Podcasts about G1

「【上半期グランプリレース・宝塚記念・G1】王者メイショウタバルが連覇達成！武豊騎手（57）2週連続G1勝利」　6月14日（日）、阪神競馬場・芝2200メートルを舞台に、上半期G1のラストを飾るグランプリレース宝塚記念が行われた。勝ったのは、2025年の覇者メイショウタバル。史上3頭目となる連覇を達成。鞍上（あんじょう）の武豊騎手はこれで2週連続のG1勝利となり、最年長G1勝利記録を57歳3カ月に更新した。

Joel and Damon are return to discuss the final night of New Japan's BOSJ with YOH vs Kosei Fujita. The guys also preview this weekend's Dominion In Osaka show including Yota Tsuji vs Callum Newman, YOH vs DOUKI, and Aaron Wolf vs Ren Narita. All of that plus SJC Unmasked, G1 speculation, and we answer your questions. For more New Japan talk, subscribe to the Super J-Cast Patreon. Jump here  www.patreon.com/superjcast and consider becoming a member!Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/super-j-cast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Joel and Damon are return to discuss the final night of New Japan's BOSJ with YOH vs Kosei Fujita. The guys also preview this weekend's Dominion In Osaka show including Yota Tsuji vs Callum Newman, YOH vs DOUKI, and Aaron Wolf vs Ren Narita. All of that plus SJC Unmasked, G1 speculation, and we answer your questions. For more New Japan talk, subscribe to the Super J-Cast Patreon. Jump here  www.patreon.com/superjcast and consider becoming a member!Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

・移動中の車内でスクランブル収録！ ・6.7大田区、大「YOHコール」に涙ぐむ社長 ・IWGPジュニアの次回王者は、第100代！ ・大成功『SUPER Jr.』から『G1』へのバトン ・社長が6.14大阪城で気になるカード！ ★メールフォームはコチラ！「番組」を選んで、ご感想を書いてお送りください

  All Hail Unicron: Episode 119: Justin is Back with the Milk    INTRODUCTION Anybody Get Anything? Movie/Show News Third Party Dr Wu's War Within Devastator full look - G1 and G2 colors (2 links) https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/05/dr-wu-dw-es03-cyber-mixer-truck-dw-es06-cyber-excavator-war-within-mixmaster-scavenger-and-cyber-hercules-war-within-devastator-color-prototypes-563219 https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/10/dr-wu-g2-cyber-hercules-war-within-devastator-g2-deco-color-prototype-563517 From War Within to Bayverse, Dr Wu is very busy! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/06/dr-wu-dw-mc05-disc-jockey-transformers-2007-frenzy-color-prototype-563290 Craftsman Toys is doing that Kang Toys thing and giving us an MP and Legends scale Swoop https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/06/great-general-toys-craftman-toys-masterpiece-legends-scale-swoop-gray-prototypes-563286 Newage showing off a Shattered Glass Ultra Magnus repaint/retool https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/08/newage-h28b-lucullu-legends-scale-shattered-glass-ultra-magnus-color-images-563383 Galaxy Toys might be new, but that repaint game isn't! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/09/galaxy-toys-mini-10-iron-armor-mini-11-guardian-ratchet-color-prototypes-563417 Want a random new Arcee with a realistic car mode and human face? LaserCat has you covered! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/20/lucky-cat-cyber-goddess-series-cg01-venus-arcee-color-prototype-564385 MachineCat, formerly LaserCat, has a color prototype of their chibi Superion to show off https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/21/machinecat-toys-mct-01-flight-b-robot-sd-superion-color-prototype-564539 MachineLaserCat whatever company isn't done yet! Here's their chibi BW Waspinator https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/21/machinecat-toys-mct-02-flight-buzz-voltbee-sd-waspinator-prototype-564559 MachineLaserKiddyPlayCat toys news week continues with more images of their chibi G1 Prime https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/27/machinecat-toys-sd-g1-optimus-prime-gray-prototype-update-564871 Listen, it's all about MachineCat this week, m'kay? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/28/machinecat-toys-mct-02-ferocy-b-robo-sd-abominus-gray-prototype-564943 Bingo Toys wants to know, does it after burn when you pee? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/22/bingo-toys-bt08-02-newton-masterpiece-scale-afterburner-color-prototype-564605 Magic Square revealed their legends class Strafe prototype and broke half the fandom... https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/23/magic-square-toys-ms-b63-eniac-no-3-legends-scale-strafe-color-prototype-564707 Rising Force is still a company, and they still want you to buy their Fall of Cybertron Combaticons, starting with Swindle and Blast-Off https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/29/rising-force-fall-of-cybertron-combaticons-swindle-and-blast-off-prototypes-565000 Who's a big puffy-puff bitch?! Yes you are a big puffy-puff bitch, yes you are! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/06/01/01-studio-01s-18-fortress-fall-of-cybertron-metroplex-new-images-565193 Official: Even this blind dude loves Titan class AoE Grimlock! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/19/transformers-studio-series-titan-class-age-of-extinction-grimlock-color-sample-564342#images Unreleased Artemis from BWII has surfaced https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/20/possible-first-look-at-unreleased-transformers-beast-wars-ii-artemis-figurine-prototype-564366 Oh good, another Transformers game that will probably get cancelled before it's released or will otherwise suck https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/20/hasbro-ceo-chris-cocks-talks-video-games-transformers-action-adventure-role-playing-pc-console-game-coming-564350 Save a horse, ride an Ironhide! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/19/takara-tomy-missing-link-c-14-ironhide-hidden-features-564362 Blokees Wheels Wreck and Rule wave 2 stock images, including chase figures (2 links) https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/24/blokees-wheels-transformers-c03-wreck-rule-2-official-stock-images-564749 https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/26/blokees-wheels-transformers-c03-wreck-rule-2-product-update-chase-variants-564816 Move over Gunpla, it's Transpla time? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/27/hasbro-files-trademark-for-new-in-house-model-kit-line-564849 Another G1 Matrix is coming for "roleplay" night https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/27/killerbody-transformers-g1-matrix-of-leadership-564854 MPG-19 Repainted and over-adjusted for inflation Soundwave and Laserbeak in-hand images https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/29/transformers-mpg-19-soundwave-condor-laserbeak-new-in-hand-images-565020 Seafood Platter, eject! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/27/transformers-cyberworld-energon-surge-additional-stock-images-564893 Takara shows off G2 Menasor complete. You seeing this, Hasbro, or just don't care, or what? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/30/takara-tomy-transformers-new-legends-g2-menasor-color-sample-565093 An AotP Leader Class Unicron Soldier coming? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/30/age-of-the-primes-leader-unicron-soldier-teasers-565103 "Fuck you, 52Toys, we can make boxes too!"  -Hasbro (2026) https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/28/officially-licensed-transformers-squaroes-deck-boxes-564959 More YoloPark Botcon "exclusives" that you can probably buy now from BBTS revealed. Sideburn and Menasor https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/31/yolopark-amk-mini-battle-protocol-sideburn-menasor-2-pack-images-565126 Reeeeelax, guy! It's just more images of me, guy! That's what this post is all uh-boot! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/06/01/lego-brickheadz-transformers-megatron-new-stoCk-images-565175 Remember that time Hasbro took some shitty little kid's drawing of Shockwave as an alligator-dinosaur thing and made it a figure? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/06/01/transformers-cyberworld-energon-surge-ultimate-cyber-changers-shockwave-in-hand-images-565208 Questions? Discussion: Email your questions to: Hailunicroncast@gmail.com    Special Shoutouts: Dustmightz for providing the beats for the theme song! Check the Realm of Collectors on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/groups/realmofcollectors   Everyone who followed us from Shattered Cast Uncut, we are grateful to each and everyone of you for joining us on this journey!   Hosts: T2RX6 http://www.youtube.com/user/T2rx6 Rich “Preordered” H. Oscar Alonso https://www.youtube.com/user/oscarnjboy Robert Duyjuy-sabado-gigante

This Week on the Toy Power Podcast; we are giving our thoughts & experiences from our recent visit to the Annual Adelaide Mega Toy Fair! Kicking off with our forceful entry into the event! Scott as the New Organiser has done a fantastic job with table spacing, Real Pop-Culture Cars as an attraction & what kind of things that where on offer for Sale; plus of course our SCORES! We each have quite a diverse range of goodies that came home with us; but as always it was absolutely awesome to socialise with so so many people! Then we begin our Review of the New Masters OF The Universe Film! Kicking off with high level non-spoiler thoughts of the Movie. Tales of Trent & Ben seeing an Advanced screening of the Film - with sacrifices from our families to attend! Then; we dive in head first into a deep discussion that bounces all over the place which analyses the entire Movie - INCLUDING SPOILERS! We touch on everything from Characters, Lore, Tone, Easter Eggs, Credit Scenes; plus the things that don't quite merry up. We even have some of the Chronicles Action-Figures to touch on as well! Please get comfy for this extended episode; all the while celebrating Darren's Birthday too. Enjoy!! Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Pedigree wise, he's Book 1. With an influential sire line and a champion dam, Doug Scharbauer's ties to horse racing are as pure as Texas is big. Hear a small part of his story including Alyesheba, a record Kentucky Derby and his newest G1 winner: Always A Runner

We are celebrating an incredible milestone: 17 years of taking over the airwaves! In Episode 457, hosts Steve Megatron and TFG1Mike celebrate the network's anniversary by diving into a massive haul of new product drops. We kick things off with the Transformers: The Movie 1986 Apology Tour, as the animated classic officially heads back to theaters. To celebrate, we break down the sound-blasting details behind the legendary soundtrack's brand-new Reformatted Edition vinyl and CD release.The mainline is completely heating up as we analyze official in-hand looks at the Age of the Primes Leader Class Sentinel Prime Artifact Pack. We debate the inclusion of The Conduit accessory—which serves as the master key to hold the artifacts of the Thirteen Primes—and check out the Generations Selects Autobot 3-Pack featuring animation-accurate decos for Mirage, Ironhide, and Bluestreak. Plus, we drop our unfiltered thoughts on Yolopark's AMK Series Beast Wars Megatron and Blackarachnia color prototypes, map out our comic pull lists with Skybound's latest solicitations, and react to Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks' massive teaser about an upcoming AAA Transformers Action-Adventure PC and console game!What you'll get out of this episode:A breakdown of the Sentinel Prime Artifact Pack and how it interacts with the rest of the line.In-hand thoughts on the new G1-accurate Autobot Multipack and pre-order alerts.Speculation on the genre-shifting Transformers action-RPG game teased by Hasbro's corporate office.Reactions to Yolopark's non-transforming but stunningly sculpted Beast Wars prototypes.Transform and Transcend!Top Stories & Featured LinksBox Office Return: The Transformers: The Movie 1986 Back In TheatersMaster Artifacts: Age Of The Primes Sentinel Prime Artifact Pack First LookAutobot Multipack: Generations Selects Autobot 3-pack In-Hand ImagesGaming Future: Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks Talks Transformers Action-Adventure Video Game

