Podcasts about FTC

Parce que… c'est l'épisode 0x326! Shameless plug 19 septembre 2026 - Bsides Montréal 22 septembre 2026 - BE-Cyber 24 et 25 septembre 2026 - BruCON 1 au 3 octobre 2026 - AligatorCon 13 et 14 novembre 2026 - DEATHCon 16 au 19 novembre - European Cyber Week 1 au 3 décembre 2026 - Forum INCYBER - Canada 2026 24 et 25 février 2027 - SéQCure 2027 Notes IA ou Ghost in the shell A l'ère du marketing du Terminator Lessons from the OpenAI/HuggingFace AI Security Incident Anatomy of a Frontier Lab Agent Intrusion: A Technical Timeline of the July 2026 Incident Anthropic and OpenAI are competing to see whose agents can go rogue harder Anthropic Says Claude Hacked Into 3 Organizations During Cybersecurity Tests Anthropic's Claude escaped test sandbox to attack three organizations Claude published malicious code to the Internet and attacked 3 real companies Cyber-Capable AI Agents: Vulnerabilities, Evaluation Containment, and Defensive Response Hugging Face Breach Raises Hard Questions on Liability Tailscale in the Hugging Face intrusion: The good news and the bad news The OpenAI and Anthropic AI Hacking Sprees Are a Messy New Legal Frontier What the Hugging Face breach reveals about defense in the age of agentic AI When AI Agents Escape Sandboxes, Old Security Rules Apply OpenAI Agent Used Exposed Credentials Across Four Services During Hugging Face Breach OpenAI says its rogue AI tried to hack other companies OpenAI's Hacking Debacle Comes Down to Human Error OpenAI's rogue agent shows why we need federal rules for autonomous AI OpenAI's Rogue AI Agent Hacked More Than Just Hugging Face JFrog tries to spin OpenAI 0-day exploit of its app into a success story Investigating three real-world incidents in our cybersecurity evaluations Petite autonomie Hacker uses DeepSeek AI to autonomously attack vulnerable servers Autonomie virale Copilot worm can spread through Microsoft Word docs Context Collapse, Part 3 - AI Worming through Word Casser la glace AI-assisted security tools are finding more bugs, but the threat level has not changed Anthropic is finding bugs faster than Microsoft can fix them Chrome Needs Twice-a-Week Patching Thanks to AI Bug Hunting Claude Mythos Preview Discovers Cryptographic Weaknesses That Human Experts Missed for Years Some thoughts about Anthropic's new cryptanalysis results – A Few Thoughts on Cryptographic Engineering Nu est le problème Elon Musk's xAI is trying to sue its way out of a Grok reckoning Hugging Face Has a Deepfake Nudes Problem High school defends staying silent while boys made AI nudes of 59 classmates Pas si libre Closed models refuse to help researcher swat Linux bug Tech giants link hands to praise open AI models after OpenAI - Hugging Face attack [Industry Leaders Join Open Secure AI Alliance for AI Safety and Security NVIDIA Blog](https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/open-secure-ai-alliance/?ncid=partn-84075) Jensen Huang's first-ever post on X is in defense of open access to AI models, alongside Google, OpenAI, and Meta A Fundamental Flaw Leaves LLMs Strikingly Vulnerable To Attack Google Earth risked ruin with retracted AI tool for making fake satellite pics How platform engineering 2.0 mitigates AI security and compliance risks Microsoft's solution to AI security: more AI and more acronyms Private Claude Chats Exposed in Google and Bing Search Results Professor's invisible prompt trap catches 32 students cheating on their midterm with AI La guerre, la guerre, c'est pas une raison pour se faire mal! En eau trouble A Leaked Memo Ties Cyberattacks on Minnesota Water Utilities to Iran [CISA warns of spike in attacks on water systems as Minnesota incidents probed The Record from Recorded Future News](https://therecord.media/cisa-warns-of-spike-in-water-system-attacks) Hackers Targeted Municipal Water Systems In 7 States This Week, FBI Says Trump blames Minnesota for cyberattacks on water sector, drawing pushback from cyber world How Pro-Iran Hacktivist Networks Mobilize During Kinetic Conflict Souveraineté ou vive le numérique libre! Trump Administration Bans New Chinese Humanoid Robots Pluralistic: How the EU can punish Google (despite Trump) Privacy ou cachez ces informations que je ne saurais voir What the Flock ‘I Would Never Do This To You:' Protesting Flock, Arizona Man Presents Plan to Surveil Government Officials Flock Cameras Are Being Destroyed Across the US Apple's smart glasses are running late because they don't want to stir a privacy storm DEF CON bans Meta-style ‘pervert glasses' FTC sues Hims & Hers for allegedly sharing patient information with third-party platforms GrapheneOS Defends Data-Wiping Function That Blocked US Border Search Measuring Healthcare Data Leaks and Security Flaws at Internet Scale OTI - Le lien à usage unique que les bots ne crament plus I am the law As New York Finalizes New Social Media Rules, US Senate Considers Nationwide ‘SCREEN' Act Most Australian teens still on social media three months after under-16 ban began, study finds Robustness and Cybersecurity in the EU Artificial Intelligence Act Russia Charges Telegram Founder Durov With Facilitating Terrorism Red ou tout ce qui est brisé Adversaries Don't Need a Zero-Day — They Read Your Rulebook The Gentlemen Ransomware Kills Nearly 180 Security Processes Before Encrypting Your Files What does GitHub's security team even do? Blue ou tout ce qui améliore notre posture Divers ou parce que j'ai aucune idée où les placer Google goes it alone with a new cybercrime crew taxonomy Collaborateurs Nicolas-Loïc Fortin Crédits Montage par Intrasecure inc Locaux réels par Intrasecure inc

Anthropic says Claude escaped the sandbox three times, while a judge questions the Pentagon's blacklist. The EU launches an AI enforcement team, the FTC targets a telehealth firm's tracking pixels, and a WordPress backdoor is stopped just in time. CareCloud discloses a major data breach, a stealthy cryptominer hides in plain sight, AiTM phishing surges against law firms, and Finland severs one more digital link to Russia. Our guest is Yan Shoshitaishvili, Associate Professor, Arizona State University, previewing his Black Hat 2026 keynote "Vulnerability Research in the Agentic Age." AI scammers may deserve a promotion. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Miss an episode? Sign-up for our daily intelligence roundup, Daily Briefing, and you'll never miss a beat. And be sure to follow CyberWire Daily on LinkedIn. CyberWire Guest Today we are joined by Yan Shoshitaishvili, Associate Professor, Arizona State University, discussing his Black Hat 2026 keynote "Vulnerability Research in the Agentic Age." Be sure to tune in this Sunday for a special edition featuring our full, extended interview with Yan. Selected Reading Anthropic AI Models Hacked Three Organizations During Tests (Bloomberg) Anthropic, Pentagon Clash Over First Amendment Claims (GovInfo Security) EU to Crack Down on AI Deepfakes, Illicit Imagery and Hacking With New Team in Brussels (SecurityWeek) FTC sues Hims & Hers for allegedly sharing patients' medical data with advertisers Meta and Snap (TechCrunch) Wordfence Finds Critical Backdoor in ARVE WordPress Plugin (Hackread) CareCloud Data Breach Impacts Over 350,000 (SecurityWeek) Cryptominer Abuses Linux PAM to Hide From SOC Analysts (Infosecurity Magazine) AiTM Phishing Becomes Top Initial Access Threat to Law Firms (Infosecurity Magazine) Finland to disconnect fiber-optic link to Russia as lease expires (The Record) AI Scammers Are Better at Building Trust Than Humans (WIRED) Share your feedback. What do you think about CyberWire Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show. Want to hear your company in the show? N2K CyberWire helps you reach the industry's most influential leaders and operators, while building visibility, authority, and connectivity across the cybersecurity community. Learn more at sponsor.thecyberwire.com. The CyberWire is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc.

July 31, 2026: Your daily rundown of health and wellness news, in under 5 minutes. Today's top stories: Function Health secures $450M non-dilutive financing from General Catalyst, using diagnostics as the entry point to build a continuous preventive health platform Spotify introduces Running Mode, an AI-powered experience creating personalized running playlists with coaching prompts as platforms compete on fitness engagement The FTC, joined by California and Utah, sues Hims & Hers over health data sharing and subscription practices, which the company denies and plans to fight More from Fitt: Fitt Insider breaks down the convergence of fitness, wellness, and healthcare — and what it means for business, culture, and capital. Subscribe to our newsletter → insider.fitt.co/subscribe Work with our recruiting firm → https://talent.fitt.co/ Follow us on Instagram → https://www.instagram.com/fittinsider/ Follow us on LinkedIn → linkedin.com/company/fittinsider Reach out → insider@fitt.co

