out how AI draws from copyrighted materials without getting permission, which brings up issues around intellectual property. Molyneux draws a comparison between standard ways of learning and what AI can do as a customized tutor, noting its ability to deliver information suited to individual needs. He cautions that AI could lower the worth of conventional media and put authors' incomes at risk by turning their creations into commodities. Molyneux calls for an approach where AI firms get approval from the original creators, stressing the importance of acknowledging authors' work as AI becomes more common.GET FREEDOMAIN MERCH! https://shop.freedomain.com/SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneuxFollow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1GET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!https://peacefulparenting.com/Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!See you soon!https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025

Guests: Ronald J. Pestritto & Daniel Darling Host Scot Bertram talks with Ronald J. Pestritto, dean of the Van Andel Graduate School of Statesmanship and Charles and Lucia Shipley Chair in the American Constitution at Hillsdale College, about the rise of the administrative state and his recent provocation Government by the Unelected: How it Happened, and How It Might Be Tamed. And Daniel Darling, director of the Land Center for Cultural Engagement at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and fellow at the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, discusses the Christian obligation to patriotism and his new book In Defense of Christian Patriotism.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last week, the CEO of AI company Anthropic spoke with The New York Times' Ross Douthat about his predictions for the future of artificial intelligence. Notre Dame's Meghan Sullivan joins us to discuss how we should ethically think about these ideas. Then, President Trump announced the elimination of a scientific ruling that said climate change endangered humans and the environment. Political consultant Mike Murphy stops by to discuss the effects of this huge deregulatory action. And finally, former president Barack Obama expresses his views on aliens on a podcast released last week. Russell Moore and Mike Cosper share their beliefs on aliens, in turn… kind of. REFERENCED IN THE EPISODE: Anthropic's Chief on A.I.: ‘We Don't Know if the Models Are Conscious'- Interesting Times with Ross Douthat Your Understanding of Calling Is About to Change Radically - Russell Moore Artificially Intelligent - The Bulletin's mini-series on AI ABOUT THE GUESTS: Meghan Sullivan is a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame. She serves as director of the ethics Initiative and is the founding director of Notre Dame's Institute for Ethics and the Common Good. She is the author of Time Biases, and The Good Life Method based on a popular introductory philosophy course she developed at Notre Dame called “God and the Good Life.” Mike Murphy is a political media consultant, and has handled strategy and advertising for more than 26 successful gubernatorial and senatorial campaigns. He served as a top campaign messaging and political strategist for Senator John McCain's campaign in 2000, as well as for successful gubernatorial candidates Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tommy Thompson, and John Engler. In 2020 he served as a key strategist for Republican Voters Against Trump. He currently co-hosts the weekly politics podcast Hacks on Tap with David Axelrod. GO DEEPER WITH THE BULLETIN: Join the conversation at our Substack. Find us on YouTube. Rate and review the show in your podcast app of choice. ABOUT THE BULLETIN: The Bulletin is a twice-weekly politics and current events show from Christianity Today moderated by Clarissa Moll, with senior commentary from Russell Moore (Christianity Today's editor-at-large and columnist) and Mike Cosper (senior contributor). Each week, the show explores current events and breaking news and shares a Christian perspective on issues that are shaping our world. We also offer special one-on-one conversations with writers, artists, and thought leaders whose impact on the world brings important significance to a Christian worldview, like Bono, Sharon McMahon, Harrison Scott Key, Frank Bruni, and more. The Bulletin listeners get 25% off CT. Go to https://orderct.com/THEBULLETIN to learn more. “The Bulletin” is a production of Christianity Today Producer: Clarissa Moll Associate Producer: Alexa Burke Editing and Mix: Kevin Morris Graphic Design: Rick Szuecs Music: Dan Phelps Executive Producer: Erik Petrik Senior Producer: Matt Stevens Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Meta's apparent comeback runs headfirst into shifting UA economics, rising creative costs, and new pressure from platforms like Reddit, forcing marketers to rethink what “working” actually means. We unpack whether Meta is truly back or just delivering short-term dopamine, why in-app ads could reshape ad-monetized LTV, and how CPMs, payback windows, and creative volume are redefining the hyper-casual and hybrid playbooks. Cihan and Josh join to break down the latest Appsflyer data, Reddit's Max campaigns, China's UA surge, and Liftoff's IPO and to debate whether AI is leveling the field or quietly squeezing the middle out of mobile marketing.Chapters: 00:00 Welcome to Deconstructor of Funds + UA Monthly kickoff00:17 Meet the guests: Jihan (Scaling.Games) & Josh (Wildcard Games)01:06 Today's agenda: Meta's return, Appsflyer report, Reddit AI ads, Liftoff IPO01:29 Is “Meta back” real? The 2.5 Gamers breakdown & the dopamine-hit spike02:52 What Meta's actually doing: rollout strategy, templates, and market impact06:05 In-app ads explained: why Meta buying inventory could boost ad-monetized LTV07:48 Ad quality debate: intrusive formats, churn-per-impression, and broken incentives12:58 Can hyper-casual come back? CPMs, payback windows, and hybrid monetization18:38 State of Game Marketing report: shrinking US spend, growth in Turkey/India20:16 The creative arms race: AI variations, the ‘middle class' squeeze, and rising noise23:25 AI Shrinks the Creative Gap: Small Teams Catch Up, Mid-Tier Stalls24:41 China's UA Surge + iOS Outspending Android: Where the Scale Is Coming From25:38 30 Creatives a Day: The New ‘Tax' of Competing in Mobile UA26:07 Ripoffs, Ethics, and Beating the Filters: The Dark Side of Creative Volume28:00 Hero Creatives Aren't Dead—But Copy Speed Forces Smarter Variations30:16 Copying vs. Trends: When ‘Stealing' Is Real (and When It's Just the Market)31:40 Is the Market Really an Iceberg? US Spend Down, Web Shops, and the ‘Hidden' Picture34:27 Reddit ‘Max' Campaigns: Advantage+ for Reddit with a Promise of Transparency37:19 Top Audience Personas: Useful Insight or Just a Fancy Dashboard?39:34 How to Test Reddit Max: Onboarding Friction, Learning Periods, and Scalability Unknowns40:58 Liftoff Files to Go Public: Valuation, Margins, Debt, and the AI Black-Box Race45:44 What's Liftoff's Moat? Engine vs. Fuel, Data Advantages, and the AppLovin Comparison48:35 Wrap-Up: UA Monthly Feedback, What to Cover Next