Timestamp for Sport of Kings Episode 364, sponsored by AmWager. Host Christopher Larmey is joined by a special guest, Craig Milkowski, developer of the speed and pace figures used in TimeformUS past performances, for a detailed discussion about races 9-13, including the Belmont Stakes, from Saratoga Racecourse on Saturday, June 6th, 2026.    2 – Introduction 5 – NYRA Wagering / CAWs 13 – Sar Race 8 (G1 Jaipur) 26 – Sar Race 9 (G1, Woody Stephens) 43 – Sar Race 10 (G1 Met Mile) 53 – Sar Race 11 (G1, Manhatten) 1:04 – Sar Race 12 (G1 Belmont Stakes) 1:35 – Best Betting opportunities 1:36 - Questions from Listeners

Thoroughbred Racing Update with Entain Victoria's Nick Quinn on Sport Nation Mornings with Ric & Chappy including, Swan Hill carnival, G1 racing in Brisbane, Wesley Ward wants a Melbourne Cup & more Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We recap a wild weekend of sport across both codes, as well as the states greatest day this saturday the 6th, Qweenlann day. 3 derby's and the oaks G1 at eagle farm, how good. Massive thanks to Neds, CTC and the love a greyhound organisation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Louie walks through the C.S. Regional and how ended up having to play the 2nd championship game.  A "Listen In" from G1 and G2 of A&M vs Lamar + Texas State.

This Week on the Toy Power Podcast; we are leaning into the significance of the Episode number - being FOUR. So we decide to spotlight Twelve of the Key Teams consisting of Four Members throughout Pop Culture History! With each Team / Group mentioned; we address the Teams official Title; the Individual Characters that make up said Group; plus their noteworthy first appearance in Pop Culture History. An in-depth conversation why said Team is significant to each of us in our own personal way & what they really mean to us. With a good mix of Movies, Comics, TV & overall cultural phenomenon's; this is an interesting & unique way to highlight & chat towards some properties that we don't talk about very often... Or the back story to why we continue to talk about some of our Favourite properties so much!! Enjoy! Which Group / Team did we leave off our list; that you would have had on yours? Let us know!!Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