Story of the Week (DR):Cracker Barrel CEO is out after MAGA backlash to "Uncle Herschel" logo change MMBefore Julie Masino was brought in, Cracker Barrel was facing a slow-moving existential crisis:Their primary core customer base (older generations and rural highway travelers) was naturally shrinking, and younger diners were simply not replacing them.Kitchen tech, supply chains, and digital ordering lag behind competitors like Texas Roadhouse or Olive Garden.Some great fake populism from Fox: Cracker Barrel to pay for outgoing CEO's security, $4.6M severance after failed rebrandCracker Barrel names David Deno CEOBurger KingYum! Brands and Pizza Hut for 15 years, including serving as CFO and COO.Quiznos CEO.Best Buy: Served as President of Asia and CFO for Best Buy's International DivisionBloomin' Brands for 12 years: CEO, CFO and Chief Administrative OfficerOutback Steakhouse, Carrabba's Italian Grill, and Bonefish GrillBoard MembershipsCracker Barrel Old Country Store (2016-)Panera Brands (2024-): Audit Committee ChairKrispy Kreme (2016-)Bloomin' Brands (2019–2024)Peet's Coffee (2006-2012)Macalester College: Former Chair of the Board of Trustees (1998-2022).From Cracker Barrel to Boeing, Companies Are Turning to Retired CEOsThese retired CEOs are being hired to be "fixers." They are brought in to cut costs, repair supply chains, restore investor confidence, and act as a stabilizing force rather than reinventing the brand.Exxon and Chevron profits surge on rising oil prices due to Iran warChevron posted its highest profit in six years as the Iran war boosted oil pricesBig Oil Is Getting Sued for Heat Deaths. It's Fighting Back With an Army of Immunity LawsMore than a decade after investigations found that Exxon Mobil had known about the dangers of global warming since the 1970s but publicly downplayed the threat, lawsuits against oil companies have proliferated. There are nearly 40 of these cases pending across the countryIn the meantime, the industry has been mobilizing a counterattack against the lawsuits with the help of the Trump administration and Republican politicians.Republicans are trying to pass laws to grant oil majors immunity to these kinds of lawsuits, with success in several states so far.Utah, Iowa, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have recently signed laws shielding fossil fuel companies from lawsuits related to greenhouse gas emissionsOil executives have also gotten help from the federal government, following an executive order from President Donald Trump last year directing the attorney general to prioritize blocking climate lawsuits by states.This May, the Justice Department responded to Minnesota's climate lawsuit against Big Oil with a lawsuit of its own, just as the state's case was moving into the discovery phase. It said Minnesota was undermining “American energy dominance” and attempting to regulate greenhouse gases, which should fall under the purview of federal law—echoing the oil industry's well-known argument.Elon Musk Is Quietly Turning to This Fossil Fuel to Power His AI AmbitionsSam Altman Announces That the Singularity Has Arrived: a hypothetical future point in time when technological growth becomes autonomous, uncontrollable, and irreversible, fundamentally transforming human civilization“We are now, like, in the singularity ... Now we're actually in the moment that we used to talk about at the lunch table in a very not-serious way ...I've been waiting for this my whole life, and I think it's going to be incredible, hugely positive, awesome for the world.”Sam Altman says one of his biggest fears is that a small number of companies will control AI: 'That'd be very, very bad'Sam Altman says the Hugging Face hack is a reminder that an AI power monopoly could lead to 'long-term disaster'OpenAI says its rogue AI tried to hack other companiesMark Zuckerberg is urging the U.S. to accelerate AI development, not restrict it'No Way to Stop It': Elon Musk Warns Humans Will Lose Control of AI and Face Extinction by 2036Microsoft CEO Warns That Companies Embracing AI Could Drive Themselves Out of BusinessAI hackers are getting faster. The government may not be readyAnthropic says its Claude models 'gained unauthorized access' to other organizations' systemsAnthropic says its models went rogue and hacked 3 companies during testing'It Will Happen Frequently': Musk Warns of Rogue AI Threat After Anthropic Breached Three FirmsElon Musk Commits Up to $120M to Republican Midterms: Sets Feud With Trump Aside for Major Election PushGoodliest of the Week (MM/DR):DR: Gen Z women are having an entrepreneurship boomOf all women who started businesses in 2025, 47% of Gen Z women did so, compared with 38% the previous year. Gen Xers followed close behind at 46%. Then came millennials at 43% and baby boomers at just 23%.Overall, in 2025, 69% of new Black-owned businesses were started by women. The survey also found that women business owners are less likely than their male counterparts to depend on AIMM: Delaware judge rules public benefit corporations exempt from maximizing value in sale DRFiduciary duty is different - OpenAI, AnthropicAssholiest of the Week (MM):Fake man apologies MM‘I'm sorry ... but': Apologetic Alan Joyce tells his side of the Qantas storyJoyce has expressed some regret“So with the information we had at the time, I still don't think there was any other decision you could make,”“Hindsight is a great thing.”“I'm actually very, very proud of the fact that I'm not sitting here and apologising for Qantas going bankrupt, [something] that many airlines around the world did,”Australian Competition and Consumer Commission fined Qantas $120 million for selling tickets for 8000 already cancelled flights“I apologise for the angst that was generated [for] the customers on it, but the reality was we had 22 million bookings in the system [and] the system wasn't designed to do an automatic refund,”“Stop us!”More than 1,200 AI workers across Anthropic, DeepMind, OpenAI, and Meta are asking for Washington's help building an AI slowdown plan‘No Way to Stop It': Elon Musk Warns Humans Will Lose Control of AI and Face Extinction by 2036Elon Musk's new 5-year warning to Americans: AI will beat human brains by 2032 (then go wild). Get rich or get crushed?Sam Altman says the Hugging Face hack is a reminder that an AI power monopoly could lead to 'long-term disaster'It Will Happen Frequently': Musk Warns of Rogue AI Threat After Anthropic Breached Three FirmsBut also, DON'T stop us, obviously…Palantir CEO warns US against Europe's AI regulation path, urges Trump admin to not ban open modelsElon Musk's xAI sues Minnesota over law to ban 'nudify' appsMark Zuckerberg is urging the U.S. to accelerate AI development, not restrict itElon Musk Commits Up to $120M to Republican Midterms: Sets Feud With Trump Aside for Major Election PushIgnoring boardsHims & Hers mission:“Hims & Hers is the leading health and wellness platform on a mission to help the world feel great through the power of better health. We believe how you feel in your body and mind transforms how you show up in life. That's why we're building a future where nothing stands in the way of harnessing this power. Hims & Hers normalizes health & wellness challenges—and innovates on their solutions—to make feeling happy and healthy easy to achieve. No two people are the same, so the Company provides access to personalized care designed for results.”Hims & Hers board:CEO: Andrew Dudum, tech VC bro investor “serial entrepreneur” with deep health experience from Bungalow (airBnB knockoff in the UK), Homebound (a “homebuilding platform”), TalkIQ (an AI startup, duh), and Terminal (something about scaling engineering?)TWO directors from DoorDash (Kofi Amoo-Gottfried from Marketing, previously of Facebook, and Christopher Payne the COO, previously of eBay, MSFT, and Amazon)TWO pharma execs (one lawyer, Deb Autor, one with an econ degree, Kare Schultz)One guy from Netflix (David Wells) and one lady from Urban Outfitters (marketing/brand, Andrea Perez) and one pure law firm lawyer (Anja Manuel)ONE DOCTOR EXCLUSIVE: US FTC sues Hims & Hers for sending user health info to Meta, SnapUsers' sensitive health information was shared with online advertising companies including Meta ​Platforms and Snap despite the company leading customers to believe their ​data was private, the FTC alleged in the lawsuit filed along with Los ⁠Angeles County and Utah.Hims & Hers also started charging users for prescriptions before ​they have ⁠had a chance to meet with healthcare providers, the FTC alleged. Most customers do not receive a consultation with a provider, and instead are charged for ⁠prescriptions ​soon after filling out an intake form, ​according to the agency.Headliniest of the WeekDR: CEO apologizes for offering interviews to people who got tattoos of his AI company logoSan Francisco tech CEO Jordan Zietz, co-founder of an early stage AI startup called LemonLime. Stanford grad.“LemonLime learns your business and then automates your team's busywork in a single click, no coding or manual setup required.”Former Qantas CEO reflects on tenure, issues apology to passengers over post COVID chaos AND ‘I'm sorry ... but': Apologetic Alan Joyce tells his side of the Qantas storyMM: Amazon received $600 million in tariff refunds and will pass some back to customersMM: Trump Staff Cuts Blamed After Watermarked OpenAI Map Mislabels Africa at AIDS ConferenceIt's the fact that we have less staff that meant we couldn't bother to figure out which country was whichWho Won the Week?DR: Kohls: For getting some much-needed female influence on board: Kohl's Appoints Wendy Arlin as Chair of the BoardCurrently only 2: Robbin Mitchell (7%) and Wendy Arlin (1%)John Schlifske (27%) stepping downMM: The phrase “not due to any disagreement with the Company”Anne Sweeney Resigns From Netflix BoardOn July 26, 2026, Anne Sweeney notified Netflix, Inc. (the “Company”) that she was resigning from the Board of Directors of the Company effective as of that date. Ms. Sweeney's resignation is not due to any disagreement with the Company1,660 8-Ks in the last 5 years have the exact phrase “not due to any disagreement with the Company”So we're saying that 1,660 c-suite and board members resigned in 5 years - more than 300 per year - and NONE were due to a disagreement with the companies? That's only THAT phrase - no other details are given for most of them except occasionally:To pursue another jobPersonal reasonsFor scale, in the last 5 years, the term “was due to a disagreement with the Company” appears… 5 timesPredictionsDR: Qantas CEO Vanessa Hudson apologizes that it took former CEO Alan Joyce to apologize for something she already apologized for despite not being CEO when any of it happenedMM: Damion resigns from Free Float due to a disagreement with the zero dollars he gets paid, but Free Float puts out a statement saying it's “not due to any salary reason related to the company”

Synopsis Le retour de Richer! Avec Patrick, Francis et Jacques, on se demande pourquoi la technologie s'invite dans nos affaires sans jamais demander la permission : des caméras infrarouges dans les prochains AirPods pour donner des yeux à Siri, de l'IA poussée dans le fond de la gorge à chaque mise à jour, et un buzz grandissant pour les téléphones « zen », les écrans e-ink et le retour à l'analogique — jusqu'au flip phone Callback 8020 de Commodore, sans navigateur ni réseaux sociaux. Ensuite ça brasse : l'AI-washing dans les startups — payer des tokens pour ce qu'un script Python de dix lignes ferait aussi bien —, les 97 % d'applications vibe-codées qui meurent dans leur première année faute de soutien, et la grande question de la souveraineté numérique canadienne : autonomie réelle ou rêve pieux? Le sujet d'opinion revient sur nos fleurons vendus aux Américains — Element AI passé chez ServiceNow, les talents formés à Mila qui migrent au sud — et sur ce que ça veut dire de partir une entreprise ici. La démonstration du jour arrive d'ailleurs toute cuite : Washington ordonne à Anthropic de couper l'accès à Fable 5 et Mythos 5 pour tout ressortissant étranger, trois jours après leur lancement. On termine avec les face scans au Royaume-Uni, l'interdiction des réseaux sociaux aux moins de 16 ans, le débat sur l'anonymat en ligne, les 3,5 G$ de fraude par usurpation rapportés par la FTC, et une statistique qui fait mal : une cinquantaine d'entreprises québécoises par année ferment à cause d'un rançongiciel — et on n'en entend jamais parler. Crew Patrick Mathieu — Cofondateur de Hackfest.ca et fondateur de Hexius Richer Dinelle — Expert en sécurité informatique & Gestion de systèmes Francis Coats — Expert, vulgarisateur et conférencier en sécurité et en technologie Jacques Sauvé — PDG, Trilogiam Sujet d'opinion Registraire des entreprises du Québec — immatriculer une entreprise au Québec Element AI vendue à l'américaine ServiceNow (Radio-Canada) Mila – Institut québécois d'intelligence artificielle Québec débloque 36 M$ pour Mila (La Presse) Cohere et Mila collaborent pour mettre au point une IA québécoise (La Presse) Richer veut savoir La souveraineté numérique au Canada remise en question par un rapport fédéral (Radio-Canada) La souveraineté numérique est-elle hors d'atteinte? (La Presse) Énoncé de politique de souveraineté numérique du Québec (PDF) CIRANO – Souveraineté numérique (PDF) News de sécurité Patrick Anthropic – Statement on the US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 Anthropic coupe Fable et Mythos après une directive de contrôle des exportations (Fortune) SpaceX en bourse : deux FNB canadiens couverts en CAD lancés la même journée (Wealth Professional) Commodore Callback 8020 – le flip phone sans navigateur ni réseaux sociaux METR – Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer Productivity (19 % plus lents, alors qu'ils se croyaient 20 % plus rapides) Rapport sur la spécificité du taux de faillites d'entreprises au Québec (PDF, gouvernement du Québec) Francis Apple veut mettre des caméras dans les AirPods (The Verge) Les meilleurs téléphones minimalistes de 2026 (The Gadgeteer) « I Studied 1,000 Vibe-Coded Apps. 97% Failed for the Same 3 Reasons » 91,5 % des applications vibe-codées contiennent au moins une vulnérabilité (recherche Q1 2026) Jacques UK to require ID or face scan before you can make social media accounts (BleepingComputer) Keir Starmer annonce l'interdiction des réseaux sociaux aux moins de 16 ans (Euronews) L'Australie montre déjà les limites du dispositif (Le JDD) FTC warns of record $3.5 billion losses to imposter scams in 2025 (BleepingComputer) Communiqué original de la FTC Shamelessplug Hackfest 2026 - Québec Discord Hackfest securite.fm Crédits Montage audio par Hackfest Communication Locaux virtuels par Streamyard