In this episode of the TPR podcast, Matthew interviews Brian Hanks, founder of Dental Buyer Advocates and author of multiple books on dental practice acquisition. They discuss the unique challenges faced by new dentists, the importance of transparency during business transitions, and the ethical responsibilities of business owners. Brian shares insights from his experience in helping dentists navigate the complexities of buying practices, emphasizing the need for honesty with staff and the value of sharing knowledge through writing. The conversation also touches on the discipline required to succeed in business and the personal growth that comes from overcoming challenges. The Ethics of Business Transitions With Brian Hanks Resources in today's episode: - Micah Shilanski: Website | LinkedIn - Brian Hanks: Website | LinkedIn - Learn More about our Coaching Programs

Filmmaker Roc Morin on following soldier and actor Pavlo Aldoshyn during the war in Ukraine What happens when an actor who once played a sniper in a movie becomes a real sniper in war? In this episode of She's All Over the Place, host Katie Chonacas speaks with director Roc Morin about the documentary MEDUZA, a powerful film following Ukrainian actor Pavlo Aldoshyn from the first days of the 2022 invasion through two years on the front lines. Before the war, Pavlo was known for the film White Raven and as a contestant on Ukraine's version of The Voice. When Russia invaded Ukraine, he was recruited as a sniper — the same role he had previously portrayed on screen. MEDUZA documents his psychological, emotional and spiritual transformation as he navigates combat, relationships, and identity. Filmed across Ukraine, Japan, India, Ecuador, and the United States, the documentary connects Pavlo's inner world to global stories, including a Japanese widower searching the ocean for his wife and an Amazonian tribesman describing a lost mythological bridge between earth and sky. Director Roc Morin, a journalist who has reported on the conflict since 2014, discusses entering Ukraine during the invasion, meeting Pavlo in Kyiv while he was on leave, and filming near the front lines in Kharkiv and surrounding regions. Topics covered: • The human cost of war • Soldiers and psychological transformation • Documentary filmmaking in conflict zones • Ukraine war reporting • Spiritual identity during wartime • Ethics of filming active conflict • The life of Pavlo Aldoshyn This episode contains discussion of war and combat experiences. https://www.rocmorin.com/   ON DIGITAL PLATFORMS ON FEBRUARY 20 by Buffalo 8 Social Media: @meduzadoc  @rocmorin @paldoshyn - Pavlo  @leonova_kata - Katarina