[powerpresss] My co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 175 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Bruce Dearling, patent attorney and partner at Hepworth Browne in the UK, and we talk about how non-technical features must be considered when assessing inventive step of patents at least according to recent decisions of the UK supreme court and the Unified Patent Court. Profile of Bruce Dearling UK Supreme Court Emotional Perception AI Limited UPC Abbot vs Sinocare But before we jump into this interesting interview, I have news for you: On May 20, 2026, the Swiss Federal Council adopted the fully revised Patent Ordinance, which will enter into force on January 1, 2027, together with the revised Patent Act. In the future, the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property will prepare a mandatory search report for each application; applicants can choose between a partially examined version and a full examination that assesses novelty and inventive step. The full examination costs an additional 300 Swiss francs, and renewal fees will increase by a total of eight percent over the 20-year term. On May 19, 2026, Asus entered into a licensing agreement with the Wi-Fi multimode patent pool managed by Sisvel, thereby ending all ongoing infringement proceedings. Sisvel bundles standard-essential patents in the pool from, among others, Atlantia, ETRI, and Mitsubishi Electric. On May 18, 2026, the UPC Local Chamber in Düsseldorf rejected Align Technology's application for a preliminary injunction against its Chinese competitor Angelalign. Angelalign may continue to sell its clear aligners within the UPC jurisdiction. Our partners Dirk Schulz, Ulrich Storz, and Wanze Zhang, together with Arnold Ruess, successfully represented Angelalign. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced midweek that, since October of last year, it has invalidated or is seeking to invalidate approximately 10,500 trademark applications and registrations in eleven administrative orders. Reasons include forged attorney signatures and the fabrication of non-existent filing requirements. This stems from ongoing abuse of the U.S. trademark system, primarily by non-U.S. applicants, which can lead to conflicts with validly registered trademarks for legitimate businesses. On May 12, 2026, the British Court of Appeal overturned a lower court decision that would have required Nokia to grant interim licenses for video coding patents. The court found that Nokia's license offer to the Taiwanese manufacturers Acer and Asus had already been made on RAND terms. In May, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a brief in the ongoing Corteva v. Inari litigation, expressing antitrust concerns regarding certain patent practices in the field of plant breeding. This marks the first time the agency has actively intervened in a biopharmaceutical patent dispute with implications for seed innovations. Episode 175 of the IP Fridays podcast was a conversation I will not forget quickly. My guest Bruce Dearling, partner at Hepworth Brown in the UK and a patent attorney for 36 years, took a case through every level of the British court system up to the Supreme Court and, in doing so, fundamentally changed patent law for AI inventions in the UK. The case is called Emotional Perception, and its effects reach well beyond British borders. Below I summarize the key points from our conversation. The full episode is available at IP Fridays. A. What Is the Emotional Perception Case About? The underlying invention concerns artificial neural networks. Specifically, it relates to a method of closing what is called the semantic gap at the output of a neural network. That sounds abstract, but the idea is straightforward: a neural network always produces an output that does not fully correspond to what a human would actually expect or feel. Closing that gap brings the system closer to human perception and human expectations. Bruce Dearling drafted this application himself and filed it at the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). The Office rejected it as excluded subject matter, characterizing it as essentially a computer program as such. The legal basis for that rejection was the Aerotel decision from 2006. The case then went to the High Court, which found in favor of the applicant. The Court of Appeal reversed that decision. Then the UK Supreme Court stepped in and changed everything. B. The Aerotel Test and Its Flaws Since 2006, the Aerotel test had been the standard British method for assessing whether an invention falls within the excluded categories under patent law. It was a four-step approach: construe the claim, identify the actual contribution the invention makes to human knowledge, ask whether that contribution falls solely within excluded subject matter, and finally check whether the contribution is technical in nature. The problem Dearling described in our conversation is that Aerotel reverses the logical order of the analysis. You start with the contribution and only then ask about the exclusions under Article 52 EPC. The UK Supreme Court described Aerotel in its judgment as “unsound law” and overturned it. The EPO’s Technical Boards of Appeal had previously called Aerotel “disingenuous,” which at the time led to a public dispute between the British courts and the Boards. With the Emotional Perception ruling, that conflict has now been resolved in favor of harmonization with the EPO. C. What the UK Supreme Court Decided The Supreme Court made two central findings. First, the exclusion of computer programs “as such” is overcome as soon as a claim includes any piece of hardware. It does not matter whether that is a processor, a memory module, or any other component. The threshold is deliberately low. Dearling described this as the “any hardware” approach, which aligns fully with the EPO’s position following G1/19. Second, and in Dearling’s assessment the more important finding: when assessing inventive step, the invention must be considered as a whole. The Court introduced what it called an “intermediate step,” an analytical stage in which the interactions between all features of a claim are examined before the question of inventive step is addressed. Non-technical features cannot simply be struck out if they contribute to the overall technical effect of the invention. D. Inventive Step: The Intermediate Step This is the heart of the judgment. In EPO practice, Dearling said, it happens regularly that examiners strike through features they consider non-technical and thereby fail to assess the invention’s inventive step correctly. A recent Technical Board of Appeal decision, T 1249/22, already criticized this approach: a claim directed at a technical solution to a problem can be patentable even if the underlying problem is non-technical in nature. Dearling recalled a remark made by a Board of Appeal member at a hearing he attended years ago: “We understand that examining divisions can operate with a degree of mental laziness and that it’s too easy to throw too many things out of the basket when considering the issues of inventive step.” That quote stayed with him because it names a structural problem that the intermediate step now addresses directly. The British method for assessing inventive step is the Pozzoli test, which differs from the EPO’s problem-solution approach. The Supreme Court explicitly retained Pozzoli because the problem-solution approach, in its view, is structurally infected with hindsight reasoning: you already know the invention, you work backwards to formulate an objective technical problem, and then you ask whether it would have been obvious for the skilled person to arrive at precisely that solution. Dearling sees this as a source of unfairness toward genuine inventions. E. Alignment with the Unified Patent Court In April 2025, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued a decision in Abbott v. Sinocare (APP_000000901/2025, judgment of 17 April 2025). Dearling pointed out that this decision uses language and reasoning strikingly similar to the UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception ruling of February 2025. That is significant because the UPC is bound neither by UK courts nor by the EPO. The overlap suggests voluntary convergence. Dearling reported a conversation with a person close to the EPO, whom he did not name, who used the word “permissive” to describe the UK Supreme Court’s approach and indicated that the EPO might move toward it. Whether and how quickly that happens remains to be seen. What is clear is that the UPC, as the new European patent court, is setting its own standards, and the question of how to handle non-technical features in inventive step assessment is now being asked at multiple levels simultaneously. F. Implications for the EPO and Practice The EPO is not directly bound by the ruling. It is an administrative body, not a court. Dearling is nonetheless optimistic that change is coming. On one hand, external pressure is building: when the UK Supreme Court and the UPC articulate similar principles, convergence becomes hard to resist. On the other hand, Article 27.1 TRIPS requires all contracting states to make patents available in all fields of technology. Examiners routinely striking non-technical features from AI claims and rejecting them on that basis sits uncomfortably with that obligation. For the underlying application in the Emotional Perception case, the ruling has a pointed consequence. The Supreme Court did not grant the patent itself; it referred the matter back to the UKIPO for reconsideration under the intermediate step. The Office’s subsequent response was, in Dearling’s words, unconvincing. He suspects the Office is attempting to reintroduce the Aerotel test through the back door. As a last resort, he has not excluded a judicial review, a procedure that does not simply challenge the substantive decision but holds the Comptroller General of Patents to account for whether the Office is deliberately circumventing the Supreme Court’s direction on the intermediate step. That is, as Dearling put it, “a nuclear option,” but one he would not rule out if the evidence in the file already suggests the Office is in contempt of court. There is also an international dimension. Singapore’s Intellectual Property Office launched a public consultation shortly after the ruling, asking whether Singapore should adopt the Emotional Perception approach into national law. That is British soft power operating in real time within the Commonwealth. G. Three Takeaways for Patent Practitioners At the end of our conversation I asked Bruce Dearling to distill the most important practical points. His first takeaway: make sure the claim contains hardware. This applies not only to UK and European applications but is simply good drafting hygiene. Without hardware in the claim, the application remains exposed. The second takeaway concerns the description. Anyone filing an AI invention needs to explain clearly which function is achieved by which piece of hardware, circuit, or software. Not as boilerplate, but as a complete technical account that describes the real-world effects. Dearling’s experience is that practitioners who write the claim first and fill in the description afterward run into trouble. The third takeaway emerged from the conversation itself: how the EPO assesses inventive step for AI inventions is not a settled question. It is worth following the development of UPC case law and any shifts in EPO practice closely. Anyone advising on AI patent applications today needs to know these arguments. H. Conclusion The UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception ruling is not a British footnote. It has declared the Aerotel test dead, introduced the intermediate step that brings non-technical features back into the inventive step analysis, and set off a convergence movement that is already visible at the UPC and still pending at the EPO. For everyone working in AI patent practice, whether in prosecution, examination, or counseling, this ruling is required reading. Rolf Claessen: Our interview guest on IP Fridays podcast is Bruce Dearling. He has been in the IP field and a patent attorney for 36 years and is partner at Hepworth Brown in the UK. Thank you very much for being on the podcast. Bruce Dearling: My pleasure, Rolf. Thank you for inviting me. Rolf Claessen: All right. We just met at the INTA annual meeting in London. And you talked about the UK Supreme Court case where you were involved. And the core questions were whether non-technical features would be considered when assessing inventive step of patents. Can you briefly summarize this case? Bruce Dearling: It’s a bit more than that. It started — I actually wrote the case. And I prosecuted it through the patent office. The patent office rejected the case for being excluded subject matter. So pretty much the excluded subject matter provisions in the UK are nearly identical. They’re as near as practical to the language of the EPC, so those of the European Patent Office — Article 52.2. But again, they apply as such. The actual technology relates to artificial neural networks. And the invention related to a very clever way of what is termed closing the semantic gap at the output of the neural network. So that means that in a neural network, there is always a discrepancy between the output of the neural network in terms of what it’s telling you you should be thinking essentially, and what reality is. So if you can close the semantic gap, then you align the neural network or the artificial intelligence system to better reflect human knowledge or human reactions and human expectations. So that’s really what the invention is about. There’s no point in going into too much detail with it — that’s the way it is. It’s very clever. So the UKIPO rejected this because they said it was essentially a computer program excluded from patentability as such. And they used a decision which is called Aerotel, which has been around since 2006. And that decision has caused considerable consternation and tension between the EPO Technical Boards of Appeal and the UK courts. Aerotel was described as being essentially disingenuous by the EPO Technical Board of Appeal. And the UK courts pushed back and said, you don’t know what you’re talking about. So that’s where it fell apart. So that’s where they rejected it for essentially being a computer program as such, possibly with a bit of business methods thrown in as well. But let’s leave that for the time being. So the case then went to the High Court and at the High Court, we won. The judge said, actually, it’s not a computer program. Neural networks aren’t computers. They’re not programs themselves. There’s more to them than that. And the invention as claimed is not excluded from patentability as such. The UKIPO obviously weren’t very happy about that because they liked their Aerotel case and so they appealed it. And they appealed it on several grounds, including a new one, which was that it was a mathematical method. The Court of Appeal decided that the UKIPO was right and that we were wrong, so we lost the case. So we then went to the Supreme Court. Well, actually, they denied us an ability to go to the Supreme Court. The court said no appeal. We went — actually, no, I think there is a bigger issue here — because we realized, or I realized at that point, that the work that we were doing was much broader than this. It requires real consideration of what an invention is at a fundamental level. So not only exclusions, but how inventive step is applied. And these issues were built into the case from the very beginning. And they sort of — I wouldn’t say crept up on the court as we went through — but they became more and more prominent to the extent that ultimately, when we made an application to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court went, yeah, we’ve got some issues here. We want to hear the full arguments on why this is not excluded from patentability, why Aerotel is potentially bad and how we more or less try to align ourselves with the European Patent Office. So that’s essentially what happened. And the Supreme Court hearing was last July. It took them the thick end of eight months to come out with a decision, which was issued in early February, at which point the entire legal landscape in the UK changed because they said we were right. The Patent Office doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Aerotel is bad. It’s unsound. That’s what they described it as — unsound law. It needs to be removed and we’re going to harmonize with the European Patent Office. So before I — I’m just going on a bit of a rant here, standing on my soapbox telling you what you already know. But the Aerotel test essentially was — it was a four-step test, past tense. So you firstly had to construe the claim. That’s pretty straightforward. Then you actually had to identify the actual contribution. This is what they said — identify the contribution. Really in this aspect, you’re asking what, as a matter of substance rather than form, the inventor has added to human knowledge. So that’s what they said the contribution was. And then they said, the next step in Aerotel was to ask, well, does that contribution fall solely within the excluded subject matter field or realm? And then they said, well, if you get through that question, then you check the actual contribution or the alleged contribution to see whether it’s technical in nature. So that’s the Aerotel test as it was. And what the Supreme Court in their unanimous final decision said was that Aerotel at best jumbles up the order. It reverses the logical order of the analysis by starting with the contributions and then addressing the Article 52 exclusions. And then finally it goes back to what the technical nature of the invention is about. So they really went, no, we don’t like any of this stuff. It’s bad, it’s stupid, it puts the cart before the horse. So, in the intervening period between finding the case and actually seeing it progress all the way to the Supreme Court, we obviously had the G1/19 decision from the EPO Enlarged Board. And they basically said that they are going to validate any hardware as the approach. And that’s essentially what the UK also went with. The UK Supreme Court said we’re going to say that the threshold of patentability — or the exclusion to patentability — is simply overcome by the inclusion in a claim of any piece of hardware, whether it’s a processor or a piece of memory or whatever. It doesn’t matter. Any hardware makes the invention a technical invention. So it’s a really low threshold to consider. And they then went, well, actually, if we now align and harmonize with the European Patent Office sensibly, then we need to look at how we assess inventive step, which is the other thing that we raised with the Supreme Court. In fact, we probably raised it at other times and in all the other instances as well, but it came to a head at the Supreme Court. So the Supreme Court then also went a bit further and said, well, actually, whilst we do like the global approach to assessing inventive step for all fields of technology — whether it’s chemistry or biotech or electronics or software or AI — we use a test called Pozzoli. So that isn’t problem-solution. We don’t like problem-solution. We think it’s not codified in the European Patent Office. It’s just a mechanism that the EPO has come up with to try to objectively assess inventive step. We don’t particularly think that’s appropriate. We like our approach called Pozzoli. That’s it. So we’re going to say with Pozzoli, however, in order to actually understand — particularly in the context of mixed inventions having technical and non-technical features — it’s necessary for the examiner to undertake the so-called intermediate step, where you have to look at the interactions between features within a claim. The invention is defined by the claim. That’s what the act says. That’s what everyone understands. It’s the invention defined by the claim. So you look at the claim features and then you have to understand the interactions that take place. And even if they are between technical and non-technical features, if they bring about an overall technical effect when you consider the invention as a whole, then your claim should be good and you can assess it for classical inventive step. So that’s really where we’re at. There’s a lot to unpack there already. It’s probably a podcast in its own right, but that’s the positive history of where we’re at. And I can keep going if you wish me to for a second and talk about why I think this is — we’ll just contrast it quickly with the problem-solution approach at the EPO and COMVIK. So for inventions in the computer-implemented field, they use COMVIK and the problem-solution approach. The Supreme Court said, as I said, they don’t like problem-solution. I think the problem-solution issue is that it is also inherently pre-baked with hindsight because you have to look at the invention and then step back and exclude those features which are common. And then you formulate a problem based on the function that the claim achieves. And then you’re asking whether or not it would be obvious for a skilled person to arrive at the claimed invention, having been given that hindsight-developed problem. So COMVIK is not great by any means. And we know from a practical perspective that examiners are only too willing to look at a claim and simply line through features which they believe are non-technical, whereas they don’t actually look at the interaction of those features in the context of the claim as a whole. There is also a decision — very recent one actually, about a year ago — T 1249/22, where the Technical Board of Appeal told the examiners and the examining division, you cannot do this. It’s okay to have a claim directed towards an invention in a non-technical field, as long as the invention is directed to a technical solution of that problem. I think it’s paragraphs 11 and 12 or 10 of that decision that are worth looking at. But they’re saying that in all fields of technology, it doesn’t matter as long as the technical solution is about technology — therefore, you should be able to obtain a patent as long as there is a realistic and appropriate technical effect. Be careful actually, Bruce — I don’t mean technical contribution, I mean technical effect. There’s a reason for that distinction. Rolf Claessen: The non-technical features are nevertheless used to assess inventive step in the UK now after this decision, right? Bruce Dearling: Yes, that is the intermediate step. The decision says you must look at the invention as a whole. It’s the important thing. There are a couple of issues that arise out of this. The first one is that you have to provide context for the invention. The Supreme Court never provided any specific guidance about how we deal with the intermediate step or what the exact test is, which is in some respects fine. It seems