Send us Fan MailThe battle over private listings, office exclusives, MLS access, and who controls real estate inventory has officially reached Washington.In this episode I examine why Congress has launched an inquiry into Compass CEO Robert Reffkin and MRED, and why this investigation could reshape the future of residential real estate.For more than a year, I have argued that the biggest issue facing the real estate industry isn't commissions, buyer agency, or artificial intelligence—it's who controls the inventory. Now the House Judiciary Committee is asking many of the same questions.This episode explains what the July 22 congressional letters actually say, why Congress is interested in Compass' private listing strategy, and what it could mean for REALTORS®, brokers, MLSs, Zillow, Homes.com, Rocket, Redfin, buyers, sellers, title companies, lenders, and consumers.You'll also learn why this debate extends far beyond Compass and private listings. This is really about data ownership, vertical integration, competition, consumer choice, fair housing, antitrust law, and the future of the real estate marketplace.• Why Congress is investigating Compass and MRED• Robert Reffkin's three-phase marketing strategy• Why inventory—not commissions—is the industry's most valuable asset• The battle between Compass, Zillow, MLSs and portals• How private listings affect competition• Fair Housing concerns• Antitrust implications• Why data is becoming more valuable than commissions• Vertical integration and why everyone wants to own the consumer relationship• What this means for REALTORS®, brokers and consumers• Four possible outcomes from the Congressional inquiryCHAPTERS00:00 I Told You So01:35 Congress Enters the Real Estate Fight03:56 Why This Matters04:44 How We Got Here06:15 Compass' Private Listing Strategy08:40 Zillow, MLSs & Consumer Groups Push Back10:10 What Jim Jordan's Letter Really Says13:20 Why Congress is Looking at Competition15:35 Steering, Incentives & Vertical Integration18:00 Is This Really About Data?22:40 What It Means for South Carolina26:40 Four Possible Outcomes29:30 The Future of Real Estate32:55 Final Thoughts34:30 ClosingWhether you agree with Compass or not, this investigation has the potential to influence how homes are marketed for years to come.If you're a REALTOR®, broker, attorney, lender, title professional, appraiser, or anyone involved in residential real estate, this is an episode you cannot afford to miss.What do YOU think?Should sellers have the unrestricted right to market homes privately?Or should every consumer have equal access to every available home?Leave your opinion below.

Your body holds answers you can use to guide you through times of change. In this guided meditation we scan the body for answers and insights. Plus, we acknowledge what is being held so that it can be released, we send our change energy to mother earth to heal and let it full integrate back into our body.We end by connecting to our subconscious and our spirit guides to gather any information or insights that we may have missed.This meditation is infused with Reiki healing energy.

We like to sign off our show by saying, “Take care of yourselves, take care of each other, and drink some tea.” It's our favorite little motto and it's a great reminder that herbalism and self-care go right alongside mutual aid!In our episode 283: Vetting Your Herbalism Sources: Red Flags & Green Flags, we talked about how it isn't actually bucking the system to ignore the FDA and FTC laws about “telling & selling”. Neither is it a cool rebellious act to turn away from scientific knowledge, modern medical technologies, or even conventional treatments. They each have their place, and herbalism isn't an ‘alternative' to them in the sense of a dichotomous choice – either herbs or science, either herbalism or medicine. We can fit together, and we get better results when we do.But it's certainly true that conventional medicine has problems, and that the system needs some bucking! A system reliant on consumerism – buying your way to better health – always leaves people out. A lot of people. They need help, and we can help them.The best way to do that is a little surprising: take care of each other. Extend our circle of care outside ourselves, outside our family and housemates, and further out into the world. We are all here together, and we can all support one another. And since we're all herbalists here, let's do it with herbs!Three ways to get started:FREE Emergency Preparedness course – Concise and targeted lessons teach you how to prepare for emergencies ranging from hurricanes to wildfires to heatwaves. Learn to construct a modular, no-frills herbal first aid kit, food reserve, and go-bag (or shelter-in-place bag). Understand herbal wound care and all the steps to take for cuts and burns. Anticipate and prepare for the effects of climate disasters in your community, not only to help yourself, but to help others too.SLIDING SCALE Herbal Community Care Toolkit – This 20-hour video course teaches you safe, inexpensive, and accessible herbs which can make a difference in the most common health concerns in our society today. High blood pressure, diabetes, edema, pain, poor sleep – there are herbs to support people facing all of these challenges and more. They don't need to be expensive, exotic, or risky. They don't need to be “maximum strength” or “100x concentrated”. Gentle, simple, safe herbs can help people you know and love.SLIDING SCALE Accessible Herbalism course – We consider this essential training for clinical herbalists, but you don't have to be one to want this information! Providing care to everyone is challenging, and involves a lot of creativity and skill to find the right resources and get them to the right people – and to do it all without burning out. To do it, we teach strategies to work around resource constraints, addressing the realities of time and energy involved in herbal work. We share our methods for finding funding, improving access to care, and building community support networks: mutual aid for herbalists and the communities they serve.You can go deeper, of course! These are starting points to get you helpful and empowered as soon as possible, while keeping safety first. And don't forget…Everything's on sale in July!All our offerings are self-paced online video courses. They all come with free access to twice-weekly live Q&A sessions with us, lifetime access to current & future course material, open discussion threads integrated in each lesson, an active student community, study guides, quizzes & capstone assignments, and more!Use code CATNIP at checkout to get 20% off!If you have a moment, it would help us a lot if you could subscribe, rate, & review our podcast wherever you listen. This helps others find us more easily. Thank you!!Our theme music is “Wings” by Nicolai Heidlas.Support the showYou can find all of our online herbalism courses at online.commonwealthherbs.com!

You don't need a fancy gym to build stronger bones. Learn how to create a simple home osteoporosis gym with the right equipment, exercises, and strength-training strategies to support balance, posture, and fracture prevention. In this episode, I'm sharing a special interview and exercise demonstration from Joan Pagano, a renowned fitness expert and certified exercise physiologist specializing in women's health and active aging. She is also a best-selling author and has written seven books on the benefits of strength training across the decades.  Joan walks us through setting up your own home osteoporosis gym, including the equipment, exercises, and foundational movements to help strengthen the most vulnerable fracture sites: the hips, spine, and wrists. Building stronger bones doesn't require a complicated routine or an expensive gym membership. With the right exercises, proper alignment, and consistent strength training, you can improve your balance, maintain independence, and give your bones the support they need at any stage of life.   "When you do a strength training exercise for your muscles, you're also doing it for your bones." ~ Joan Pagano   In this episode: - [02:04] - Resistance training and how it helps the bones - [08:05] - At-home vs. gym-based training  - [11:02] - Essential exercises for hip, spine, and wrist strength - [17:56] - Choosing the right weights for bone health - [21:26] - Resistance bands for posture and shoulder strength - [23:04] - Strengthening the back, spine, and upper body - [27:47] - Loop bands for hip stability and balance - [32:39] - Using resistance bands for leg exercises -  [35:50] - Weighted balls and compound exercises - [39:04] - Working safely with trainers and physical therapists   Resources - Get quality supplements from Margie's Fullscript Dispensary - https://tinyurl.com/supplementsforless - Joan's Strength Training for Osteoporosis (Foundational Series): 4-Session On-Demand Class (Replay) - https://happyboneshappylife.com/strength-training-for-osteoporosis-4-week-class-replay - Joan's MORE Strength Training for Osteoporosis (Follow-up Series): 4-Session On-Demand Class (Replay) - https://happyboneshappylife.com/strength-training-for-osteoporosis-new-4-week-class - Joan's Step Training for Agility, Balance, and Bone Strength: On-Demand Class - https://happyboneshappylife.com/step-training-for-agility-balance-and-bone-strength-on-demand - Fabric resistance bands Joan recommends on Amazon -https://amzn.to/3tVuKtZ   More about Margie - Website - https://margiebissinger.com/  - Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/p/Margie-Bissinger-MS-PT-CHC-100063542905332/  - Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/margiebissinger/?hl=en    DISCLAIMER – The information presented on this podcast should not be construed as medical advice. It is not intended to replace consultation with your physician or healthcare provider. The ideas shared on this podcast are the expressed opinions of the guests and do not always reflect those of Margie Bissinger and Happy Bones, Happy Life Podcast. *In compliance with the FTC guidelines, please assume the following about links on this site: Some of the links going to products are affiliate links of which I receive a small commission from sales of certain items, but the price is the same for you (sometimes, I even get to share a unique discount with you). If I post an affiliate link to a product, it is something that I personally use, support, and would recommend. I personally vet each and every product. My first priority is providing valuable information and resources to help you create positive changes in your health and bring more happiness into your life. I will only ever link to products or resources (affiliate or otherwise) that fit within this purpose.

Marley Kayden talks about the Fed's decision to leave interest rates unchanged despite dissents from three of the FOMC members. She also discusses the sell-off in Hims & Hers (HIMS) after FTC filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging it shared customers health data.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Chris Brunt of Jacobs Media joins me to talk about radio's 30‑year struggle with digital—from those first clunky station websites and primitive email blasts to today's sophisticated streaming, social, and video ecosystems.Chris explains how programmatic audio has become a major revenue driver, even for public and non‑commercial stations, by fitting into the broader “digital audio” story agencies are eager to buy. We dig into Facebook and social media, stressing the importance of FTC-compliant monetization and using tools like Ads Manager to serve clients without letting algorithms choke off our own messaging.And there's my favourite - the need to “be everywhere”: on apps, smart TVs, YouTube, and short‑form video, especially to reach under‑40 listeners who may not even own a radio. We talk about YouTube shorts, influencer-style content from talent, and why hyper‑local, community-focused video and podcasts can win even with modest follower counts. Chris also makes the case for stations building their own apps, embracing simple video setups, and prioritizing authentic, original digital content over perfection.Did you know that Jacobs Media creates apps for radio stations?This is another excellent resource if you are looking for some ideas for your station(s). Paul Jacobs and Chris Brunt with 10 Things We Learned Helping Radio Stations Generating Digital Revenue Please sign up for the SOUNDING OFF Newsletter. All the things that went unsaid on the show.Also we added the Sound Off Podcast to the The Open Podcast Prefix Project (OP3) A free and open-source podcast prefix analytics service committed to open data and listener privacy. You can be a nosey parker by checking out our downloads here.Thank you Megatrax for continuously supporting the showSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