to be fairly clear that you just have to engage your gray matter — your neurons — to work out what is going on in the real world. And once you work out what’s going on in the real world, what the benefits are, then you look at whether or not the actual implementation of the invention fundamentally has a technical flavor to it, which is not just coding, not just simple coding, but it does something smarter. There’s a real technical impetus. There’s a technical effect. Now that actually brings me onto something I’ve postulated or said. I think the intermediate step will follow something like what I’ve termed the holistic character test, which essentially is: work out what’s going on in the real world. Then once you’ve worked out what’s actually being achieved, what the benefits are, what the invention’s concerned with, then you ask the question, how am I achieving it technically? And how is there a technical effect? How does the technical effect arise? That brings out a couple of issues. The first one is that it’s actually about the word “contribution” because it depends on how the word is used. So if you look at head note one in COMVIK, it uses the word “contribute” — how the non-technical feature contributes to the invention. So that’s an additive inclusive concept. The UK IPO historically, and arguably at the moment today whilst they’re trying to retrain their 400 examiners — which this has caused them to have to do — their idea of contribution is this backward-looking concept. So technical contribution and technical effect, I think — although we mix them up and interchange them — are distinct. Technical contribution: you’re looking backwards. Technical effect is what you look at when you look forward into what’s going on. So this is subtle — it’s really subtle, but it’s important. And once you realize that you are actually looking for the technical effects, then you’re on much safer ground. It’s much more objective in terms of the assessment. This might be somewhat contentious, because it’s the way I’m looking at this, but I’ve been working on this a long, long time and thinking about it for probably decades, worryingly so. So technical contribution and technical effects are probably not the same, where they are interchangeably used to mean the same thing within existing decisions. Rolf Claessen: And in the beginning you said, now that Aerotel is dead basically, it’s more harmonized with the EPO’s approach. But what I take from the discussion now is that maybe — especially in view of the problem-solution approach — it’s not fully harmonized with the EPO’s approach at the moment, right? Or did the UK Supreme Court get something wrong, or was that a desired outcome from your point of view that this is not so completely harmonized with the EPO? Bruce Dearling: Well, the EPO — the any-hardware solution is fully harmonized, no doubt. So it’s now a question of inventive step under Article 56 or Section 3 of the Act. The EPC nowhere mandates the use of problem-solution. And we know that there are many different ways of actually assessing inventive step, including the concrete elaboration test from last year and problem-of-invention approaches. So there are numerous ways of assessing inventive step. So the UK says, “Pozzoli — we like Pozzoli.” Interestingly, I had a discussion with someone I probably can’t mention. They’re saying that the UK approach may actually be more permissive now. It might even influence how the EPO operates. So they may move away from COMVIK towards more of a Pozzoli approach, which basically says this: You identify the notion of the skilled person — step one. You identify the common general knowledge of that skilled person — step one B. You identify the inventive concept of the claim in question, where you construe it if you can’t work out what it is. You then identify what the differences are. And then you ask the question, is it obvious to the skilled person, given knowledge of the common general knowledge? This is entirely not artificial because, as I said beforehand, when you look at problem-solution, you are formulating a problem by backtracking from what the claimed invention is to a situation where you say, well, these are the common features and I’m going to project a problem to try and solve. Now that is already tainted with hindsight reasoning. It’s not safe, it’s not thoroughly objective. There is an inherent problem with this which sees good inventions cast by the wayside. Although it’s a preferred mechanism, it’s not fully baked. There are situations where examiners are inherently lazy, or they just simply use something like the requirements specification argument, which is just factual. It just demonstrates that they can’t be bothered to actually argue it properly or think about what the invention is. Sorry to any examiners listening to this, but this is just my personal view, that sometimes there are problems. I’m reminded of a quote from an EPI hearing I was at a long time ago, where the Legal Board of Appeal member said: “We understand that examining divisions can operate with a degree of mental laziness and that it’s too easy to throw too many things out of the basket when considering the issues of inventive step.” Now that one has stayed with me because you think — did someone just say that? And the answer is yes, they did. But it just goes to show that there is some tension between the TBA and the examining divisions, and they don’t always get it right. Rolf Claessen: So there might be a small difference now between the UKIPO’s future approach of assessing inventive step and the EPO? Bruce Dearling: Yeah, it might do. But the other interesting thing here — and thank you for pointing this out, I hadn’t entirely caught up with it, I’ve been traveling beforehand and I missed some of the UPC case law. So the UPC case law — in, was it — yeah, we talked about that. Rolf Claessen: Yeah. There was a decision in April, Abbott versus Sinocare. Bruce Dearling: Yeah, 901 of 2025. So a Court of Appeal decision from the UPC. It was APP_000000901, I believe, 2025. Decision 17th of April, hearing 27th of March. The UPC is not bound by — it’s a court. The European Patent Office is not a court, it’s an agency that administers and looks after the administrative rule of law. So the fact that this decision came out from the UK Supreme Court in February, and you see almost identical language used in the UPC decision, suggests that there is some alignment here, or some convergence in thought. Now, whilst the UPC decision also references G1/19 and uses problem-solution, there is enough — you’ve got to bear in mind that high-level courts do look at each other’s decisions. And this is really a question of influence and the desire to converge. So the fact that they’ve done this at this time is quite interesting. Again, I can’t quote someone directly from the EPO, although I would love to. They were saying — at a very high level — and they used the words “converge UPC practice towards UK Supreme Court practice on interpretation of the law.” So this may actually be happening in real time. Again, it would be wrong to actually refer to anyone by name, but it’s an observation that when I looked at the case, I can see why this is going ahead. And I can see why the judiciaries — they want to maintain independent judicial controls. They won’t reference the UK Supreme Court decision, not least because we’re not in the UPC. But if you look at the arguments in sections 106 and 107 of the UK Supreme Court’s Emotional Perception decision and head note one, you go — wow, this is very close. Rolf Claessen: Very close and nearly identical wording. Yeah. And the UPC also now uses non-technical features for assessing inventive step. Is that a problem for the EPO that has historically been aggressive in throwing out non-technical features for inventive step analysis? Bruce Dearling: Well, I think they really need to get to the situation — I don’t know — this holistic character test that I’m sort of proposing, where you really have to think about what the invention is achieving, and then look at how it’s technically being achieved. And then if you look at that again in the context of that other decision I mentioned — T 1249/22 — it says something like, in the case of an invention that amounts to a technical implementation of a non-technical method, provided the non-technical method does not contribute to the technical character of the invention. The board validated the approach of identifying the non-technical method and then goes through and says it’s patentable. There are decisions like this which suggest that examining divisions have to give it a bit more thought, because the Technical Board will realize that to satisfy the WTO requirements — which pretty much everyone is bound by — Article 27.1 TRIPS, which requires that you protect all fields of technology. And that means whether it’s data processing or business methods, because business methods can be patentable so long as they are implemented on a technical basis. That essentially seems to be what T 1249/22 is saying, although it doesn’t explicitly say “allowing business methods.” The exclusion is only “as such.” So does this decision, in combination with the Supreme Court case and the movement of the UPC, say: well, actually, let’s look at this properly? It requires objective assessments, not just superficial “let’s strike through that feature because I don’t like it, it looks non-technical.” Rolf Claessen: So are you hopeful that the EPO is adjusting and will reshape their case law in view of the UPC decision and the UK Supreme Court decision? Bruce Dearling: It’s a bit unfortunate that the corresponding UK case at the EPO was dropped by the applicants, because it was heading towards an examination hearing at the examining division. It would have gone to the TBA, and I’m sure it would then have gone from the TBA to the Enlarged Board. I’m pretty sure that’s the case. There is another case from the same client which will probably argue the same thing because the specs are almost identical. It’s just lagged in time. So is it going to change? I hope so, because I think the EPO have got it wrong — more often than not in this field. Well, maybe not more often than not — they get it wrong more times than they should do. Would I like to see it changed? Yes, I would, because I want the examiners to actually think about the technology as opposed to just — oh, it’s not — I don’t want to engage the gray matter. That serves no one. That doesn’t serve technology. That doesn’t serve industry. These patent rights are there for a reason. They are property rights. I’m referring to the award of the 2025 Nobel Prize for Economics — they are a core driver for society’s development. So the 2025 Nobel Prize was for something called creative destruction — the replacement of old technology with new — and it’s based on the patent paradigm. So all this stuff is coming to a head now. It’s just a question of how quickly the EPO actually catch up, and maybe they have something to catch up on. It’s just understanding that the examiners have to start to think. As I said, we’ve got the issues at the UKIPO where they’re going to have to retrain 400 examiners. Rolf Claessen: Yeah, right. Bruce Dearling: The Emotional Perception case wasn’t granted by the Supreme Court. They referred it back to the patent office for consideration under the intermediate step. So the patent office produced a response that I would describe as — I’d say arguably — not well reasoned, which I’ve filed the response to, which basically says you don’t really know what you’re talking about. What really worries me a bit is that I think they’re trying to introduce the Aerotel case through the back door. It’s backsliding. It’s a mechanism for trying to apply it in a different way or a different context, which would be wrong. I think they believe that the applicant will appeal this if they get a bad decision — they will appeal it back to the courts again via the High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court route. I say maybe not. I say maybe the client will file what they call a judicial review, which is a nuclear option. That’s when you actually hold the Comptroller General of Patents to account and get full discovery of whether or not there’s internal documentation showing that they are deliberately circumventing the direction of the Supreme Court on the intermediate step. This is basically holding them to account and saying: if you’re not applying the intermediate step appropriately, you are in contempt of the law. So judicial review is a really serious thing to do, but it’s certainly something I would not exclude from consideration. We’ll see what happens. It’s not saying we’re just going to go through the courts and make them decide on this. We’re going to say you’re wrong. And there’s already enough evidence in the files to suggest that they are probably in contempt of court and they’re not applying the intermediate step appropriately. They may not know any better at the moment — they need to be guided — but the consequences for them are potentially severe. Rolf Claessen: I have another question for you. You were the instructing attorney — do you think the decision was perfect? What argument that you made was the most underappreciated by the court? And where do you think the judgment got it wrong, or was it all perfect? Bruce Dearling: No, it got 90% or 95% correct. The intermediate step is right. That’s the most important thing in the decision — it’s the intermediate step. The any-hardware thing — that’s logical, that makes some sense — but if people say “if the any-hardware rule is the important bit,” no it isn’t. It’s the intermediate step. That’s the important thing. Where do they go wrong? I think they went wrong because — and you’ve got to bear in mind that unlike German courts, I’ve got to be careful about how I express this — generally, as I understand it, and correct me if I’m wrong, but the judiciary in Germany on patent cases are generally more technically able. They’re normally technically qualified. I look at the Supreme Court justices and the Court of Appeal justices — we had one who was a humanities undergrad, one was a chemist. Good luck with trying to argue complex artificial neural network technologies, which are difficult even for me to understand. And I’ve been working in the field. They’re hard to understand. They require real understanding, real appreciation. They could say, well, actually we don’t need to look at the technology — but frankly, if you’re looking at the statutes and exclusions to patentability and asking what a computer program is, then you need to understand what these technical terms really are. And if you can’t, then the judgment is potentially flawed. Their finding that the neural network is a computer program is, I think, technically obtuse. You know that the Singaporean government — the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore — released about six weeks ago a consultation note to the Singaporean profession and population, asking: is the Emotional Perception case right, and do we need to adopt it into Singaporean national law? So this is direct soft power from the UK Supreme Court changing Commonwealth legislation and statutes. We’ll see what happens. But from what I’ve seen of a draft response from the attorneys, they’re saying essentially: we agree any hardware is right, the intermediate step is right. The assessment of the neural network as a computer program is wrong, or it just doesn’t make any sense. And I’ve made the same comments before in SIPA, in the relevant round in March. There’s a disconnect. I mean, it’s like they equate a computer program with being able to be run on an analog computer. Now, an analog computer has no central processing unit. An analog computer just has resistors and transistors and capacitors. So if they’re saying that an analog computer can run a program — that’s essentially what they’re saying in part of the judgment. Where is the program in an analog computer? And if they’re saying it’s in the values of the resistors and the capacitors, then that has implications for any circuit we’ve got — it’s potentially a computer program — which is just madness, because it doesn’t sit well with the legislation and decisions we’ve looked at over the last 50 years. This is a real problem. It may be a storm in a teacup because you can overcome the objections by having any hardware, but it’s an argument they shouldn’t have been making. It seems to be abstract legal argumentation which has little credibility in my personal view, although it’s now law. It may be that someone can take that, have an argument with the Supreme Court, get them to fix this. The other thing is the EPO looks at a neural network as a mathematical method, and the UK now says it’s a computer program. Neither is right. The EPO is wrong as well. If you look at the actual decision which they regularly quote — the Vicom case — if you actually read the claim and look at the case, you see that it doesn’t make a huge amount of sense. A neural network has applied mathematics in it. It can be based on a computer program because it’s required to set up the learning objectives and the loss function. Mathematical processes — it tweaks the weighting factors of neurons over the course of the training epochs. But at the end of the day, if the function performed by the neural network is new and it’s directed towards a technical implementation which is technically relevant, then it shouldn’t fail for being a mathematical method. And I think the EPO guidelines actually say that. Even recommendations — the UK court said that a recommendation is not technical. Well, actually it is, because it’s data processing, and you’ve got to work out how does the data processing work to provide an improved recommendation? Again, it goes back to the T 1249/22 decision. There’s a whole raft of these things which are left not entirely resolved. There’s enough here to keep someone busy for a few more years. Rolf Claessen: Right. So I have a question for you now that we’ve talked about the decision of the UK Supreme Court and the UPC — the Unified Patent Court — with very, very similar wording. What do you say are the three most important takeaways for patent practitioners in the US, in Europe, in the UK, before the EPO? Are there any things that you really want patent practitioners to take away from our discussion here? Bruce Dearling: Yeah, okay. So first: make sure the claim has some structure in it. You need to have any hardware. That’s number one — in terms of claim drafting. In terms of the description, you really have to understand what the invention is about. And you’ve got to make sure that you explain what function is achieved by what piece of hardware, kit or software. And if you do that — don’t nickel-and-dime this by writing the claim first — I would suggest that you run into problems. You need to understand what the invention is about. And you need to make sure that the description is complete and full to describe the functionality and the effects that are achieved in the real world. And if you can do that, then you’re on a much sounder basis — much, much stronger. There’s a much stronger foundation for this. So that’s two things. Is there a third one? That’s me being a bit cheeky, but I suppose I know what’s going on. Rolf Claessen: Yeah, but maybe the third takeaway is that maybe the EPO will rethink the way — at least how AI inventions are assessed for inventive step. Bruce Dearling: Well, as I said to you before, it could be that that’s the case. I don’t want to repeat myself again. The word “permissive” was used in a conversation I had with respect to the UK Supreme Court approach. COMVIK fundamentally still breaks with me and has done for years, because the way it’s set up and the way it’s applied distorts fundamentally what the invention is about. And until such time as that distortion is removed, there is a problem of objectivity versus subjectivity. And I think that’s really what the EPO has to grapple with. It’s not an easy thing to deal with, but maybe there are things going on. Bruce Dearling: It’s not an easy thing to deal with. I don’t know who’s going to argue it. It would have been useful for me to still have the original case up and running at the EPO because these arguments would have been fleshed out. I’m pretty sure they would have been referred to the Enlarged Board. We would have got it resolved. So it’s whether or not I can now work this into the existing case to try and get the examining division to — well, they will refuse, I suspect. And then it’ll go to the TBA. And then the TBA will have to look at this, hopefully with the referrals to the Enlarged Board. And then that fixes the problem on a national and international basis. Rolf Claessen: Yeah. Let’s see. [Laughs] Bruce Dearling: No, we don’t know. I mean, you might have a different view. What do you think? Do you think COMVIK is fundamentally right or fundamentally wrong? Rolf Claessen: Well, I’m not so much into AI inventions. I’m a chemist and I usually deal with chemistry inventions. But from the discussion that we had, I think that the EPO might rethink their position. I don’t know. Let’s see. Let’s hope so. Bruce Dearling: Well, they liked it. They liked problem-solution. It’s been with us for 25 years. It suggests that it’s a compromise. It’s not mandated by the European Patent Convention — that’s the point. It’s something they think works. And these things only work until such time as someone comes along and says, actually, you’re wrong, and this is the reason. Rolf Claessen: Let’s see if they choose a different route at least for AI inventions. So Bruce, thank you very much for your insight and for talking about the case that you were involved in with the UK Supreme Court. Where could people reach you if they have more questions about this field — basically patents, AI protection in the UK and Europe — and if they want to ask you more questions about this case? Bruce Dearling: Sure. Through the Hepworth Brown website or my LinkedIn profile, I suppose. The Hepworth Brown website has an email link. I’m trying to post things on it as well to try and provide a bit more context. But if people have fundamental questions on this stuff, then I’m happy to try and answer them. I suppose that I can be considered to be quite knowledgeable in the area. Rolf Claessen: Right. Certainly more than I am. [Laughing] Bruce Dearling: So I was fortunate. As a consequence of the work I’m doing, I was appointed last year to the WIPO Standing Committee on Patents and Privacy. That was discussed for the issues of where WIPO goes and what the direction of the problems are that we have in high-tech areas. So there seems to be some degree of understanding that I might know what I’m talking about. I think I probably do. Rolf Claessen: Thank you, Bruce. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays. Bruce Dearling: My pleasure. Thank you very much, Rolf.