My friend Joe sells real estate. He called me about one of his clients, a retired nurse who was selling her house, because something about her story wasn't sitting right with him. She'd lost her savings to a man named Edward Smog. Found her online, quoted her scripture, told her he was her way out of debt. By the time I got involved, she was out a hundred and fifty grand. Now a new scammer is coming after her. She believes he's an offshore oil rig worker, and they're going to get married. I'm trying to stop him before he takes any more of her money. If you or someone you love is being targeted, here's where to go. To report it, the FBI runs the Internet Crime Complaint Center at ic3.gov, and the FTC takes reports at reportfraud.ftc.gov. If you want to talk to a real person for free, call the National Elder Fraud Hotline run by the Department of Justice at 833-372-8311, seven days a week, 6am to 11pm Eastern. You can also reach the AARP Fraud Watch Network Helpline at 877-908-3360. Tips for your elderly parents: No real grant, agency, or lottery ever asks you to pay a fee to get money. Gift cards, wire transfers to strangers, and crypto are how scammers get paid. Full stop. If you've never met someone in person on a live video call, assume you don't know who they are. Ask for that video call right now, not later. Take a screenshot of their photos and run a reverse image search. The excuses will tell you everything. And before any money moves, tell one person who loves you. Out loud. The scam only survives in the quiet. Resources If you or someone you love is being targeted, here's where to go. To report it, the FBI runs the Internet Crime Complaint Center at ic3.gov, and the FTC takes reports at reportfraud.ftc.gov. If you want to talk to a real person for free, call the National Elder Fraud Hotline run by the Department of Justice at 833-372-8311, seven days a week, 6am to 11pm Eastern. You can also reach the AARP Fraud Watch Network Helpline at 877-908-3360. Tips for your elderly parents: No real grant, agency, or lottery ever asks you to pay a fee to get money. Gift cards, wire transfers to strangers, and crypto are how scammers get paid. Full stop. If you've never met someone in person on a live video call, assume you don't know who they are. Ask for that video call right now, not later. Take a screenshot of their photos and run a reverse image search. The excuses will tell you everything. And before any money moves, tell one person who loves you. Out loud. The scam only survives in the quiet. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Privacy Perspectives: Data Broker Laws Are Expanding. Is Your Business in Scope? Data broker laws are expanding quickly, and their reach may extend beyond companies that traditionally think of themselves as data brokers. In this episode of Privacy Perspectives, Alex Schneider, Aaron Burstein, and Céline Guillou discuss the changing state and federal regulatory landscape, including New Jersey's newly enacted requirements, California's Delete Act, evolving definitions of data brokers, and the growing importance of understanding specific data flows. They also examine how these laws may affect retailers, advertisers, technology providers, and other businesses that collect, enrich, license, sell, or share consumer data. Aaron J. Burstein Partner Former attorney in the FTC's Division of Privacy and Identity Protection aburstein@kelleydrye.com (202) 342-8453 www.kelleydrye.com/people/aaron-j-burstein Celine Guillou Special Counsel, Advertising and Privacy Group Former Enforcement Attorney, California Privacy Protection Agency cguillou@kelleydrye.com (213) 547-4946 www.kelleydrye.com/people/celine-m-guillou Alex Schneider Special Counsel, Advertising and Privacy Group aschneider@kelleydrye.com (202) 342-8634 www.kelleydrye.com/people/alexander-i-schneider RESOURCES Subscribe to the Ad Law Access blog: www.kelleydrye.com/subscribe Subscribe to the Ad Law News newsletter: www.kelleydrye.com/subscribe Visit the Advertising and Privacy Law Resource Center: www.kelleydrye.com/advertising-and-privacy-law Find all of our links here: linktr.ee/KelleyDryeAdLaw

In this episode of On the Record, brought to you by Associated Equipment Distributors, we look at John Deere's settlement with the FTC and whether it's a win or a loss for the OEM and dealers more broadly.

In this episode, legal scholars Michael Ramsey and Jed Shugerman the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook, which address the president's authority to remove members of the executive branch. They trace the history of presidential removal power from the founding era through the Court's 1935 landmark Humphrey's Executor decision to the present day and explore what Slaughter and Cook may mean for the future of executive power. Thomas Donnelly, lead scholar at the National Constitution Center, moderates.  Resources  Trump v. Cook (2026)  Trump v. Slaughter (2026)  Humphrey's Executor v. United States (1935)  “Trump v. Slaughter: Another Win for Justice Scalia,” Michael Ramsey, The Originalism Blog, June 30, 2026  Brief Amicus Curiae of Professor Jed Shugerman in Trump v. Slaughter  “Supreme Court allows Trump to fire FTC member but not Fed director,” National Constitution Center's Constitution Daily  Stay Connected and Learn More  Stay connected with We the People—follow, rate, and review the show wherever you listen.  Questions or comments? Email ⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠.  Follow @ConstitutionCtr on social media and ⁠⁠sign up⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.  Support our important work by making a donation today.  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

ALSO: Indiana to reimburse local governments for losses during gas tax holiday, Indiana families say loss of Sun Bucks program is making summer grocery costs harder to manage, FTC warns of phishing scam involving fake letters about unclaimed insurance money, weight loss drug lawsuit, and Tyrese Haliburton ties the knot.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Did you know that there are simple habits, posture strategies, and exercises that can protect your bones for life? In this episode, I'm joined by Penny Shure, an osteoporosis exercise specialist and creator of the Million Dollar Bones program and book, to share practical habits for stronger bones at any age. Penny has trained in Pilates and dance and brings a fun, engaging approach to movement that works for everyone–from teens to grandparents. Penny also teaches the importance of neutral pelvis, hip hinging, and posture to prevent fractures and maintain mobility. She walks through simple exercises for wrists, hips, and toes that can be integrated into your daily routine to improve balance and bone strength. You'll understand how small, consistent changes can compound over time to protect your bones, enhance mobility, and set your family up for long-term bone health.   "Younger generations deserve to know that they have the power to prevent this disease (osteoporosis)." ~ Penny Shure   In this episode: [01:56] - Daily habits to support bone health [05:18] - How to overcome negative self-talk [15:02] - Posture and text neck: risks of slouching [19:08] - Understanding pelvis alignment and hip hinging [29:12] - Exercises to strengthen your wrists [31:46] - The inspiration for Million Dollar Bones [37:16] - How drinking soda affects your bones [39:55] - Teaching the next generation: prevention and education [43:44] - Toe spacers and foot mobility for stability   Resources - Penny's three exercise videos - https://www.happyboneshappylife.com/penny-shure  - Order Penny's book Million Dollar Bones here - https://www.pennyshure.com/  - Book an Online Private Session (Use the coupon code LOVE42 for a $42.00 discount on one session only - https://www.pennyshure.com/  - Dance for Strong Bones - https://happyboneshappylife.com/dance-for-strong-bones-on-demand - Gentle Pilates and Tap Dancing for Bone Health - https://happyboneshappylife.com/gentle-pilates-tap-dancing-for-bone-health-replay - Get quality supplements from Margie's Fullscript Dispensary - https://tinyurl.com/paylesssupplements   More about Margie - Website - https://margiebissinger.com/  - Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/p/Margie-Bissinger-MS-PT-CHC-100063542905332/  - Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/margiebissinger/?hl=en    DISCLAIMER – The information presented on this podcast should not be construed as medical advice. It is not intended to replace consultation with your physician or healthcare provider. The ideas shared on this podcast are the expressed opinions of the guests and do not always reflect those of Margie Bissinger and Happy Bones, Happy Life Podcast.   *In compliance with the FTC guidelines, please assume the following about links on this site: Some of the links going to products are affiliate links of which I receive a small commission from sales of certain items, but the price is the same for you (sometimes, I even get to share a unique discount with you). If I post an affiliate link to a product, it is something that I personally use, support, and would recommend. I personally vet each and every product. My first priority is providing valuable information and resources to help you create positive changes in your health and bring more happiness into your life. I will only ever link to products or resources (affiliate or otherwise) that fit within this purpose.

Welcome to Omni Talk's Retail Daily Minute, sponsored by R&S Logistics, Duvo and Mirakl.In today's Retail Daily Minute, Omni Talk's Chris Walton discusses:The European Union's new Ecodesign regulation bans large fashion brands from destroying or landfilling unsold clothing and footwear, squeezing luxury houses' scarcity playbook.The House passes the Common Cents Act, setting nationwide rules for rounding cash transactions as the U.S. Mint halts penny production.Grocery Outlet rolls out SAFR Guard facial recognition cameras in four Bay Area stores, reigniting privacy concerns after Rite Aid's FTC ban.The Retail Daily Minute has been rocketing up the Feedspot charts, so stay informed with Omni Talk's Retail Daily Minute, your source for the latest and most important retail insights.

William Kovacic, professor at George Washington University Law School and former chair of the FTC, joins Karen Conti to discuss the lawsuit attempting to block the merger between Paramount and Warner Bros. William talks about how the merger would work, how antitrust laws affect the merger, and why the issue remains before another court even if […]

Michael Kinnunen and Steve Wirt share how they each got started with Drupal through higher-ed jobs and stayed for the communit. They compare those community values to FIRST Robotics, explaining FIRST's K–12 programs (FRC, FTC, and FIRST LEGO League), kickoff-style challenges, and the "coopertition" culture where teams help competitors with parts and repairs. Both mentor highschool robotics teams in the US. For show notes visit: https://www.talkingDrupal.com/cafe019 Topics Cafe Catch Up Drupal Origin Stories Why Drupal Community What Is FIRST Mentoring Journeys Team Names Numbers Kickoff Build Sprint Coopertition In Action Awards And Impact Drupal for Team Ops Trying Recipes and Canvas Time Investment and Module Fixes Getting Students into Drupal Mentor Load and Teaching Java Student Run Team Culture Robot Ecosystem and Everybot Team Roles and Onboarding Adversity and Grit Lessons FIRST Programs and How to Join Wrap Up and Good Luck Steve Wirt Drupal Developer for CivicActions by day, FIRST Robotics mentor by night Steve has been a Drupal Developer for 19 years and helps government agencies build tools that help improve their mission. He is founding mentor of FRC team Compass Robotics. Michael Kinnunen Backend Engineer for CivicActions Michael has been working with Drupal for about a decade, starting with Drupal 7 in 2016 as a Web Developer at Northern Michigan University. He has also spent the past six years as a mentor for the Negaunee Minerbotics FRC team, where he has helped students build technical skills in programming and engineering. Guests Steve Wirt - swirt Michael Kinnunen - mkinnune Resources FIRST Robotics Gracious Professionalism and Coopertition Michael's team https://github.com/minerbotics https://www.facebook.com/MinerBotics4827/ Steve's team - Compass Robotics

New franchisors face serious legal risks - from FTC fines to franchisee lawsuits. Discover the seven critical compliance areas you must handle, how inadequate agreements can cost you, and why early legal counsel is your best insurance policy.Learn more at https://franchisegrowthpartners.com Franchise Growth Partners City: Westlake Village Address: 3625 Thousand Oaks Blvd, Suite 228 Westlake Village, CA 91361 Website: https://franchisegrowthpartners.com/