Reportagem do site "G1" desta semana traz como destaque que as opções de crédito variam principalmente pelos juros e pelas garantias exigidas pelos bancos. Antes de emprestar dinheiro, as instituições analisam renda, histórico de pagamentos e bens que possam servir como garantia em caso de inadimplência. "Cheque especial e cartão de crédito estão entre as modalidades mais caras e devem ser usados apenas em emergências rápidas. Empréstimo pessoal e consignado têm juros menores, enquanto o financiamento imobiliário é considerado o mais seguro para os bancos por ter o imóvel como garantia", aponta. Nesta edição do "Conversa de Bolso", o comentarista Felipe Storch explica as diferenças entre cheque especial, consignado e empréstimo pessoal, por exemplo.

  All Hail Unicron: Episode 118: OSCAR EXPOSED HASBRO RELIEVED! INTRODUCTION Anybody Get Anything? Movie/Show News It's been 40 years, but there's still a chance to catch it in the theater! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/18/transformers-the-apology-tour-the-transformers-the-movie-1986-back-in-theaters-564252 Third Party Official: Hasbro says, "Buy this stuff again! It's different, we promise!" https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/24/transformers-studio-series-86-deluxe-cliffjumper-voyager-cyclonus-leader-blitzwing-official-stock-images-562388 Oh look, another G1 statue from another statue company https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/26/iron-studios-transformers-g1-soundwave-1-20-statue-562629 Looks like Takara found ALL the links and made some new ones for this Missing Link Ironhide https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/takara-tomy-missing-link-c-14-ironhide-full-reveal-details-563731 Don't worry, Ratchet is coming too! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/takara-tomy-missing-link-c-15-ratchet-color-prototype-first-look-563831 Reeeeelax, guy! I'm a Lego set, guy! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/01/lego-brickheadz-transformers-megatron-first-look-562979 Safety Dance Megatron gets a second life? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/05/yolopark-amk-mini-decepticon-avatar-megatron-images-563244 Mheh news from Robosen... now there's a trailer for their Elite scale Optimus https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/07/robosen-elite-optimus-prime-trailer-kit-official-reveal-563347 More Hot Wheels Transformers are coming https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/transformers-x-hot-wheels-gt-scorcher-el-segundo-coupe-twin-mill-563710 Nemesis Star Convoy full reveal https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/takara-tomy-new-legends-nl-03-nemesis-star-convoy-full-reveal-price-563744 Overgear Optimus Prime full color reveal https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/takra-overgear-optimus-prime-color-images-563793 Literally half of the MPG line are repaints, so why not another?! Dark Design Rhinox is coming! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/transformers-mpg-beast-wars-dark-designs-rhinox-first-look-563798 But wait, these aren't MPG repaints! Well... mostly... https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/13/takara-tomy-transformers-mpg-24-ramhorn-eject-prototypes-563857 This, however, is a repaint/retool. BW II Gigastrom https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/13/takara-tomy-new-legends-nl-06-beast-wars-ii-gigastorm-additional-images-563841 BWII getting some more love with a new Galvatron! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/takara-new-legends-beast-wars-ii-galvatron-revealed-563816 But will it transform? https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/12/takara-adamas-machina-star-saber-revealed-563805 Professor X's wheelchair? A 52Toys figure? You decide what the new Sentinel Prime figure transforms into! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/18/age-of-the-primes-sentinel-prime-artifact-pack-first-look-564224 Hasbro and Stern want to inspire you to play with your Transformers' balls! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/13/new-transformers-pinball-by-stern-563968 Questions? Discussion: Email your questions to: Hailunicroncast@gmail.com    Special Shoutouts: Dustmightz for providing the beats for the theme song! Check the Realm of Collectors on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/groups/realmofcollectors   Everyone who followed us from Shattered Cast Uncut, we are grateful to each and everyone of you for joining us on this journey!   Hosts: T2RX6 http://www.youtube.com/user/T2rx6 Rich “Preordered” H. Oscar Alonso https://www.youtube.com/user/oscarnjboy Robert Duyjuy-sabado-gigante

Today we chat to Scott Simpson, the man behind one of our fave events, the Adelaide Mega Toy Fair! Learn what led him to take over from the great Andreas and how the 2026 edition is gonna be bigger and better. Scott brings his tales from Scotland, his passion for toys (and football), a wild sense of humor and even some gifts. Then a quick round of Show and Tell where Scott brings in something truley amazing. See you all at the Fair next weekend! Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

東西區決賽G1也太精彩↓↓↓ (02:00) 日本獨旅的感想 (15:32) 西決Game 1 (23:34) 東決Game 1 (32:12) 推歌時間～ Carpetman - Smoking Cherry 別忘了小額贊助

A thrilling night in Richmond sports last night, from a walk off at CarMax to another incredible basketball game in Oklahoma City, the sports calendar continues to roll on! AWadd is here to keep you in the loop when we open up the sports app! The OKC Thunder even the series up after a classic in G1. Injuries take a toll on both sides with key players going down in the game. Plus the Hartstein v Wemby battle delivered after he sat for most of the first game! Play by play voice of the Richmond Flying Squirrels Blaine McCormick joins the show to talk about a magical night at the ballpark yesterday. From walk offs to psychic dogs what is the latest with the AA leading Squirrels? Memorial day is this weekend and it is the first major cookout holiday of the season. What are the top sides to bring to the party this weekend? Tune in LIVE every weekday from 12-3 PM everywhere on the Audacy app and locally at 910 the fan and 105.1 FM for more AWadd Radio!!

On today's BEST OF AWADD RADIO! The OKC Thunder even the series up after a classic in G1. Injuries take a toll on both sides with key players going down in the game. Plus the Hartstein v Wemby battle delivered after he sat for most of the first game! Play by play voice of the Richmond Flying Squirrels Blaine McCormick joins the show to talk about a magical night at the ballpark yesterday. From walk offs to psychic dogs what is the latest with the AA leading Squirrels? The second hour of AWadd Radio begins the same as always with a look at the local football team the Washington Commanders! Adam Peters and Dan Quinn have done their best to make this roster playoff ready, but did they get it done? NBA insider Justin Fensterman, joins the show to break down all things NBA playoffs. From electricity in OKC to crazy comebacks in the garden, what are the takeaways from the start of the semifinal series? Tune in LIVE every weekday from 12-3 PM everywhere on the Audacy app and locally at 910 the fan and 105.1 FM for more AWadd Radio!!

What does it take to grow a family business from a bootstrapped startup into a multi-generational operation, and how do you protect the family along the way? ✨ In this episode, Kristi Skutvik sits down with Shane Foye, President of DW-1, to explore his journey growing up inside his family's waste management business and the pivotal moments that shaped his leadership. Shane shares how his father started the company after losing his job, the experience of having employees working out of their family home as a kid, and how he went from peeling potatoes and running summer shifts to building an ERP software and eventually stepping into the role of leading the core business. They discuss the challenges of navigating the G1-to-G2 succession, why Shane spent time learning from hundreds of family offices, and how developing a shared mission, vision, and values brought his family through some of their hardest seasons. Shane also opens up about the role art collecting has played in shaping the company's culture and identity, and why intentionality and a willingness to learn are the keys to building something that lasts. Additional Resources: Follow Shane on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shane-foye-663464bb/ Visit DW-1's website: https://dw1.com/ Subscribe to Kristi's YouTube for more Vibecast content: https://youtube.com/@kristiskutvik?si=ZzyIX7yyCRukXgNy Learn more about Skutvik Consulting: https://www.skutvikconsulting.com/ Follow PeopleForward Network on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peopleforward-network Learn more about PeopleForward Network: https://peopleforwardnetwork.com/ Key Takeaways: Workplace vibe is an energy you can feel, and losing it means losing everything Building a family business requires balancing the needs of the family with the needs of the company The G1-to-G2 transition demands intentional governance, shared values, and multiple anchor points of trust Spending time learning from other family offices and going in without an agenda can reshape how you lead Intentionality and a willingness to learn are the foundation for building something that lasts beyond one generation  

Grant reacts to the Brewers in over the Cubs and a comment form Pat Murphy, a hot Packers vs. Steelers take and G1 of the WCF. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Florida State wrapped up the regular season with a series win over Miami. The Seminoles are entering the ACC Tournament as the No. 3 seed with a 19-11 conference record (38-16 in total). Brett and Ariya recap the series against the Hurricanes and FSU's comeback win in game one. They also discuss FSU's current resume and how it stacks up for a top-eight national seed.G1 comeback: 5:00-22:00Starting pitchers: 22:00-35:00Bullpen: 35:00-45:00Offense: 45:00-1:00:00FSU's resume/top-eight case: 1:02:00-1:30:00

This Week on the Toy Power Podcast; we are back all back together in the studio again; to bring in all the Latest News! Kicking things off with quite a few MOTU Toy Headlines; branching all sub-categories of the brand - including a Playset! Neca continue to flip through the pages of the Mirage Comics, & questionably bring us Figures from those stories. Playmates announce a 2pk with BLOOD attributes!! As well as a potential Lawsuit to protect their work....? McFarlane continue to produce Batman products & Transformers Missing Link announce a unique offering in the form of G1 Ironhide & Ratchet. Trent gets super nostalgic over Goof-Troop; plus we have more Fighters announced from Jada & McFarlane too. Rounding out the News is a beautiful nod to the influential man that was Jack Kirby; in the form of a street named after him! Then we have a very close in-hand review of the amazingly intricate HeatBoys TMNT Figures. These Figures are absolutely extraordinary; with their Die-Cast designed Mech-Suits. They are honestly like nothing we have seen in the TMNT franchise before!! All this & more! Enjoy!!Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

All Hail Unicron: Episode 117: Better Late then Never! INTRODUCTION Anybody Get Anything? Movie/Show News G1 Writer and creator of The Punisher Gerry Conway passes away https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/27/g1-transformers-writer-gerry-conway-has-passed-away-562756 Third Party Magic Square Nosecone https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/26/magic-square-toys-ms-b63-eniac-no-2-legends-scale-nosecone-color-prototype-562607 Newage, now with 100% more Dick! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/27/newage-toys-h71-dick-legends-scale-sideswipe-new-color-va-562709 Newage, now with 100% more junk! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/28/newage-toys-h75a-snow-h75b-swan-h75c-cowboy-h75d-cleon-h75e-ajax-h75f-rembrandt-legends-scale-junkions-color-prototypes-562759 Remember those BotCon Junkions in Insecticon colors? Pepperidge Farms and Newage remember https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/01/newage-toys-h75x-wyatt-h75cx-cowboy-h75dx-cleon-legends-scale-shattered-glass-junkions-color-prototypes-562985 LaserCat is now MachineCat and they've got a G1 Prime for you! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/02/machinecat-toys-sd-g1-optimus-prime-color-renders-563014#images Dr Wu Cybertron mode Constructicon prototypes (2 links) https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/03/dr-wu-dw-es07-cyber-shovel-loader-dr-wu-dw-es08-cyber-bulldozer-war-within-scrapper-scavenger-563164 https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/04/dr-wu-dw-es05-cyber-crane-dw-es06-cyber-dump-truck-war-within-hook-long-haul-color-prototypes-563195 Great General Toys IDW Ultra Magnus color prototype https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/22/great-general-toys-djs-bs01-masterpiece-scale-idw-ultra-magnus-562223 Official: Hasbro says, "Buy this stuff again! It's different, we promise!" https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/24/transformers-studio-series-86-deluxe-cliffjumper-voyager-cyclonus-leader-blitzwing-official-stock-images-562388 Oh look, another G1 statue from another statue company https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/26/iron-studios-transformers-g1-soundwave-1-20-statue-562629 Missing Link Ironhide teaser https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/03/takara-tomy-missing-link-ironhide-teaser-image-teaser-image-563102 Takara teases an evil Star Convoy https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/05/03/takara-tomy-new-legends-nemesis-black-star-optimus-prime-teaser-563107 Time to get your suck on! https://news.tfw2005.com/2026/04/30/officially-licensed-ldcx-transformers-suction-cup-figures-562891 Questions? Discussion: Email your questions to: Hailunicroncast@gmail.com    Special Shoutouts: Dustmightz for providing the beats for the theme song! Check the Realm of Collectors on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/groups/realmofcollectors   Everyone who followed us from Shattered Cast Uncut, we are grateful to each and everyone of you for joining us on this journey!   Hosts: T2RX6 http://www.youtube.com/user/T2rx6 Rich “Preordered” H. Oscar Alonso https://www.youtube.com/user/oscarnjboy Robert Duyjuy-sabado-gigante

Le 16 mai 1956, la Grande-Bretagne déclenche l'essai nucléaire G1 aux îles Montebello, au large de l'Australie-Occidentale, terre traditionnelle du peuple Noala. Baptisée Opération Mosaic, cette série de deux essais s'inscrit dans la course à l'armement nucléaire de la guerre froide. Malgré les promesses d'absence de danger, les retombées radioactives ont atteint le continent australien. Soixante-dix ans après, l'opération Mosaic s'inscrit dans l'histoire des douze essais nucléaires majeurs menés en Australie entre 1952 et 1957, tous réalisés sur des terres autochtones.

It got ugly last night in G1 against Miss. State and a "Listen In" with Earley postgame and the Aggie Softball contingent (Ford, Perez, and Powell) set up the College Station Regional.