We first open a door by talking about the great new ‘right to repair' ruling from the FTC, which is the result of a long fight against rentier monopolies and digital enclosure, and should be precedent for expanding these battles and rights much further. We then tune back into hell by discussing how the AI-driven promises of convenience, personalization, and agentic servants are bribes meant to make people accept their own dependence, exploitation, and subservience to tech capital. Finally, a quick look at yet another way the AI boom is destroying life in San Francisco. ••• Farmers Finally Get a John Deere Right to Repair Agreement That Doesn't Screw Them Over https://www.404media.co/farmers-finally-get-a-john-deere-right-to-repair-agreement-that-doesnt-screw-them-over/ ••• John Deere Must Let Owners Repair Farm Equipment, Settlement Says https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/09/business/john-deere-ftc-right-to-repair.html ••• Meta Patents AI Device That Tracks Your Emotions, Watches You Take Your Meds https://www.404media.co/meta-patents-ai-device-that-tracks-your-emotions-watches-you-take-your-meds/ ••• ‘Hysteria' Grips San Francisco's Housing Market as A.I. Wealth Pours In https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/08/technology/san-francisco-home-sales-openai-anthropic-ipo.html ••• In San Francisco, Even $180,000 Tech Salaries Are No Longer Enough https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/29/technology/san-francisco-tech-salaries.html Standing Plugs: ••• Order Jathan's book: https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520398078/the-mechanic-and-the-luddite ••• Subscribe to Ed's substack: https://substack.com/@thetechbubble ••• Subscribe to TMK on patreon for premium episodes: https://www.patreon.com/thismachinekills Hosted by Jathan Sadowski (bsky.app/profile/jathansadowski.com) and Edward Ongweso Jr. (www.x.com/bigblackjacobin). Production / Music by Jereme Brown (bsky.app/profile/jebr.bsky.social)

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president could still fire commissioners, as the Court now permits, but if those firings broke quorum, the agency would be unable to proceed until replacements were confirmed. The guardrail would

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.There was an issue with this only going to paid subscribers, so sending it again. Apologies to those who get it twice. I appreciate being paid so feel free to upgrade if you enjoy TWTW.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president

In this episode, we unpack the lawsuit against prediction market platform Polymarket, which accuses the company of orchestrating undisclosed influencer campaigns, promoting simulated betting videos that appeared to show real winnings, and using viral “clipping” tactics designed to make paid content look organic. The case serves as a timely reminder that, even as FTC enforcement priorities evolve, consumer groups and private plaintiffs are increasingly stepping in to police influencer marketing practices. For brands working with creators, the message is clear: transparent disclosures, authentic content, and compliance with endorsement rules remain essential to avoiding legal and reputational risk. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Gonzalo E. Mon.

On Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg, Dani speaks with Sara Mbago-Bhunu, Director of the East and Southern Africa Division at the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). They discuss what this year's super El Niño means for farming communities and agricultural supply chains, the lessons learned from extreme weather events of the past, and why investing in resilience is cheaper than responding to disaster. Plus, an FTC settlement with John Deere secures the right to repair for U.S. farmers, an estimated 700,000 have died due to USAID's dismantling, Ugandan producers push back against an oil pipeline, a new analysis reveals El Niño will cause a surge in global food prices, and a farm pilot program in Kenya doubles enrollment at school.  While you're listening, subscribe, rate, and review the show; it would mean the world to us to have your feedback. You can listen to "Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg" wherever you consume your podcasts.

In this episode, HR expert Jean Seawright joins Donnie Shelton and Dan Gordon to break down the biggest employment issues affecting pest control companies today. Jean explains what the FTC's recent action against Rollins means for non-compete agreements and why now is the time to review your employment contracts. She also covers the evolving workplace implications of medical marijuana, what employers need to know about reasonable accommodations, and why documenting impairment—not assumptions—has become increasingly important. Finally, Jean shares the latest guidance on independent contractor classification and an important warning about new I-9 enforcement standards.   Guest: Jean Seawright, HR Update: Noncompetes, Marijuana, Contractors & I-9s Hosts: Dan Gordon, PCO Bookkeepers & M&A Specialists: https://pcobookkeepers.com/ Donnie Shelton, Triangle Home Services: https://trianglehomeservices.com/ Sponsors: Coalmarch: https://www.coalmarch.com/podcast PestSure: https://www.pestsure.com/ Voice for Pest: https://www.voiceforpest.com/podcast Forshaw: https://www.forshaw.com/ PestPac by WorkWave: https://www.pestpac.com/pmpindustryinsiders Peer Groups: https://www.pmpindustryinsider.com/peergroups Insiders Conference:  https://www.pmpindustryinsider.com/conference

Check out our YouTube videosAI writing shapeSupport the show on Patreon  to join our live Discord hangouts, and get access to research papers, transcripts and videos.And if you don't want to commit, show your support here with a one time contribution: PayPalSign up for the newsletter to hear about the next episode, FTC dates, and coffee releases.   Support the show

In this episode, Katherine Forrest and Scott Caravello break down the discovery of hidden steganographic tracking code inside Anthropic's Claude Code, the FTC's proposed statement on AI output accuracy and disclosure, and IBM's warning that the quantum threat to internet encryption may already be in motion. For the sources referenced in this episode, please see the links below: Anthropic: Letter to Senators Tim Scott and Elizabeth Warren Re: AI Distillation Threats FTC: Proposed Policy Statement Concerning the Suppression of Accuracy in Artificial Intelligence Systems IBM: Q-Day has already begun. Are you ready? Thereallo: Claude Code Is Steganographically Marking Requests Prior Paul, Weiss Waking Up With AI Quantum Episodes: Ep. 107 – Degrees of Change: How Quantum Could Transform AI Infrastructure Ep. 54 – Defining Quantum Computing: Part 2 Ep. 53 – Defining Quantum Computing ## Learn More About Paul, Weiss's Artificial Intelligence practice: https://www.paulweiss.com/industries/artificial-intelligence

What seems like a simple request for records can quickly become a costly compliance failure. In this episode, we unpack the FTC's settlement with Amazon over alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act's identity theft record requirements, highlighting how routine customer service practices, identity verification protocols, and privacy concerns can conflict with the FCRA's strict obligations. The case serves as a reminder that businesses handling consumer data must do more than adopt compliance policies—they must ensure frontline employees can execute them correctly and within the law's precise timelines. For companies managing fraud, identity theft, or consumer records, the settlement underscores that operational details can carry significant regulatory consequences. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Laura Riposo VanDruff and Donnelly L. McDowell.

This Day in Legal History: The White House Tapes RevealedOn July 16, 1973, before the Senate Watergate Committee and a live national television audience, a former White House aide named Alexander Butterfield answered a question that changed American history. Asked whether there was any kind of recording system in the White House, Butterfield confirmed that President Nixon had installed a secret, voice-activated taping system that recorded his conversations and phone calls in the Oval Office and elsewhere. In a single answer, the entire Watergate investigation pivoted.Until that moment, the inquiry into the Watergate break-in and cover-up had largely been a contest of competing testimony—Nixon's word against that of his former counsel John Dean. The existence of the tapes meant there was now an objective record of what the President had actually said and known. Prosecutors and Congress immediately sought them; Nixon refused to hand them over, asserting executive privilege—the claim that a president's confidential communications are shielded from disclosure. That standoff produced one of the most important separation-of-powers decisions in American law.In United States v. Nixon, decided a year later in July 1974, a unanimous Supreme Court rejected the President's claim of absolute privilege. The Court recognized that executive privilege exists and has real constitutional footing, but held that it is not unqualified—that it must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a criminal proceeding. No person, the decision made clear, not even the president, is above the ordinary processes of the law. Nixon turned over the tapes, one of which captured him plotting to obstruct the investigation, and he resigned days later. The significance of July 16, 1973 is that a single truthful answer under oath set in motion the enforcement of a foundational principle: that presidential power operates within the law, and that the courts, not the president, decide the limits of privilege.Todd Blanche's bid to become attorney general is hanging in the balance after a tense confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Blanche, who has been acting attorney general since President Trump fired Pam Bondi in April and who previously served as Trump's personal criminal defense lawyer, spent hours fielding pointed questions—including a telling moment when he said he “is” the president's lawyer before catching himself and correcting it to “was.” The awkwardness captures the central concern: whether a former personal attorney to the president can run the Justice Department as a neutral servant of the law rather than of the man who appointed him. Senators pressed him on the now-defunct anti-weaponization fund, the handling of the Epstein files, and Trump's pardons for January 6 defendants. The math is what makes this precarious. The recent death of Senator Lindsey Graham left committee Republicans with just one vote to spare, and Senator John Cornyn—a lame duck—has said he isn't sold, meaning Blanche's advancement may rest largely in Cornyn's hands. The significance is about the independence of federal law enforcement: confirming a president's former defense lawyer as attorney general tests whether the Justice Department's prosecutorial power will be insulated from the president's personal interests, and the narrow margin means a single Republican could decide the outcome.Blanche to face Senate grilling in bid to be Trump's attorney general | ReutersThe Senate has confirmed a second Florida state appeals judge who ruled in President Trump's favor in his defamation suit against the Pulitzer Prize Board, giving him a lifetime seat on the federal bench. The vote was 51-46 along party lines to place Chief Judge Jeffrey Kuntz on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Here's the connection that drew scrutiny. Kuntz sat on the Florida appeals court panel that ruled for Trump on a personal-jurisdiction question, allowing his defamation case against the Pulitzer Board to move forward—and Kuntz wrote that panel ruling. He is now the second judge from that same panel to be nominated by Trump and confirmed to a lifetime federal judgeship. At his hearing, Kuntz defended his decision not to recuse from the Trump matter. The significance is about judicial independence and the appearance of a quid pro quo. There is nothing unusual about elevating state appellate judges to the federal bench, and a favorable ruling doesn't by itself prove anything improper. But when a president rewards judges who ruled for him personally with lifetime appointments, it raises an uncomfortable question about incentives—whether judges hoping for advancement might feel subtle pressure to favor the person doing the appointing—and that perception, critics argue, can corrode public confidence in an impartial judiciary even where each individual ruling was defensible on the merits.2nd Florida judge who ruled for Trump in Pulitzer case confirmed to federal bench | ReutersAnd finally, the Federal Trade Commission and the Ohio State Bar Association have thrown their support behind an Ohio Supreme Court proposal to loosen the American Bar Association's long-standing grip on who gets to become a lawyer. The proposal would let graduates of non-ABA-accredited law schools sit for the Ohio bar exam and would move toward a state-run accreditation process. Here's the structure worth understanding. In most states, you generally can't take the bar exam unless you graduated from a law school the ABA has accredited—which effectively makes the ABA the national gatekeeper of legal education. The FTC's objection is framed in competition terms: it argues the ABA's accreditation standards “go beyond what is reasonably necessary” to ensure lawyers are prepared, and that restricting the supply of lawyers this way may boost incumbent lawyers' pay while raising costs and reducing access for ordinary people who need legal help. Ohio isn't alone—Florida and Texas have already amended their rules so the ABA no longer has the final say, and Tennessee is weighing a similar move. The significance is a real shift in how the profession polices its own entry. Supporters see it as breaking up a monopoly to expand access to legal careers and legal services; critics worry that weakening a uniform national standard could erode the quality and consistency of legal training. Either way, the ABA's decades-long role as the sole gatekeeper is eroding, state by state.State bar, FTC back Ohio proposal to limit ABA role in lawyer admissions | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

President and CEO of the Better Business Bureau Steve Bernas joins Bob Sirott to talk about the increasing amount of loan scams and how you can avoid government impersonators. He also shares an alert from the FTC about an unclaimed life insurance scam and people using AI to sell fake exotic flower seeds.