This episode of Double Tap is brought to you by: C&G Holsters (Code: WLSISLIFE) Gideon Optics (Code: WLSISLIFE) Rost Martin (Code: WLSISLIFE) Night Fision (Code: WLSISLIFE) Blue Alpha Second Call Defense Text Dear WLS or Reviews +1 743 500 2171  Public   Show Titles   GOA GOALS Aug 1-2 in Iowa. https://goals.goa.org/ GunCon.net Tickets on sale now. Use code AGENCY171 DEAR WLS Question from OopsieDaisy from California For double tap by OopsieDaisy I've been listening to a lot of old episodes and started the book One Second After, a book Jeremy talked about and holy fuck it's good. Since an EMP would wreck all of the electronics in vehicles, what EMP-safe vehicle would you guys choose to take into an EMP ridden world? You have 10 grand to spend. Go. Question from Mike in NH 1st: quick positive review for C&G, I've been carrying my CSX-E series in a Covert for a month now, so great. Thank you to Chris and company 2nd: At what point does a used pick up become too nice/collectible to use/carry? I recently purchased a S&W 640-2. I didn't know anything about it apart from it was in excellent condition, and that it was pre-Lock. I thought it was weird for a steel J-frame to be 38spl only. It turns out the -2 was only made 1997-99 for NYPD as an approved back-up/off duty weapon. So it's kind of rare. Thanks for the opinions and the great shows. -Mike in NH Question from Duke of Crude from Texas Duke of Crude Hey fam, Thanks for reading my question on episode 449 about carry guns and meth country. My definition for meth country is either: 1. Urban sprawls (ex. Tulsa, Memphis) where hard drug use is prevalent 2. Rural areas (ex. West Virginia) where high poverty creates new hard drugs and users But going back to my question on 44 special in particular. Why does no one make a 44spc+P? I was looking for something like 1000-1200 fps 200gr out of a 4in barrel and I could not find any factory loads or even Underwood ammo that makes +P rounds. I have a 329PD that I like, but you will snap your wrist before you get through an entire cylinder of factory load 44 magnum. I was looking at that new s&w nightguard 396 but with my mind blown on how anemic 44 special is, I think I might have to pass. Do ya ll have any recommendations on 44mag/ special revolvers for EDC carry? Question from amonymous texas from coward from Texas Where can I find ammo to fight robots? There's a company called roborounds (roborounds.com if you are not familiar) that has a lot of cool bullets you can fire from standard firearms. For instance one fragments iron filings to short out circuit boards and another one creates a localized EMP on impact. The fucking robots are coming and I need this ammo, but I can't find a place to buy it. I see a few online retailers who used to carry it. I tried contacting them and they won't get back to me. Probably because I'm a nobody. If these guys are done, is anyone else making anything similar? Second related question: what about drone defense rounds? They had some cool stuff for 12 ga shells, but I have seen similar stuff from other companies. Are there any specific ones you know of or recommend? -amonymous texas from coward Question from Anonymous Coward from Oregon From No one Your printers are always running. What are you guys printing? Except Jeremy. He don't mess with that nerd shit. Question from Jon W from Washington Jon W I unfortunately live behind enemy lines in Washington state. Years ago when they first became sponsors, I took you up on your advice and signed up for Second call Defense and felt reassured that they had my back if the worst day ever happened. Since that time, our now turd Ferguson governor who used to be the Attorney General made having said insurance illegal in Washington. My question is hypothetically if a person had a close relative in another state could they sign up for Second Call Defense Using that address? They have said that they cover people that are signed up even if an incident occurs in a state like Washington, New York and I forget the other states that think it's murder Insurance. Your wisdom is greatly appreciated Keep up the good work! #wlsislife GUN INDUSTRY NEWS Bond Arms Snake Slayer (BASS) The Bond Arms Snake Slayer is a compact double-barrel derringer designed as an outdoor companion, chambered in .357 Mag/.38 Spl and .45 LC/.410. It features a stainless steel frame with a 3.5-inch barrel, extended rosewood grips, fixed sights, and a 2-round capacity. Key mechanisms include a rebounding hammer, cross-bolt safety, and compatibility with all standard Bond Arms barrels. Q Tall Boy Silencer Q has introduced the Tall Boy, a .30 caliber all-steel silencer optimized for maximum suppression on subsonic .300 Blackout via extended internal architecture that slows, cools, and manages gases for reduced exit pressure. It features a refined baffle structure for consistent performance across cartridges, full-auto rating, and Cherry Bomb/REAREND compatibility. The design prioritizes durability and long-term reliability without unnecessary complexity. Cabot Guns Apex Jurassic 1911 Cabot Guns has produced the Apex Jurassic 1911, a one-of-a-kind precision-engineered Government-size 1911 pistol crafted from Damascus steel, carbon steel, and genuine extraterrestrial meteorite. It features a unique ‘fossil' Damascus pattern resembling a sedimentary fossil bed, hand engraving depicting a Raptor archaeological dig site with 24kt gold inlay, Bulino-engraved Raptor vignette, and grips and trigger incorporating actual meteorite. The custom carbon-steel frame has a Fire and Ice rustic patina finish, with small parts in brushed bronze PVD; this art pistol appears to have already been sold. Berger 217 Grain Elite Hunter .300 PRC Load Berger has released a new .300 PRC ammunition load featuring the 217-grain Elite Hunter bullet with a hybrid ogive profile, G1 BC of 0.702 (G7 0.347), optimized for long-range hunting. It achieves 2,400 FPS muzzle velocity from a 24-inch barrel and retains over 2,500 foot pounds of energy past 300 yards. The load requires a 1:10 or faster twist rate. Palmetto State Armory PSA Sabre Builder Kits Palmetto State Armory announces the return of PSA Sabre Builder Kits as a permanent catalog offering on the AR-15 mil-spec platform. These include complete builder sets, upper receivers, lower receivers, handguards in multiple lengths, and individual components with Cerakote options like Champagne, Titanium Blue, Black, Burnt Bronze, FDE, and Moss Green. The sets launch on May 8 at 4:30 PM EST via Palmetto State Armory. Q Tall Boy Suppressor Q has released the Tall Boy, a .30 caliber suppressor designed for maximum suppression of subsonic .300 BLK using extended internal architecture and steel construction to optimize gas management. It measures 10 inches long, weighs 19.5 ounces, and is full-auto rated with no barrel restrictions. The Tall Boy integrates with Q's QD ecosystem via Cherry Bomb / REAREND mounts and is available now through Q dealers. Modlite Noxon Havok Weapon Light The Modlite Noxon Havok is a new rifle-mounted weapon light series offering premium performance at an affordable price, available in Core (18650 battery) and Mini (18350 battery) sizes with G1 (1350 lumens, 54,000 candela) or T1 (680 lumens, 69,000 candela) emitters. Constructed from 6061 aluminum with Mil-Spec hard anodizing and BOROFLOAT lens, it features a fully potted light engine tested for SCAR 17 recoil and compatibility with scout-pattern mounts, tailcaps, and switches. Released around May 2025 following SHOT Show debut, it provides runtimes of 75 minutes (Core) or 35 minutes (Mini). Walker's Razor Junior Muffs Walker's has launched the Razor Junior Muffs, youth-sized compact electronic ear muffs designed for smaller head sizes with an NRR of 23dB. These muffs feature dual Hi-Gain omnidirectional microphones, full dynamic range HD speakers, low-noise frequency-tuned circuitry, and 0.02-second sound-activated compression for hearing protection and sound enhancement. The product uses sound-dampening composite housing, a padded headband with metal wire frame, and recessed volume controls for durability and usability in range or field settings. Before we let you go – JOIN GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA We'd love if you supported the show, join Agency 171 at agency171.com. Lot's of prizes, rewards and kick ass swag. No matter how tough your battle is today, we want you here fight with us tomorrow. Don't struggle in silence, you can contact the suicide prevention line by dialing 988 from your phone. Remember – Always prefer Dangerous Freedom over peaceful slavery. We'll see you next time! Nick – @busbuiltsystems | Bus Built Systems Jeremy – @ret_actual | Rivers Edge Tactical Aaron – @machinegun_moses Savage – @savage1r Shawn – @dangerousfreedomyt | @camorado.cam | Camorado

上週節目講得一副國王只打一場挑戰賽就要放假，結果咧？所以這週節目當然要鄭重向挺過 12 天 7 戰、以表現打臉不看好的人的國王說聲「我們錯了」，每月贊助 500 元，鍵盤向國王道歉！XD國王確實打出跟例行賽尾聲截然不同的氣象，Group A Game 1 一顆顆三分球炸得雲豹措手不及，但這場爆冷就代表系列賽已經脫離第一種子的掌握了嗎？Group B Game 1 也出現攻城獅相隔 1,000 多天在台中贏球的下剋上，夢想家又該如何重拾賽季後半段的連勝氣勢？本集邀請到《籃球伙》Allen 上節目，當然不只聊 TPBL 季後賽，還有 2026 台籃非官方年度獎項票選的揭獎 Part 1！在兩職籃聯盟合併票選的平行宇宙中，超過 200 位投票者選出的年度 MVP、年度洋將、年度第六人、年度防守陣容、後林志傑時代的台籃門面、最不依賴罰球的純粹得分手、以及年度總教練，得主分別是誰？還有節目簡介塞不進的內容，都在本週霹靂鍵盤！「攻城獅 x 宅男打籃球」聯名隨身碟的中獎名單Evilmonkey93 (Instagram)琪拉 (YouTube)TT Remember (YouTube)

「【NHKマイルカップ・G1】2週連続の大接戦！初コンビD.レーン騎手と共にロデオドライブが3歳マイル王に！」　5月10日（日）、東京芝1600メートルを舞台に3歳マイル王決定戦、NHKマイルカップ・G1が行われた。混戦模様のレースを制したのは、発走直前に1番人気となったロデオドライブ。道中は後方に控え、最後の直線に入り一気に加速。大外から猛追し、4番人気アスクイキゴミとの激しい叩き合いへ。写真判定の結果ハナ差でロデオドライブが制し、G1初挑戦で見事3歳マイル王の座をつかんだ。また、鞍上のD.レーン騎手は今年G1初制覇。この勝利でキャリア通算7度目のG1制覇となった。

本期嘉宾：彭林、十天、森森、蓝白、恺伦本期节目的主要内容有：· 00:01:08 -- 苹果内置摄像头 AirPods 或 9 月发布· 00:09:18 -- 苹果因 AI Siri 延迟赔偿 2.5 亿美元，每台 iPhone 最高可获赔 95 美元· 00:14:38 -- 三星宣布在中国大陆停售所有家电产品· 00:26:16 -- 一加、realme 合并· 00:34:53 -- Valve 新一代 Steam 手柄宣布发售· 00:52:43 -- OpenAI 发布 GPT-5.5 Instant、扩容广告平台和实时语音助手· 01:09:15 -- 豆包付费订阅价格曝光，官方回应：始终提供免费服务· 01:24:46 -- 阿里发布「数字员工」QoderWake· 01:31:13 -- 阿里巴巴发布视频生成模型 HappyHorse 1.0· 01:37:11 -- 宇树 G1 人形机器人在韩国佛门「受戒」：法名「迦悲」· 01:46:23 -- 时代的眼泪：开播 24 年的星空卫视 5 月 8 日起暂停卫星传输服务· 01:57:32 -- 中方禁止外资收购 Manus 项目· 02:19:39 -- 闲聊环节我们的二手线下店位置在深圳·坂田北·吉华路·展誉公馆，离地铁站很近目前已经开业了，试营业期间活动也走起来了，具体可以听播客，感谢大家的支持~还有众多观众朋友的热心提问~每周五晚 8 点，爱否直播间，我们一起开心聊天

This Week on the Toy Power Podcast; we are unfortunately once again missing Scot; but making up the Forth Member of the show; & back from his recent UK Trip; we have Special Guest: Matt Tealeó! Matt systematically guides us through his most recent Toy Hunting Tour through UK! Kicking things off at "Leicester Vintage" & "Retrodee Toys"; with a very difficult mindset of self control & retaining enough money for the rest of the Trip! Then traveling next to the impressive: "Space Bridge"; which certainly holds up its name for Transformers fans! Next adventure was "The Vintage ToyMonster"; that was very well stocked indeed. Moving on next to: "Back To The Retro" which was positioned in a Mall. Then heading over to the incredibly well curated & equally spectacular: "Retro By Ronnie." Touring on then to both "Nerdbase" & "The London Toyshop". Next expedition was to "Hertfordshire Vintage Toys," with their striking Cabinet presentations! Then wrapping up at the awe-inspiring "88mph Toys" which seemed to have everything!! Then we bring it back to the Studio; with an exciting Gift-Box from Matt; for us to open! Wrapping up the Episode is a great overlook of what we are each Reading, Playing &/or Watching! Enjoy! To find more from Matthew Teale - please check out his very Toy Focused Instagram page: @Tealeos_ToyBox Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 223: Oncogenic Viruses Introduction Mehr: Hi everyone, welcome back to the Rio Bravo qweek podcast. Back by popular demand is Me, Mehr Boparai a third-year medical student at COMP-NW. Here with me is Jeremy Pan from COMP who is also a third-year medical student. How are you doing Jeremy? Jeremy: I'm doing great Mehr.Thanks for the kind intro; we had a fun time this morning doing street medicine and had some practice giving Toradol injections and wound dressings. So excited to be back for another podcast episode this afternoon! Mehr: This week, we are moving away from bacteria and antibiotics and diving deeper into cancer-causing viruses. Jeremy: Yes, and if you are interested at all in public health, this is one of those areas where medicine overlaps with public health in a really tangible way. I think one of the most underappreciated aspects of this topic is that we have vaccines that can prevent many of these cancers. If you told someone 50 years ago we'd be vaccinating against cancer, they probably wouldn't believe you! It's amazing to see how far medicine has come. How viruses cause cancer: Jeremy: Before jumping into specific viruses, I always think having a mechanism-based framework makes everything stick better. Mehr: Right, because they don't all cause cancer the same way. Medicine can never be easy huh? Jeremy: Yea…this career really is just a lifetime of discovery. So just to start, in broad terms, we can think of three main buckets of how viruses can cause cancer: Direct oncogenesis where viral proteins interfere with tumor suppressors like P53 and Rb. We will go over their specific mechanisms a little later in the discussion. Mehr:  Chronic inflammation where viruses cause repeated injury through production of reactive oxygen species. They also increase the chance of mutation through repeated DNA replication, leading to cancer.  Jeremy: Immune evasion or suppression leads to decreased tumor surveillance. What this means essentially is that our immune system is constantly removing abnormal cells before they become cancerous. This is completed by CD8 T cells and natural killer, or NK, cells. CD8 T cells recognize abnormal peptides presented on Major Histocompatibility Complex, or MHC, class I molecules and induce apoptosis in those cells. Mehr: And NK cells step in when cells decide to stop expressing MHC I, which abnormal cells like to hide to avoid being caught. So just to reiterate, there are two layers to dissect here: if a cell looks suspicious with an abnormal MHC, CD8 T-cells kill them. If the abnormal cell decides to hide its MHC, then the NK cell will kill it instead. Jeremy: So, for the final big picture, we can think of oncogenic viruses as either disabling tumor suppression, causing chronic damage over time through inflammation, and weakening the immune system's ability to catch cancer in time before it develops. HPV Mehr: Let's start with one of the most common viruses afflicting our population – Human Papilloma Virus otherwise known as HPV.  Jeremy: Right, this notorious virus is probably the most clinically impactful oncogenic virus. The key players HPV utilizes are proteins E6 and E7. Mehr: Right! E6 binds to and inhibits p53, which normally acts to induce cell cycle arrest, and E7 inhibits Rb, which normally acts as a tumor suppressor gene that inhibits the G1 to S phase transition in a normal cell cycle. Jeremy: So essentially, we are losing both apoptosis and losing cell cycle control at the same time. What is interesting about HPV is that persistent infection, not just exposure to the virus, is what drives cancer risk.  Mehr: Exactly, most HPV infections clear on their own, but the ones that persist are the problem. Clinically, many end up being asymptomatic. However, for high-risk infections, we can see genital warts that can itch, feel tender, or cause abnormal vaginal bleeding and discharge. Patients are sometimes not able to have a vaginal delivery because of the warts that are present along their genital tract. We can also see warts on the hands and fingers or plantar surface of our feet. Jeremy: Another interesting point is that we are also seeing a shift where there are more cases of oropharyngeal cancers in younger, non-smoking patients. This is why if we see an abnormal neck lymph node or persistent sore throat after swallowing in a young patient, HPV should definitely be on the differential.  Mehr: Screening is very important as well! We typically discover high-risk HPV infections through routine Pap smears and other HPV specific tests through DNA PCR and RNA tests. We also encourage vaccination for effective prevention of both genital warts and high-risk HPV-related cancers. There was also a study in Scotland where there were zero cases of HPV in adults who received the vaccine between 12-13 years of age! Which is crazy!  EBV HBV & HCV Mehr: Now let's shift to viruses that affect the liver, Hepatitis B virus and Hepatitis C virus. Jeremy: Both are strongly associated with hepatocellular carcinoma, but they actually get there in slightlydifferent ways. Mehr: Right. Hepatitis B is a DNA virus that can integrate directly into the host genome, which can disrupttumor suppressor genes and promote oncogenesis. Jeremy: Whereas Hepatitis C is an RNA virus, so it doesn't integrate into the host genome. Instead, it causes chronic inflammation Over time, that leads to repeated cycles of hepatocyte injury and regeneration, along withoxidative stress from reactive oxygen species, which increases the risk of DNA mutations. Mehr: One really important clinical pearl is that Hep B can actually cause hepatocellular carcinoma evenwithout cirrhosis. Whereas with Hep C, the pathway is usually chronic inflammation → fibrosis → cirrhosis → dysplasia→ cancer.  Jeremy: So, screening becomes really important for both of these viruses. For high-risk patients—like those with chronic hepatitis or cirrhosis—we typically dosurveillance with liver ultrasound every 6 months, sometimes with alpha-fetoprotein levels to see if it is elevated. Mehr: From a prevention standpoint, the Hep B vaccine is a huge win. It significantly reduces the risk ofhepatocellular carcinoma. For Hep C, we don't have a vaccine, but direct-acting antivirals can actually cure the infection andreduce long-term cancer risk, which is why we screen between ages 18-79  nowadays. Global Hep B and C account for 65% of all HCC cases! So, it makes sense that primary care itself is increasing the treatment of Hep C cases as well since it is easier to prescribe and that you want to be treated ASAP.  Jeremy: Yea, the ability to treat Hep C is so beneficial to population health. Now let's say you have a patient who develops hepatocellular carcinoma, options can include surgicalresection, liver transplantation, local therapies, or systemic treatments depending on stage.  Even without trying, every night you go to bed a little wiser. Thanks for listening to Rio Bravo qWeek Podcast. We want to hear from you, send us an email at RioBravoqWeek@clinicasierravista.org, or visit our website riobravofmrp.org/qweek. See you next week!  __________________________________ References: Barry H. C. (2024). Scottish Screening: No Cases of Invasive Cervical Cancer in Women Who Received at Least One Dose of Bivalent HPV Vaccine at 12 or 13 Years of Age. American family physician, 110(2), 201–202. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39172683/ Theme song, Works All The Time by Dominik Schwarzer, YouTube ID: CUBDNERZU8HXUHBS, purchased from https://www.premiumbeat.com/. Even without trying, every night you go to bed a little wiser. Thanks for listening to Rio Bravo qWeek Podcast. We want to hear from you, send us an email at RioBravoqWeek@clinicasierravista.org, or visit our website riobravofmrp.org/qweek. See you next week!

This Week on the Toy Power Podcast; we are unfortunately missing Master Scot; but standing his spot is Special Guest: Matt Tealeó! Kicking things off, we have some somber News as we morn the loss of the Creator of He-Man; Roger Sweet. RIP great sir. Then onto more positive things; with Movie Masters Toys hitting our local stores in a big way; just how deep are we already with purchases?! Lots of awesome things coming out of Mondo plus another shot at Tron from the team at Hasbro. Marvel Legends continues to impress us; especially with their New Rivals offers! Arguments about how to pronounce "Mate" - & this is coming from a bunch of Aussies! Neca - we are directing this at you! Then we take off our Headphones, & suit up with our key choices of Superpowered Helmets! Yep, its time for another segment of The Team! Featuring you guessed it: The Good-Guys behind the Mobile Armored Strike Kommand! Selecting key characters that best suit the catagories for: Leader, Muscle, Specialist, Wheelman; as well as an Iconic Vehicle too!! Do YOU agree with our final Choices?! All this & more; ENJOY!! To find more from Matthew Teale - please check out his very Toy Focused Instagram page: @Tealeos_ToyBox Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this week's episode, Scott Rennak interviews Jason Haas, co-founder of G1 Climbing + Fitness. Jason shares his extensive journey in climbing, from his early days on Michigan sandstone and dirtbagging out of a Saturn to climbing on nearly every continent. He reflects on his work as a prolific first ascensionist with over 700 routes, authoring 12 guidebooks, contributing to the early development of the Boulder Climbing Community nonprofit, and replacing aging bolts across Colorado in partnership with organizations like the American Safe Climbing Association. Jason discusses balancing a 15-year teaching career alongside his climbing pursuits, as well, and how that experience shaped his perspective as a gym owner. He dives into the challenges of launching G1, including navigating multiple failed locations, zoning hurdles, and ultimately opening just one week before the COVID-19 shutdown. The conversation also explores Jason's role in developing the Climb Pass to foster collaboration across the Colorado Front Range, his views on auto belays, gym-to-outdoors stewardship, and his grit-first philosophy on building both a business and a life in climbing. General Topics Covered Jason Haas's path from climber to gym owner Opening G1 Climbing Gym and overcoming development challenges Navigating COVID-19 as a new gym owner Industry collaboration through the “Climb Pass” initiative Stewardship and involvement with American Safe Climbing Association and Boulder Climbing Community Gym responsibility in safety, education, and community building Show Notes G1 Climbing + Fitness The CLIMB Pass Boulder Climbing Community American Safe Climbing Association Climbing Boulder's Flatirons (Jason's guidebook) Thank you Cascade Specialty, Rúngne, Climbing Wall Association, Essential and Approach for your support! And thank you Devin Dabney for your music!

This Week on the Toy Power Podcast; we are all back together again in the studio; ready to share our latest exciting Stories of Adventure! Scot traveled to Melbourne & caught the 20th Anniversary of Wrestle Rock; as well as the Evil Dead -Musical; along with his partner Jo, Brett & Sarah. Frank traveled with his Family to Japan, & soaked in the awesome atmosphere & Culture! Including the height of Cherry Blossom Season! Disneyland certainly proved to be the happiest place on earth; plus creating new friends too! Ben car-pooled with Davey to Ballarat Victoria, for the incredibly entertaining Live Recording of Passive Aggressive ep 200! Then a trip to Melbourne to catch Renegades Of Wrestling! Trent & Fam adventured to Japan too - with some amazing stories of Universal Studios & Toy Hunting as far as his feet could take him!! Then we bring it back to our local area; in which Ben, Frank & Scot attended Brett & Sarah's: Adelaide Comic & Toy Fair event! We each sold there & had the best day! With all said above - you can only imagine what we each come together to get amped-up about.... Our Latest Scores! This is a rather big boost from each of us; as we shout-out the goodies we have got from all over the place!! All this & more - enjoy this extended ep!Support the show: http://patreon.com/toypowerpodcastSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.