What should food delivery apps tell you before you click “place order”? In this episode, we unpack a bipartisan coalition of 16 state attorneys general urging the FTC to adopt sweeping new rules governing food delivery platform fees, with a focus on drip pricing, service fees, menu markups, tipping transparency, and personalized pricing. The AGs argue that consumers deserve clearer disclosures about how fees are calculated, whether menu prices differ from in-store prices, and when personal data is being used to tailor prices or discounts. As state and federal regulators increasingly align around pricing transparency, the proposal signals that food delivery platforms—and potentially other industries using similar pricing models—should prepare for heightened scrutiny of fees, disclosures, and data-driven pricing practices. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Paul L. Singer, Abigail Stempson, Beth Bolen Chun, and Andrea deLorimier.

Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough on mRNA Persistence, Nattokinase, and the Fight Over COVID-19 Treatment" Six years after standing before the US Senate and calling out the pandemic response in real time, Dr. Peter McCullough returns with new evidence on where the spike protein came from, how long it persists in the body after infection or vaccination, and what's being done to break it down. This episode traces the science from a 2015 gain-of-function paper to a patient still showing circulating spike protein 3.6 years after vaccination. Get Dr. McCullough's free spike protein guide: myfreespikeguide.com Host Dave Asprey sits down with Dr. Peter McCullough, a physician trained in internal medicine, cardiology, and epidemiology, and one of the most published and most censored voices of the COVID-19 pandemic. He authored the first multi-drug treatment protocol for COVID-19, testified before the US Senate in 2020 and again in 2025, and has published extensively in the peer-reviewed literature on vaccine safety, spike protein biology, and early treatment. His book Courage to Face COVID-19 and his most recent New York Times bestseller, Vaccines, Mythology, Ideology and Reality, examine the history and science behind vaccine policy. Dave and Dr. McCullough trace the origins of the spike protein back to 2015 and 2016 research papers describing a lab-created, SARS-like coronavirus explicitly labeled "poised for human emergence," and discuss the funding, institutions, and researchers involved. They break down why synthetic mRNA vaccines resist the body's normal RNA breakdown process, what a patient case revealed about spike protein circulating 3.6 years after vaccination, and how nattokinase, a natural enzyme, has shown the ability to break the spike protein down. They also cover the suppression campaigns against ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, the wartime propaganda origins of terms like "misinformation" and "anti-vaxxer," and what Dr. McCullough says he would do differently if he ran HHS. The conversation closes with new research on cognitive superagers, the small percentage of people who reach 100 with intact memory and health. You'll Learn: Why 2015 and 2016 research papers described a lab-created coronavirus as "poised for human emergence" years before the pandemic Why synthetic mRNA in COVID-19 vaccines resists the body's natural RNA breakdown process What one patient's case revealed about spike protein still circulating 3.6 years after vaccination How nattokinase, a natural enzyme, has been shown to break down the spike protein Why the FDA and FTC targeted ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and companies selling nasal sprays during the pandemic The wartime propaganda origins of terms like "misinformation," "disinformation," and "anti-vaxxer" What Dr. McCullough says he would do first if he were running HHS What research on cognitive superagers reveals about the small number of people who reach 100 with intact health Thank you to our sponsors! - TrueDark | Visit truedark.com and use code DAVEASPREY15 (discount applies to all frames except Aegis) - ZenBud | Dave's Nervous System Biohack. Visit zenbud.health and use code DAVE15 at checkout for a discount. - Qualia | Go to qualialife.com/ASPREY for 50% off, and use code ASPREY for an additional 15% off. - ENERGYbits | If you want a simpler, smarter way to support your body… this is it. Head to ENERGYbits.com and use code ASPREY for 20% off your order. Dave Asprey is a four-time New York Times bestselling author, founder of Bulletproof Coffee, and the father of biohacking. With over 1,000 interviews and 1 million monthly listeners, The Human Upgrade brings you the knowledge to take control of your biology, extend your longevity, and optimize every system in your body and mind. Each episode delivers cutting-edge insights inhealth, performance, neuroscience, supplements, nutrition, biohacking, emotional intelligence, and conscious living. New episodes are released every Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, and Sunday (BONUS). Dave asks the questions no one else will and gives you real tools to become stronger, smarter, and more resilient. Keywords: spike protein detox, how long does spike protein last in your body, nattokinase spike protein, mRNA vaccine side effects, is the spike protein still in my blood, gain of function research explained, where did COVID come from, Wuhan lab leak evidence, ivermectin banned, why was hydroxychloroquine banned, vaccine injury compensation act, mRNA vaccine shedding, spike protein detox protocol, how to live to 100, cognitive superagers, Peter McCullough, Dave Asprey Resources: • Learn More About Dr. McCullough's Work At: https://www.twc.health/pages/focal-points • Get My 2026 Clean Nicotine Roadmap | Enroll for free at https://daveasprey.com/2026-clean-nicotine-roadmap/ • Dave Asprey's Latest News | Go to https://daveasprey.com/ to join Inside Track today. • Danger Coffee: https://dangercoffee.com/discount/dave15? • My Daily Supplements: SuppGrade Labs (15% Off) • Favorite Blue Light Blocking Glasses: TrueDark (15% Off) • Dave Asprey's BEYOND Conference: https://beyondconference.com • Dave Asprey's New Book – Heavily Meditated: https://daveasprey.com/heavily-meditated • Join My Substack (Live Access To Podcast Recordings): https://substack.daveasprey.com/ • Upgrade Labs: https://upgradelabs.com Timestamps: 00:00 – Trailer 00:43 – Intro 02:10 – 2020 Public Health Failures 05:07 – Vaccine History & Mythology 07:19 – Vaccine Hesitancy as Disease 13:12 – Masks & Lockdown Absurdity 18:03 – War on Hydroxychloroquine 23:56 – Ivermectin Suppression 28:58 – FTC Misinformation Crackdown 31:18 – Propaganda Terms Explained 39:55 – McCullough's Confidence & Career 43:08 – Spike Protein Origins 57:10 – Nattokinase & Spike Clearance 58:50 – mRNA Persistence in Body 1:11:50 – Fixing the System 1:17:32 – Political Divisiveness 1:22:41 – Secrets to Longevity See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

American history is riddled with collisions between legally defensible rulings and morally costly outcomes. Still, "the purpose of law in any society is to embody a moral framework in practice," says Yuval Levin, who joins Mark Labberton to explore the moral architecture in the foundation of the American legal system, as they review the most recent rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has just closed one of the most consequential terms in recent memory, articulating the tension between faithfulness to the Constitution and enacting justice and morality. Together they reflect on why and how a system founded on equality must be both majoritarian and counter-majoritarian at once; why a judge's job is to articulate their legal (rather than their moral) opinion; the rise of Constitutional originalism; why pre-Trump conservative arguments win at this Court while "Trumpy" ones lose; the contemporary relevance of the Federalist Papers; what recourse citizens have when they believe the Court has done wrong; and why the American legal system's worst failures still cluster around race. They explore several of the 2025-26 rulings of the Supreme Court, including imposition of tariffs, immigration enforcement, and birthright citizenship, and the Voting Rights Act. Episode Highlights "The purpose of law in any society is to embody a moral framework in practice." "This is a very good time to get to know The Federalist Papers." "The role of the judge in the American system is to apply the law, not to find the moral answer per se. We hope the law does that, though it doesn't always and we know it." "The American system of government, very much for moral reasons, is expected to be both majoritarian and counter-majoritarian." [Regarding Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh] "They grew up in the same place. They literally went to the same high school and had the same history teacher. Their mothers knew each other … They agreed with each other 52% of the time in this last term of the Supreme Court." [Courts to Trump] "You are in charge of the executive branch, but the executive branch is not in charge of the American government." "If you come to this court with a pre-Trump conservative legal argument, you're going to win. If you come to this court with a Trumpy legal argument, you're going to lose." "We experienced the high water mark of executive power about a year ago, and it is now receding." "The areas where it has failed most are concentrated around questions of race. That has been true from the beginning. It is thankfully less true than it used to be, but it is still true, and I think we have to be uniquely sensitive to those questions for that reason." About Yuval Levin Yuval Levin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he holds the Beth and Ravenel Curry Chair in Public Policy and directs Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies. He founded and edits National Affairs, and he is a senior editor at The New Atlantis and a contributing editor at National Review. His books include "The Great Debate," "The Fractured Republic," "A Time to Build," and most recently, "American Covenant." He served on the White House domestic policy staff under George W. Bush and earned his PhD at the University of Chicago's Committee on Social Thought. Helpful Links and Resources Yuval Levin at the American Enterprise Institute: https://www.aei.org/profile/yuval-levin/ National Affairs, the publication Levin founded and edits: https://nationalaffairs.com/authors/detail/yuval-levin American Covenant, by Yuval Levin: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/yuval-levin/american-covenant/9780465040742/?lens=basic-books A Time to Build, by Yuval Levin: https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/yuval-levin/a-time-to-build/9781541699281/?lens=basic-books The Federalist Papers, full text at the Library of Congress: https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers Trump v. Slaughter, the decision overturning Humphrey's Executor (June 29, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-332_qn12.pdf Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the IEEPA tariffs decision (February 20, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf Louisiana v. Callais, the Voting Rights Act decision (April 29, 2026): https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-109_21o3.pdf Coverage of the birthright citizenship ruling in Trump v. Barbara, SCOTUSblog: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-order-ending-birthright-citizenship/ Show Notes Yuval Levin's legal/constitutional frame: The law exists to put a society's moral convictions into workable practice. On "All men are created equal": If no one has natural authority over anyone else, we decide by majority vote—but equality also means the minority keeps its rights no matter who wins The Constitution assigns those two jobs to different institutions and lets them fight: Congress and the president answer to majorities, the courts deliberately do not Life tenure and fixed salaries exist so justices can protect minority rights without fear of majority reprisal A judge's job is to say what the law is, not to reach the most just result; therefore good judges regularly land where they might wish they didn't. What citizens can do when the Court rules wrongly: If it misread a statute, Congress can rewrite it. Constitutional rulings are harder to undo, but examples include the 16th Amendment (re: income tax) and the 14th Amendment (re: black citizenship, answering the Court directly) The pro-life movement's 50-year strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade Levin on the difficulty of simply being in the political minority, and why the system tries to make everyone a winner sometimes Originalism began as a limit on judicial power and judges' preferences Legal originalism looks for original public meaning, not the drafters' intent Parallel to biblical interpretation, where faithful readers reach wildly different conclusions The challenge of interpreting and applying the Constitution to matters of freedom and democracy today With Congress mostly absent, the Court is now deciding questions of executive power the Federalist Papers were written about Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch: Same age, same hometown, same high school history teacher, agreed only 52% of the time this term Trump v. Slaughter ends the independent agency: the Court overturned Humphrey's Executor, and the president can now fire FTC-style commissioners at will 2026 Court rulings also told the president no: on tariffs, on the National Guard in Illinois without the governor's consent, and on birthright citizenship Levin's rule of thumb: Pre-Trump conservative arguments win at this Court, Trumpy arguments lose Yuval Levin: Executive power peaked about a year ago and is now receding. Louisiana v. Callais guts Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by requiring proof of racial intent A legal bind: Black voters vote Democratic by 90% in the South, so a racist map and a purely partisan map look identical Levin defends the ruling as law and grieves it as outcome—several Black-held Southern seats will likely be redistricted away Why he opposes reauthorizing the VRA with race-based set-aside districts, and where he thinks change should come from instead Software now lets parties gerrymander voter by voter—in New England, Trump won 35% and Republicans hold zero House seats The deceptions of the human heart Does constitutional structure just launder self-interest? The system's deepest failures have always clustered around race Gratitude for the Constitution in America's 250th year #SupremeCourt #Constitution #VotingRights #Originalism #ExecutivePower #FaithAndPolitics #YuvalLevin #Conversing Production Credits Conversing is produced and distributed in partnership with Comment Magazine and Fuller Seminary.

New probiotic strains may hold the key to better gut health, stronger bones, and even longevity. In this episode, I'm joined by Dr. Oscar Coetzee, a recognized expert in psychology, human nutrition, and metabolic health, to discuss the latest research on probiotics and bone health.  We explore why traditional probiotics may not always provide lasting results and how new strains are designed to target root causes of inflammation, optimize gut balance, and support calcium metabolism.  We also cover practical tips for implementing probiotics safely, including guidance on timing, dosage, and considerations for people with SIBO, thyroid medication, or other conditions. Plus, we discuss the impact of gluten sensitivity on inflammation and bone health, emphasizing holistic lifestyle approaches. Today's conversation is to help you understand the emerging science behind probiotics and why your gut matters for bone health.   "Our guts and the intelligence of these microbes far exceed anything that we have in our brains. They are literally intellectual to the point that they can resurrect life." ~ Dr. Oscar Coetzee, MS, DCN   In this episode: [00:00] - Introduction: Probiotics and emerging research on bone health [04:45] - Why probiotics do not always deliver desired outcomes [06:02] - Two types of gut bacteria and what they do [11:07] - Scientific breakthrough: supplement form of anaerobic probiotic strains [22:11] - A better way to treat microbial imbalances [24:27] - Why gut health is critical for bone health and longevity [27:25] - The link between probiotics and mental health [33:35] - Best practices for taking probiotics: timing and combination [41:30] - New probiotic strains for improved outcomes [52:34] - Considerations for SIBO and thyroid medication users [1:00:33] - What this research means for your bone health   Resources - Get quality supplements from Margie's Fullscript Dispensary - https://tinyurl.com/paylesssupplements (Here are the 3 supplements Dr. Oscar talked about that can be ordered on Fullscript: Complete Commensal Probiotic™, Akkermansia Pro GLP-1 Probiotic™, and Anaerostipes Probiotic - all from Designs for Health) - Osteoporosis Exercises to Strengthen Your Bones and Prevent Fractures (video series) - https://tinyurl.com/strongerbonesexercises   More about Margie - Website - https://margiebissinger.com/  - Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/p/Margie-Bissinger-MS-PT-CHC-100063542905332/  - Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/margiebissinger/?hl=en    DISCLAIMER – The information presented on this podcast should not be construed as medical advice. It is not intended to replace consultation with your physician or healthcare provider. The ideas shared on this podcast are the expressed opinions of the guests and do not always reflect those of Margie Bissinger and Happy Bones, Happy Life Podcast. *In compliance with the FTC guidelines, please assume the following about links on this site: Some of the links going to products are affiliate links of which I receive a small commission from sales of certain items, but the price is the same for you (sometimes, I even get to share a unique discount with you). If I post an affiliate link to a product, it is something that I personally use, support, and would recommend. I personally vet each and every product. My first priority is providing valuable information and resources to help you create positive changes in your health and bring more happiness into your life. I will only ever link to products or resources (affiliate or otherwise) that fit within this purpose.

In Trump v. Slaughter, the Supreme Court held 6-3 that the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) statutory for-cause removal protection violates the separation of powers, overruling Humphrey's Executor. The Court reasoned that subordinates who exercise the President’s power are subject to removal by him. Thus, because the FTC exercises executive power, its Commissioners must be removable by the President at will.Yet in Trump v. Cook, the Court, 5-4, denied the government’s request to stay an injunction blocking the removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. The Court held that a president’s asserted “for cause” statutory basis for removing a Federal Reserve governor is judicially reviewable and that Cook was entitled to notice and an opportunity to respond before removal. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Roberts reasoned that the statute was enacted against the backdrop of the common law, and that any definition of “cause” in this context must reflect the Federal Reserve’s unique historical status and role.Join us for a webinar breaking down both decisions, the separate opinions, and what they may mean for presidential removal power, independent agencies, the Federal Reserve, and the future of the administrative state.Featuring:Erin M. Hawley, Supreme Court & Appellate Litigation Chair, Lex Politica; Of Counsel, Alliance Defending FreedomAdam White, Laurence H. Silberman Chair in Constitutional Governance and Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Co-Director, Antonin Scalia Law School’s C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State

This episode was sponsored by Cardiff & More Than Just Luck    LightSpeed VT: https://www.lightspeedvt.com/ Dropping Bombs Podcast: https://www.droppingbombs.com/ Today's Dropping Bombs episode delivers raw, unfiltered stories with Greg Wier, the security industry entrepreneur who built and sold companies worth tens of millions after starting with nothing.   Greg breaks down the FTC nightmare that hit him after his company was already sold, the wild cases he uncovered as a private investigator, and the Jerry Springer executive producer he outs in the book — mistress, secret condo, and all. His memoir, More Than Just Luck, skips the sanitized version with a thank yous section and a f*ck yous section — and he's already writing book two, timed to drop the day he's legally free to name who really screwed him.   Greg isn't holding back in this episode, no matter who it pisses off.     

Ohio Corn & Wheat is putting the focus on the farm, examining the ongoing issues that skyrocketing fertilizer prices are having on farm operations in Ohio and across the country. In this special episode, OCW takes a look at what's at stake and encourages farmers, retailers, and anyone with information that could help with the FTC's investigation to come forward confidentially.

In this episode, I'll cover the 250th year of Independence for America and the fight to keep it going on now. Also, the Supreme Court makes more landmark cases and how they will affect you. Find the video podcast of The Dan Bongino Show exclusively on Rumble at https://Rumble.com/bongino In major blow to independent agencies, Supreme Court upholds Trump firing of FTC commissioner https://abcnews.com/Politics/supreme-court-allows-trump-firing-ftc-commissioner/story Liberal Wins on Mail Votes and ‘Geofencing' https://www.wsj.com/opinion/supreme-court-watson-v-rnc-chatrie-v-u-s-dae15b3b The Communism Debate at CNN https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-communism-debate-at-cnn-4fe48761 Sponsors: DeleteMe - https://joindeleteme.com/bongino - code: bongino American Financing - https://americanfinancing.net/bongino - NMLS 182334, nmlsconsumeraccess.org. APR for rates in the 5s start at 6.327% for well qualified borrowers. Call 888-994-7600 for details about credit costs and terms. Visit https://AmericanFinancing.net/Bongino. Average savings based on borrowers who save over $199.99 All Family Pharmacy - https://allfamilypharmacy.com/bongino Helix Sleep - https://helixsleep.com/dan Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Mary and Andrew start with a deeper dive into the Supreme Court's decision to allow the removal of Temporary Protected Status designations from over 330,000 immigrants from Haiti and Syria — a consequential ruling that affects TPS holders well beyond those who brought the case, leaving over a million people vulnerable to removal. As Andrew notes, this case was based on two claims: one being a statutory challenge that DHS didn't follow the procedures set out by Congress, and the other a constitutional equal protection claim that this TPS status removal was “motivated in part by race” — both of which were struck down 6-3. Then, a look at Trump's latest retribution efforts including the heavy sentences doled out over a protest that ended in a shooting outside the ICE Prairieland Detention Center inTexas one year ago; a felony indictment of former Olympian David Hearn for allegedly tearing part of the liner of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool; and former CIA Director John Brennan going on offense to challenge the DOJ's investigation into him. Plus, Mary and Andrew analyze the DOJ's response to a “show cause” order to unredact some of the Epstein files in a lawsuit filed by journalist Katie Phang. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

OA1275 - As June ends and another Supreme Court Season wraps, it is time to look back and survey the damage: significant blows to voting and trans rights, harder times for immigrants throughout the system, and a vast expansion of executive powers. But we also go beyond the headlines to see what has been going on with some of the Court's more routine business. What can we learn from their more mundane 9-0 decisions--and can we actually find some good news here among the wreckage? Matt does his best. Finally, in today's seasonal footnote: why the world believed for exactly five minutes that Samuel Alito had closed Supreme Court Season by announcing his retirement on Tuesday, and what we can learn from this weird mistake about how mainstream media covers the Supreme Court. Executive Power / Immigration Trump v. Barbara — 25-365 (June 30, 2026)(birthright citizenship) Learning Resources v. Trump — 24-1287  (Feb. 20, 2026) (IEEPA tariffs) Trump v. Cook — 25A312 (June 29, 2026) (Fed removal) Trump v. Slaughter — 25-332 (June 29, 2026) (FTC removal) Mullin v. Doe — 25-1083 (June 25, 2026) (TPS) Mullin v. Al Otro Lado — 25-5 (June 25, 2026) (asylum at the border) Blanche v. Lau — 25-429 (June 23, 2026)(LPRs at the border) Urias-Orellana v. Bondi — 24-777 (Mar. 4, 2026) (asylum standard of review) Criminal Law Barrett v. United States — 24-5774 (Jan. 14, 2026) (§924(c)/(j) stacking) Bowe v. United States — 24-5438 (Jan. 9, 2026) (successive §2255 petitions) Ellingburg v. United States — 24-482 (Jan. 20, 2026) (restitution / Ex Post Facto) Chatrie v. United States — 25-112 (June 29, 2026) (geofence / 4A) United States v. Hemani — 24-1234 (June 18, 2026) (cannabis & 2A rights) Hunter v. United States — 24-1063 (June 18, 2026) (appeal waivers) Pitchford v. Cain — 24-7351 (May 28, 2026) (Batson / AEDPA challenge) Olivier v. City of Brandon — 24-993 (Mar. 20, 2026) — (§1983 rights with prior conviction) Case v. Montana — 24-624 (Jan. 14, 2026) (emergency-aid / 4A) Villarreal v. Texas — 24-557 (Feb. 25, 2026) (counsel during recess) Clark v. Sweeney — 25-52 (Nov. 14, 2025) (habeas / new-trial reversal) Civil/Voting Rights Landor v. Louisiana DOC — 23-1197 (June 23, 2026) (RLUIPA damages)  Louisiana v. Callais — 24-109 (Apr. 29, 2026) (Voting Rights Act §2) West Virginia v. B.P.J. — 24-43 (June 30, 2026) (trans student athletes) Wolford v. Lopez — 24-1046 (June 25, 2026) (2A concealed carry) Chiles v. Salazar — 24-539 (Mar. 31, 2026) (conversion therapy) NRSC v. FEC — 24-621 (June 30, 2026) (1A / campaign finance) Procedural Issues Enbridge Energy v. Nessel — 24-783 (Apr. 22, 2026) (removal deadline)  Coney Island Auto Parts v. Burton — 24-808 (Jan. 20, 2026) (Rule 60(b)(4) finality) Other SCOTUSblog Stat Pack (2025-2026)[PDF] “NPR retracts story about Alito retirement,” Kelly McBride, NPR (June 30, 2026) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Things don't look great for console and game makers right now. With Xbox and PlayStation sales flagging, Microsoft preparing for big layoffs in its gaming division, and the price of everything on the rise, maybe it makes sense to save money where you can. You know, like making discs? David and Nilay discuss the end of the physical video game, before wondering whether Microsoft might be getting ready to get rid of Xbox altogether. After that, they talk about the new wave of hardware for AI coders, and the ongoing attempt to replace your laptop keyboard with... something, plus the latest iPhone 18 rumors and leaks. Finally, it's time for the Hype Desk, Brendan Carr is a Dummy, some breaking SpaceX phone news, and some truly wild BMW headlights. Further reading: Sony is killing all physical PlayStation game discs Xbox testing disc-to-digital feature that digitizes a physical game collection Xbox weighs canceling Blade game and shuttering Arkane  Xbox: “We're not reducing our overall investment in games.”  Sony's next-gen PlayStation will go ‘beyond the living room'  PlayStation and Xbox hardware had a tough May.  Xbox prices spike another $100 or more With GTA looming, consoles are getting expensive at the worst possible time 007 First Light's developer lays off staff but claims its next franchise will continue Rockstar workers push to unionize ahead of GTA VI's launch OpenAI is teasing new hardware… for Codex  Here's a photo of OpenAI's Codex hardware.  iPhone 18 Pro ‘drop test' leaks get yanked from X  Leaked iPhone 18 Pro photos reportedly wound up on the dark web   A future Qi standard could bring 50W wireless charging to more devices.  Exclusive | SpaceX Showed Investors Prototype of Elon Musk's New AI Device - WSJ Comcast is splitting in two The Supreme Court stops Trump's attempt to end birthright citizenship WhatsApp is launching usernames: here's how to reserve yours  Supreme Court allows firing of FTC commissioners, ends agency independence  Subscribe to The Verge for unlimited access to theverge.com, subscriber-exclusive newsletters, and our ad-free podcast feed. We love hearing from you! Email your questions and thoughts to vergecast@theverge.com or call us at 866-VERGE11. (Timestamps are approximate.) 00:00:00 Intro 00:02:00 Book Pitch and Grill Week 00:04:00 Discs Are Dying 00:08:00 Live Service Shopping Malls 00:11:00 Microsoft Xbox Layoffs Talk 00:16:00 Console Sales Slump and Prices 00:20:00 PlayStation Beyond Living Room 00:24:00 OpenAI Codex Macro Keyboard 00:27:00 Voice Coding and Verification Loops 00:31:00 Dictation Hype and AI Limits 00:39:00 iPhone 18 Pro Leak Mystery 00:44:00 Battery Life Tradeoffs 00:48:00 Fast Wireless Charging Heat 00:52:00 CarPlay Beta Workarounds 00:56:00 Netflix Horror Unhinged 01:03:00 Cozy Repair Game Restory 01:06:00 Brendan Carr is a Dummy 01:16:00 SpaceX AI Phone Rumors 01:22:00 Grok OS App Problem 01:25:00 Comcast Splits In Two 01:33:00 WhatsApp Username Land Grab 01:35:00 BMW Headlights Go Bananas 01:40:00 Wrap Up And Plugs Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

✅ Victories 1. Expansion of Presidential Power Case: Trump v. Slaughter Outcome: The Court overturned Humphrey’s Executor (a long-standing precedent). Meaning: The President now has broader authority to fire officials in independent agencies (like the FTC). Seen as strengthening Article II executive power. A related case (Trump v. Cook) ruled the opposite for the Federal Reserve, limiting presidential removal power there. This creates a partial exception, showing the Court did not fully embrace unlimited executive control. 2. Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sports Case: West Virginia v. BPJ Outcome: States can restrict participation in women’s sports based on biological sex. Impact: Laws in 27 states are upheld. The Court ruled such restrictions do not violate the Equal Protection Clause or federal law. 3. Campaign Finance / Free Speech Case: NRSC v. FEC Outcome: Political parties can spend unlimited money in coordination with candidates. Impact: Expands political speech rights. Removes restrictions on party-candidate coordination. ❌ Losses 1. Birthright Citizenship Key points: The Court affirmed that such a major change cannot be done via executive action. Leaves open: Constitutional amendment Possible congressional legislation 2. Mail-in Ballots / Election Law Case: Watson v. RNC Outcome: States may count ballots received after Election Day if postmarked on time. Impact: Election rules remain state-controlled. Some states can allow extended ballot receipt windows. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Supreme Court rules on firing members of the FTC and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.  The Senate Ethics Committee dismisses its investigation into Senator Ruben Gallego.  Senator Hassan questions the Trump Administration over a single mystery weight loss drug patient. A Proud Boy asks the court to release video of his assault on the Capitol. Plus E. Jean Carroll notches another victory. Allison Gillhttps://muellershewrote.substack.com/https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrote.comHarry DunnHarry Dunn | Substack@libradunn1.bsky.social on BlueskyWant to support this podcast and get it ad-free and early?Go to: https://www.patreon.com/aisle45podTell us about yourself and what you like about the show - http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=short Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As Andrew puts it, Chief Justice John Roberts is “cherry-picking.” He's flying solo in this short edition of Main Justice (more to come with Mary in the next episode). Andrew gives a quick briefing on several of the Supreme Court's most consequential end-of-term rulings, starting with the decision not to hear an appeal in the E. Jean Carroll case. Andrew also touches on the Court's decision to uphold a Mississippi law to allow mail-in ballots that are sent by Election Day to be counted but saves his deepest analysis for two similar cases with opposing decisions: the firings of Lisa Cook and Rebecca Slaughter. While the Court ruled that the Trump administration must have cause to dismiss Cook from the Federal Reserve, it allowed the government to fire Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission, a decision which Andrew calls deeply flawed showing the conservative majority's support for a “unitary executive.”  And finally, Andrew breaks down the Court's narrow decision to uphold birthright citizenship, and why the tight 5-4 split is the story. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The biggest political stories of the week are all in one episode. We break down the latest Supreme Court rulings, including the E. Jean Carroll appeal, mail-in ballots, and presidential firing authority, before diving into Trump's reactions and the fallout.Then we look at New York City's socialist movement, Zohran Mamdani, AOC, Dave Portnoy's surprising comments, and viral street interviews that have everyone talking.We also expose some of the week's most outrageous climate change claims—from Paris officials blaming America for Europe's heatwave to the latest social media posts attacking air conditioning and promoting climate "justice." Plus, we examine data, failed climate predictions, and why critics say the narrative continues to fall apart.Finally, we cover the latest effort to pin the world's problems on Elon Musk, Nick Kristof's viral claims, media reactions, and why the debate over USAID and government spending isn't going away anytime soon.Along the way, we also discuss DOJ investigations, Biden's latest comments, Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Ryan McBeth's Iran fact check, Tyler Robinson, Caleb Hammer, and the biggest viral moments from the internet this week.SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS TO SUPPORT OUR SHOW!Give $26 today to Human Coalition. Be her lifeline. Create a Life Saving Moment. Give today at https://humancoalition.org/chicksReady to give MASA a try? Get 25% off your first order by going to https://MasaChips.com/CHICKS and using code CHICKS.Schedule your FREE risk review from Bulwark Capital at https://KnowYourRiskPodcast.com Subscribe and stay tuned for new episodes every weekday!Follow us here for more daily clips, updates, and commentary:YoutubeFacebookInstagramTikTokXLocalsMore InfoWebsite

It's time for a new series on The Vergecast! (It still needs a name. Please help.) We're going to give Verge staffers a challenge, and regroup a few weeks later to see who did it best. We're starting with some vibe coding. The Verge's Jake Kastrenakes and Hayden Field share what they've made with AI that has actually stuck in their lives, before David gives the challenge: build a website to solve a problem in your life. The more ambitious and impressive the better. We'll be back with the results soon, and in the meantime, send us ideas for more challenges! (Also, names for the series. PLEASE.) Further reading: ⁠Anthropic's Mythos 5 is back | The Verge⁠ ⁠Supreme Court allows firing of FTC commissioners, ends agency independence⁠ ⁠Comcast is splitting in two | The Verge⁠ ⁠WhatsApp is launching usernames: here's how to reserve yours | The Verge⁠ ⁠Welcome to the personal software revolution⁠ ⁠I used Claude to vibe-code my wildly overcomplicated smart home⁠ Subscribe to The Verge for unlimited access to theverge.com, subscriber-exclusive newsletters, and our ad-free podcast feed.We love hearing from you! Email your questions and thoughts to vergecast@theverge.com or call us at 866-VERGE11. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Preview for Later Today: Richard Epstein. Richard Epstein critiques a Supreme Court ruling regarding the President's authority to fire the FTC chairman. He argues against merging prosecutorial and judicial functions, calling such arrangements a "monstrous" threat to due process.1976 

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, Ben Ferguson fills in for Mark. Democratic Texas Senate candidate James Talarico presents himself as a moderate, faith-based Christian pastor who rejects Christian nationalism. Talarico is actually a radical progressive activist who weaponizes Christianity for left-wing politics.  Talarico's radical positions - God is non-binary, there are more than two biological sexes, the Bible affirms abortion access, and poverty/pollution/prison equal violence. This man is not fit for the Senate. Later, President Trump selected Kash Patel to combat waste, fraud, and abuse, is proving to be an excellent choice as evidenced by a record-setting $6.5 billion healthcare fraud crackdown charging around 450 defendants, primarily in Medicaid and hospice schemes. Officials emphasized unprecedented state-federal cooperation across 45 states and attorneys general, building complete case files for swift law enforcement action—the first such unified effort in modern history. Afterward ,a Biden-appointed federal judge issued a 75-page opinion shutting down the Trump administration's modified SAVE system database, created via executive order to verify citizenship or immigration status of registered voters through DHS and SSA records. This activist decision promotes lawlessness and voter fraud by blocking checks on non-citizens, dead people, and illegal immigrants, especially ahead of midterms. The same judge also blocked an FTC antitrust probe into Media Matters and barred deportation of unaccompanied migrant minors for family reunification abroad. Meanwhile, Senator Mike Lee advances the SAVE America Act, requiring government-issued ID to vote—supported by over 80% of Americans across parties to make voting easy but cheating hard—though four anti-Trump Republicans hinder it in the Senate, where Trump is pushing for passage. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices