Podcasts about gutenberg

Two-time Emmy and Three-time NAACP Image Award-winning, television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Gregory Richardson. A cybersecurity expert and AI consultant. The conversation explores cybersecurity best practices, the rise of AI, and how Gregory is helping churches and nonprofits leverage technology to spread the gospel.

Today on Welcome to Cloudlandia, Our discussion unravels the surprises of Ontario's geography, the nuances of tariff wars, and the timeless drive for ambition, ensuring you're well-equipped with insights into how technology continues to redefine the global landscape. Discover how NuCom's innovative app is revolutionizing sleep and relaxation. We dive into the specifics of how its unique audio tracks, like "Summer Night," are enhancing REM and deep sleep, all while adding a humorous twist with a comparison to Italian driving laws. With separate audio for each ear and playful suggestions for use, you'll learn how this app is setting new standards for flexibility and effectiveness in achieving tranquility. Finally, we ponder the evolving nature of trust in a world increasingly dominated by AI and digital interactions. Drawing inspiration from thinkers like Jacques Ellul and Thomas Sowell, we discuss the societal shifts driven by technological advances and the potential need for encryption to verify digital identities. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS We discuss the intriguing journey from Ontario's cottages to the realm of international trade, focusing on how AI is reshaping trade agreements and challenging the predictability of global politics. Dean explores NuCom's innovative app designed to improve sleep and relaxation through unique audio tracks, highlighting its effectiveness in enhancing REM and deep sleep. We ponder the evolving nature of trust in a digital world increasingly dominated by AI, exploring how we can maintain authentic human interactions amid rapidly advancing generative tools. Dan shares a humorous story of two furniture companies' escalating marketing claims, setting the stage for a discussion on capitalism and the importance of direct referrals in business. We delve into the impact of technology on society, drawing insights from Jacques Ellul and Thomas Sowell, and compare AI's transformative potential to historical technological advancements like the printing press. Dean highlights the importance of personalized market strategies, exploring how personal solutions can evolve into valuable products for a wider audience. We explore the concept of ambition and agency, discussing how adaptability and a forward-looking mindset can help navigate new realities and unpredictable changes in the world. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan. Dan: Ah, Mr Jackson. General Jackson. General Jackson. Dictator Jackson Dean: Now there's two thoughts that are hard to contain in the brain at the same time. Are you in Toronto or at the cottage today? At the cottage, look at you, okay. Dan: Yeah, all is well, very nice day, yeah, except our water went out and so we can't get it fixed until tomorrow morning because it's cottage country. Till tomorrow morning because it's cottage country. And you know, this is not one of those 24-7 everybody's available places on the planet. Dean: Where do people in cottage country go to get away from the hustle and bustle of cottage country on the weekends? Dan: Yeah, it's a good question. It's a good question. It's a good question they go about two hours north. Dean: It feels like that's the appropriate amount of distance to make it feel like you're getting away. Dan: In the wild. Dean: Yeah. Dan: So we're having to use lake water for priming the vital plumbing. Dean: The plumbing you have to do. Dan: You have to have pails of water to do that and we'll do. Even though it feels like a third world situation, that's actually a first world problem. Dean: You're right, you're exactly right. Dan: Yeah, yeah, beautiful day, though. Nice and bright, and the water is surprisingly warm because we had a cold winter and the spring was really cold and we have a very deep lake. It's about um the depth meters on the boats go down to 300 feet, so that's a pretty deep lake that's a deep lake. Yeah, yeah, so here we are here's a factoid that blew my mind. The province of Ontario, which is huge it's 1,000 miles north to south and it's 1,200 miles east to west has 250,000 freshwater lakes, and that's half the freshwater lakes on the planet. Isn't that amazing? Dean: Yeah, I heard a little. There's some interesting Ontario facts. I remember being awed when I found out that you could drive the entire distance from Toronto to Florida north and still be in Ontario. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah, yeah. Dan: Yeah, If you go from the furthest east, which is Cornwall a little town called Cornwall to the furthest west, which is a town called Kenora Right, kenora to the furthest west, which is a town called canora right, uh, canora. It's the same distance from that as from washington dc to kansas city. Oh, that's amazing yeah I had a good. Dean: I had a friend who was from canora. He was an olympic decathlete, michael sm. He was on the Olympic decathlon team and that's where he was from Kenora, kenora. Dan: Mm-hmm. Yeah, yeah, it's a lot of big. I mean most of it's bugs, you know most of it's bugs. It's not, you know, the 90% of the Ontario population lives within an hour 100 miles of the? U, lives within an hour a hundred miles of the US. Yeah, yeah, you know, I mean that's it's if you go from the east coast to the west coast of Canada. It's just a 3,200 mile ribbon, about a hundred miles high that's really can't. From a human standpoint, that's really Canada. Everything else is just bugs yeah. Dean: So it's very. I guess you've been following the latest in the tariff wars. You know again Canada with the oh yeah, well, we're going to tax all your digital things, okay. Dan: Okay, yeah, okay we're done. Yeah, we're done. That's it Good luck Stay tuned. Dean: We'll let you know how much we're going to charge you to do business. I mean, where does this posturing end, you know? Where do you see this heading? Dan: Well, when you say posturing, you're Well. Dean: I don't think I mean it's. Dan: There's a no. It's the reworking of every single trade agreement with every single country on the planet, which they can do now because they have AI. Yeah, I mean, you could never do this stuff before. That's why using past precedents of tariffs and everything else is meaningless. Dean: Well, here's an example. Dan: If the bombing of Iran, which happened in recent history, iran which happened in recent history, if that had happened 30 years ago, you would have had a real oil and gas crunch in the world. Everything would crunch, but because people have instant communications and they have the ability to adjust things immediately. Now, all those things which in the past they said well, if you do that, then this is going to happen. Now I don't think anything's going to happen, Everybody's just going to adjust. First of all, they've already built in what they're going to do before it happens. You know, if this happens, then this is what we're going to do. And everybody's interconnected, so messages go out, you know they drop the bomb, the news comes through and in that let's say hour's time for everybody involved. Probably you know 10 billion decisions have been made and agreed on and everybody's off and running again. Yes, yeah. Dean: Yeah, it's amazing how this everything can absorb. Dan: I think the AI changes politics. I think it changes, I think it changes everything. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Dean: Agreed, yeah, but, but, but not necessarily in any predictable way, mm-hmm. Right, exactly. Dan: Yeah. Dean: But meanwhile we are a timeless technology. Dan: We are. Dean: I was rereading you Are a Timeless Technology. Yeah, these books, Dan, are so good oh thank you. Yeah, I mean, they really are, and it's just more and more impressive when you see them all you know lined up 40 of them, or 44 of them, or whatever. I'm on 43. Dan: I'm on 43. 43 of them yeah, I'm on 43. I'm on 43. 43 of them, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. This one's called Always More Ambitious, and we talked about this in the recent In the free zone yeah. In the free zone that I'm seeing ambition as just the capability platform for all other capabilities. Dean: Yes, you know, you have ambition and you know or you don't. Dan: And then agency goes along with that concept that, depending on your ambition, you have the ability to adjust very, very quickly to new things. For example, getting here and, uh, it was very interesting. We got here yesterday and, um, we had an early dinner. We had an early steak dinner because we were going to a party and we didn't think that they would have the kind of steak at the party that we were right, they didn't have any steak at all. Oh, boy, and they had everything that I'm eating steak. The reason I'm eating steak is not to eat the stuff that's at the party. Right, exactly, yes, I mean, I'm just following in the paths of the mentor here, of the mentor here, anyway, anyway, um, so you know, all the water was working and everything, and when we went to the party we came home and the water didn't work and it's some electrical connection you know, that in the related to the pump and um and anyway, and I just adjusted. you know, it was still light out, so I got a bucket and I went down to the lake and I got a bucket full of water and I brought it up and you know, and I was really pleased with OK. Ok, scene change. Dean: Yeah right, Exactly yeah. Scene change. Dan: Ok, you, you gotta adjust to the new one, and I'm new reality, right yeah, new reality. Okay, what you thought was going to happen isn't going to happen. Something is going to happen and that's agency. That's really what agency is in the world. It's your ability to switch channels that there's a new situation and you have the ability not to say, oh, I'm, oh, why, jane? You know, and you know that long line of things where, maybe 10 years ago, I was really ticked off and you know and, uh, you know, you know, I checked if I had any irish whiskey, just to to dead dead in the pain. Dean: All right. Dan: Yeah, and I just adjusted. You know? Yeah, this morning I took a Pyrex you know, the bowls you use to mix things, the mixing bowls you know, yes and I just filled it up with water, put it in the microwave. It still works, the microwave. Went and I shaved, you know, and. Dean: I shaved Right. There you go. Dan: Yeah, you can do a washcloth bath if you need to. Warm water, yeah, but the interesting thing about it is that I think that you don't have agency unless you have ambition. In other words, you have to have a fix on the future, that you're going to achieve this, you're going to achieve this, you're going to achieve this, and it's out of that ambition that you constantly develop new capabilities. And then the other thing is you utilize all the capabilities you have if something goes you know goes unpredictable. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Yeah. Dean: And my. Dan: Thing is that this is the world. Now, I mean, you know and so, and anyway it's, it's an interesting thing, you know but I'm really enjoying. I'm really enjoying my relationship with perplexity. I'm sort of a one master, I'm a one master dog. Dean: Right, exactly. Dan: Like I listened to Mike Koenigs and he's investigated 10 new AIs in the four weeks since I talked to him last. Dean: He's doing that there. Dan: I'm just going developing this working relationship with one. Dean: I don't even know. Dan: If it's, is it a good one? I don't even know if perplexity is one of the top ones, you know, but it's good for my purposes. Dean: Well, for certain things it is yeah, for just gathering and contextualizing internet search stuff. But you know I look at Mike, as you often talk about Joe Polish, that you know. You don't need to know everybody, you need to know Joe Polish. I just need to know Joe, anybody you want to meet, you just mention it to Joe and he can make it happen. And I'd look at Mike Koenigs like that with AI tools. We don't need to know all the AI tools. Dan: We just need to stay in touch with Mike. Dean: Mike and Lior and Evan, you know we're surrounded by people who are on the. Dan: Yeah. And Tom Labatt do you know Tom, yeah, well, tom has created this AI mindset course that he's doing. And and he he comes to every one of our 10 times. Our connector calls, you know the two hour Zoom calls. So we've got every month I have two for 10x and I have two for FreeZone and and he's in breakout groups and every time he's in a breakout group. He acquires another customer. Dean: Right. Dan: And then I'll have Mike talk about what he's discovered recently. His number goes into chat and you know know, 10 people phone him up and say what's this all about? And it's amazing the, the uh, what I would say the um, um progress in our strategic coach clients just acquiring ai knowledge and mindsets and capabilities just by having one person who I just get him to talk to on a Zoom call. Dean: Yeah, it's pretty amazing yeah. Dan: I think this is kind of how electricity got foothold. Did you get electricity in your house? Yeah, yeah, yeah and you have electric lights. Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, and you have electric lights. Yeah, yeah, I do, yeah, yeah, you know, it's, you know. And then all sorts of new electrical devices are being created. Dean: Yes, that's what I'm curious, charlotte about the, the, uh. What were the first sort of wave of electrified uh conveniences? You know that. Where did we? Where did we start? I know it started with lights, but then. Dan: Yeah, I think lights obviously were the first. Yeah, yeah. It would have taken some doing, I think actually. I mean, once you have a light bulb and they're being manufactured, it's a pretty easy. You can understand how quickly it could be adapted. But all the other things like electric heaters, that would take a lot of thinking. Dean: Before what we're used to as the kind of two or three prong, you know thing that we stick into the wall. Before that was invented, the the attachment was that you would plug it into the light socket. Dan: Oh yeah, that was how you would access the electricity. That's right, you had a little screw in. Right, you had a little screw in that you could put in. Yeah, I remember having those yeah. Dean: Very interesting, that's right. Dan: Right, yeah, yeah. And then you created lawn wires that you could, you know you could you know, it's like a pug, but you needed something to screw into the light socket. Dean: Yeah, yeah, yeah, very, I mean it's, it's so. Yeah, what a. What a time. We had a great um. I don't know if we recorded um. We uh, chad and I did a vcr formula workshop the day in toronto, in toronto, yeah, and that was a really the first time we'd done anything like a sort of formalized full-day exploration. It's amazing to see just how many you know shining a light for people on their VCR assets and thinking of it as currency and thinking of it as currency and it's amazing how, you know, seeing it apply to others kind of opens their eyes to the opportunities that they have. You know, yeah, it was really I'm very excited about the, just the adaptability of it. It's a really great framework. Dan: Have you gotten? Your NuCom yet? Dean: I have absolutely. Dan: I really love it what's your favorite? I have different. First of all, I use the one at night that sounds like crickets. Okay, yeah, you know, it's 10 hours, you can put it on for 10. It's called Summer Night and it's got some. There's a sort of faint music track to it. But my aura, I noticed my aura that my REM scores went up, my deep sleep scores went up and the numbers you know. Usually I'm in the high 70s. You know 79, 80, and they jumped to 86, 87. And that's just for sleep, which is great. So I've had about two weeks like that where I would say I'm probably my sleep scores I'll just pick a number there but it's probably up around 50, 15, 15, better in all the categories and that and. But the one thing is the readiness. The readiness because I play the trackster in the day. But the one thing is the readiness, the readiness because I play the trackster in the day. But the one that I really like to have on when I'm working is ignite okay yeah, it's a. It's a really terrific. It's really terrific, that's right I haven't used any of the daytime. Uh, yeah, the daytime yeah, yeah, and then the rescue is really great. Okay, yeah, and you know For people listening. Dean: We're talking about an app on iPhone called NuCom N-U N-U-Com, yeah, and it's basically, you know, waves, background music. I mean, it's masked by music, but it's essentially waves. Dan: Apparently. We were in Nashville last week and David Hasse is experimenting with it. He says what they have is that they have two separate tracks. I use earphones and one track comes in through your right ear, one comes and your brain has to put the two tracks together, and that's what uh, so it elevates the brain waves or kind of takes the brain waves down. And there's music. Dean: You know the music yeah over and uh, but I noticed mentioned to me that the music is incidental, that the music has nothing to do with it. Dan: No, that's exactly right, it just gives your brain something to hold on to Attached to yeah. And then Rescue is really great. I mean that one. Just you know if you have any upset or anything, or you're just really busy, or you're enjoying anything. You just put it on, it just calms you right down. Dean: Did you notice that the recommendation on Ignite is to not use more than 60 minutes a day? Dan: Yeah, I doubt if I do. I think it's about a 14-minute track. Oh, okay, yeah, interesting, yeah, but that's a suggestion. Dean: Yeah, it is a suggestion. That's right, that's funny. Dan: Now what you're talking about. There is a suggestion. That's right, Now what you're talking about. There is a suggestion. Dean: That's all suggested. That's right. Dan: That reminds me of I was in Italy, I was on the Amalfi Coast and Italians have a very interesting approach to laws and regulations, you know. So we were going down the street and I was sitting right next to the bus driver, we were on a bus and a whole group of people on the bus, and so we come down to a perpendicular stop. You know you can't go across, you have to turn, and the sign is clearly says to the, and the driver turns to the left, and I said I think that was a right-hand turn. He said merely a suggestion. I love it. Dean: That's great. Dan: Merely a suggestion. Yeah, that's funny, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's funny. Have lawsuits, you know, like something like this. I mean, it's a litigious country, the. Dean: United States. Dan: Yeah, and so you know they may be mentally unbalanced, you know they may be having all sorts of problems. And they said why don't we just put in recommended not to use it more than an hour? So I think that's really what it is. That's funny. Yeah, Like the Ten Commandments, you know, I mean the suggestions yeah, there are ten suggestions, you know, yeah, yeah, but break two of them at the same time and you're going to find out. It's more than a suggestion. Yeah, fool around and find out, yeah I think in terms of book titles, that's a good bit. Pull around and find out. That's right, exactly. So what would you say is uh, just going on the theme of pulling around and find out that you've discovered is that there's things with AI that probably shouldn't go down that road. Dean: Anything. Just philosophically, I'm more and more resolute in my idea of not spending any time learning the particular skill or learning the particular tool, because I really, if I look at it that fundamentally, if you think about it as a generative tool or as a collaboration, creating either images or words or picture or uh, you know, sound or video, that's the big four. Right, those are the underlying things. There's any number of rapidly evolving and more nuanced ways to do all of those things and you're starting to see some specialists in them now, like, I think, things like you know, eleven Labs has really focused on the voice emulation now and they're really like it is flawless. I mean, it's really super what you can do with generated, uh, voice. Now even they can get emotion and I think it's almost like the equivalent of musical notations, like you can say, you know, uh, you know pianissimo or or forte. You know you can give the intention of how you're supposed to play this piece. Uh, so you get a sense that they can say you know whispers, or quietly, or or excited, or giggles, or you know you can add the sentiment to the voice, and so you just think, just to know that, whatever you can imagine, you can get an audio that is flawless of your own voice or any voice that you want to create. You can create a. There is a tool or a set of tools that will allow you to prompt video, you know flawlessly, and that's going to constantly evolve. I mean, there are many tools that do like. It's kind of like this race that we're all in the first leg of the relay race here, and so it started out with Sora was able to create the video, and then the next you know, the VO three, you know less than a month ago, came out and is the far winner by now. So any time that you spend like learning that technical skill is I don't think that's going to be time well well spent, because there's any number of people who could do those things. So I think I'm more, you know, I'm more guessing and betting that imagination is going to be more valuable than industriousness in that. Dan: One thing, and I'd just like to get your take on this, that the crucial quality that makes human things work, human activities, human teamwork and everything is trust you know, and that you're actually dealing with something that you can trust. Ok, and I'm just wondering if the constant evolution of artificial intelligence is going to encourage people to make sure that they're actually dealing with the person in person, that you're actually dealing with another human being in person. Well, I see that in contact with this person or you've got some sort of encryption type mechanism that can guarantee you that the person that you're dealing with digitally is actually the person? And I'm just wondering, because humans, the need for trust overrides any kind of technology. Dean: I agree with you. I mean that's. I think we're going to see, I think we're going to see a more. We're going to react to that that we're going to value human, like I look at now that we are at a point that anything you see on video is immediately questioned that might be especially, yeah, especially if you, if it's introducing a new thought or it's counter to what you might think, or if it's trying to persuade you of something is. My immediate thought is is that real? You know, you know, I just wonder. You know what I was? I was thinking about Dan. You used to talk about the evolution of the signs. You know where it said the best Italian food on the street? Yeah, the evolution was in the town. Two furniture companies, yeah two furniture companies Best furniture. What was it? Dan: Yeah, best furniture companies, best furniture, what was it? Yeah, best furniture store on the street. So the other one comes back and says best, you know best furniture store in the town. And the other one says the other one comes back, state the other one comes back country. The other one comes back Western Hemisphere, the other one comes back planet, the other one comes back solar system and finally it's so far out, it's in the Milky Way. And the other one comes back and says best store on the street. Dean: Right, exactly, and I think that's where we're. I think that's where we're. Dan: Yeah. Anything to differentiate anything to differentiate, I mean the other thing is differentiation. You know, yeah, yeah, yeah and yeah, so no. I go back to Hayek. He's an economist, fa Hayek, and he said that he was talking about capitalism. And he said the big problem with capitalism is that it was named by its enemies. It was named by the whole group of people. You know, marx was the foremost person you know and he, you know, wrote a book, das Capital, you know, and everything else, and they thought it was all about capital. And he says actually, capital is actually a byproduct of the system. He said what capitalism is is an ever expanding system of increasing cooperation among strangers. He says it's just constant going out from ourselves where we can trust that we can cooperate with strangers. And he says most places in history and most places still on the planet, the only people you can trust are our friends and family our friends and family. That limits enormously cooperation, eliminates collaboration, eliminates innovation, eliminates everything if you can only trust the people that you know. He said that basically what capitalism is. It's got this amazing number of structures and processes and agreements and laws and everything that allow you to deal with someone you don't know halfway around the planet and money is exchanged and you feel okay about that and you know, there was a great book and I've recommended it again and again called the One-to-One Future. I've read it. Dean: I've read it. Yeah, yeah, this was written back in the 90s, yeah, and that was one of the things that they talked about was this privacy, that, and I don't see it happening as much, but we're certainly ready for it and and going to appreciate having a, an intermediary, having a trusted advocate for all of the things you know. That that's that we share everything with that one trusted person and trust them to vet and represent us out into the world. Dan: It's really interesting. It would have been at a Free Zone workshop, because those are the only workshops that I actually do, and somebody asked. Babs was in the room and they said that you know how many of your signups for the program you know, the last 12 months and you know we had just short of a thousand a thousand signups and you know, and we know what the influence was because we have the contact we have the, you know, we have the conversations between the salesperson and the person who signs up, and somebody asked how many of them come directly from direct referrals. It's 85%. It's not the only thing They'll read books. They'll see podcasts. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Yeah and everything like that, but it's still that direct referral of someone whose judgment they totally trust is the deciding factor. Dean: Yes, yeah, amazing, right, and that's. Dan: I mean, here we are. We're 36 years down. We're using all kinds of marketing tools. We're using podcasts, we're using books. We're using books, we're using social media. And it struck me one day. I said how do people know me on social media? I said I never use social media. I've never. I've never. Actually, I don't even know how to. I don't even know how to use social media. Dean: I wouldn't know how to get on and everything else. Dan: So I went to our social media director and I said um, how am I on social media? He says dan, you're out there, there you're doing every day you're doing 100 things a day you know you know. and he went down the list of all the different uh platforms that I'm in and I said uh. I said oh, I didn't know that. I said, do I look good? He said oh, yeah. He says yeah, nothing but the best, but I'm just using it as a broadcast medium. You know, I'm not using it as an interactive medium. Right Well, I'm not. We're using it as an interactive medium, but I'm not. Dean: Right. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah, that's all that matters, right, I mean, and it's actually you, yeah, it's your words, but you're using, you know, keeping, like you say, somebody between you and the technology. Dan: Yeah, yeah, yeah, always keep a smart person. Right A smart person between yourself and the technology. Dean: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Dan: Yeah. So yeah, I was at the party. I had this party that was sort of a beach, had this party that was sort of a beach. You know, we have an island, but there are about 15 couples of one kind or another at the party last night, most of whom I didn't know, but I got talking and they were talking about the technology and everything like that. it was about a three person and myself and we were talking and they said, geez, you know, I mean it's driving me crazy and everything like that. And one of them said, dan, how are you approaching this? And I said, well, I'm taking a sort of different approach. And I just went through and I described my relationship to television, my relationship to social media, my relationship to the you know, my iPhone and everything else. And they said, boy, that's a really different approach. And I said, yeah, and I said you know we're growing, you know the company's growing, and you know everybody who needs to find out. what they need to find out is finding that out and everything else. So yeah, but I don't have to be involved in any of it. Dean: Right, yeah, you know, you're proof that it's. You can be in it, but not of it. Dan: Yeah, I think that's part of the thing. Yeah, but there's kind of a well, we're probably on this podcast, we're developing sort of an AI wisdom, because I think wisdom what matters is that you can adapt a particular strategy and just think of it, you know, and just stick with it. There's just something that you can stick with and it doesn't cause you any harm. Yeah, the one thing that I have learned is that the input between me and perplexity has to be 50-50. And the way I do it, dean, is I trigger everything with a fast filter, so I'll do the best result. You have just one box. I put the best result. You have just one box, I put the best result. That becomes the anchor of the particular project that I'm working on with Perpuxy. I'll just take it and stick it in there. Then I'll write one of the success criteria, okay, and then I'll take the success criteria and I said okay, now I want to create two paragraphs. Okay, so I've got the anchor paragraph and I've got this new paragraph. I want to take the central message of this success criteria and I want to modify whatever I wrote down in the lead and bring it back as a 100-word introduction where the success criteria has 50 words. Okay. And then what I'll do is I go to a mindset scorecard and I'll start creating mindsets and I'll take a mindset and I said, okay, I want to take this mindset and I want to change the meaning of the two paragraphs and it comes down and then after a certain point I said okay, let's introduce another. So I'm going back and forth where it's delivering a product but then I'm creating something new and inserting it into the product, and it's kind of like this back and forth conversation. Dean: You're using perplexity for this Perplexity yeah. Yeah. Dan: Yeah, and it has a really nice feeling to it that it's doing some magic. You know it's doing magic tricks. It's carrying out instructions instantaneously. You know three or four seconds. And then I read what I wrote and then it gives me a new idea. Then I write down the idea in the pass filter or the mindset scorecard and then I insert that new idea and say, okay, modify everything above with this new thought, and it's really terrific, it really works really great, yeah, okay, and you know it's, and what's really interesting about? I'll go do this. And then, down at the bottom, it creates a unique summary of everything that we're talking about, and I didn't ask it for a summary, but it creates a summary. Dean: That's amazing, isn't it? Dan: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Dean: Yeah, this is. You know. I really enjoyed the new tool that we did in the FreeZone workshop. This time I forget what the tool is called. Dan: I had three. I had the six-year your best six years ever. Was it that one we also? Dean: had. Always More Ambitious, always well, always more ambitious was great too, but yeah, that uh. But that six year your best six years ever is. That's such a good thing that if you just imagine that that's the, the lens that you're looking at the present through that, you're always. It's a durable thing. I try and explain to people I've had this framework of thinking in terms of the next hundred weeks is kind of a the long-term like actionable thing that you can have a big impact in a hundred weeks on something. But it's gonna happen kind of a hundred days at a time, kind of like quarters I guess, if you think about two years. But I've really found that everything comes down to the real actionable things are the next 100 hours and the next 100 minutes. And those I can find that I can allocate those 50 minute focus finders that. I do those sessions, it's like that's really the only. It's the only thing is to the extent that we're able to get our turn our ambitions into actions that correlate with those right that align, aligning our actions with our ambitions because a lot of people are ambitious on theoretically ambitious, uh, as opposed to applied ambition. Dan: They're not actionably ambitious. Dean: Actionably ambitious. I think that there's something to that, Dan. Dan: Yeah. Dean: And it's frustrating yeah. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah. Dan: I think that's a really good, theoretically ambitious, but not actionably ambitious, yeah, and I think that's a really good theoretically ambitious but not actually ambitious, yeah, and I think that theoretically ambitious just puts you totally in the gap really fast. Absolutely Okay, because you have no proof, you're never actually You're full of propositions. Yeah, I'm reading a book. Have you ever read any of Thomas Sowell? I? Dean: have not. Dan: Yeah, he's a 93, 94-year-old economist at Stanford University and he's got 60 years of work that he's done and he's got a great book. It's a book I'm going to read continually. I have about three or four books that I just read continually. One of them is called the Technological System by Jacques Hulot, a French sociologist, jacques Lull, french sociologist, and it does the best job of describing what technology does to people, what it does to organizations, when they're totally reactive to it. Dean: You know in other words. Dan: They have no sense of agency regarding technology. They're just being impacted, and it's really good. He wrote it probably in the 60s or 70s and it's just got a lot of great observations in it. Dean: And. Dan: I've read it. I've probably read it. I started reading it in 1980, and I've probably read it three or four times. One book fell apart because there was so much notes and online Really Wow. Yeah, the binding fell apart. Dean: What's it called again? It's called the. Dan: Technological System. Dean: The. Dan: Technological System. Jacques, you know Elal and there's quite a good YouTube interview with him If you want to look it up. It's about 25, 30 minutes and very, very, very engaging mind. He really gets you to think when he talks about it. But the book that I'm talking about right now, this is Thomas Sowell. It's called Intellectuals and Society and he said if you take all the intellectuals in the world and you put all their sense of how the world works, at best it could represent 1% of the knowledge that's needed for the world to run every day the other 99%, and he calls it the difference between specialized knowledge and mundane knowledge. Okay, so specialized knowledge is where somebody really goes deep, really goes deep into something and then develops. You know, if the whole world would just operate according to what I'm seeing here, it would be a better world. And he says, and he said that's the intellectual approach. You know, I've I've really thought this deeply, and therefore what I want now is for someone to impose this on the planet. So, I feel good. But, he says what actually makes the world work is just everybody going about their business and working out rules of, you know, teamwork, rules of action, transaction work. And he says and intellectuals have no access to this knowledge whatsoever because they're not involved in everyday life, they're off. You know they're looking down from a height and saying you know, I'd like to reorganize this whole thing, have the mundane knowledge are now being able to really get multiply the value that they're just getting out of their daily interactions at an exponentially high speed and that the intellectuals are probably. The intellectuals are just if they're using AI. They're just doing that to multiply their theories. But they're not actionable ambition, they're theoretical. Theoretically ambitious right, yeah, yeah. Dean: Yeah, that's really interesting looking at the uh, you know, I think that there's, you know, kind of a giant leap from proposition to proof. Oh yeah, in the in the vision column is like that's it's worth so much. Uh, because intellectually that that's the. It's a different skill set to turn a proof into a protocol and a protocol into a protected package. You know, those don't require creative solution and I'm finding the real like the hotspot leverage points, like in the capability column. It's ability is the multiplier of capability. Dan: Yeah. Dean: You know, because that then can affect capacity and cash, you know. Dan: Yeah, yeah, I mean, if you take it. I mean never have human beings had so many capabilities available to them but do they have any ability to go along with the capabilities? Dean: Yeah. Dan: Yeah. Dean: And I think that that part of that ability is to recognize it. You know, vision ability to recognize the excess capacity that they have, you know. Dan: And. Dean: I think that that trusted you know. Dan: The leverageable point in the reach column is the you know a heart level, like an endorsed uh being access to somebody else's um, to somebody else's trust level yeah, relationships yeah it's so it's amazing like I just like that I've seen so much opportunity AI introduced chat, gpt, that we're at a major this is a major jump, like language itself almost. I often go back and say I wonder who the first tribe? That was probably a tribe that developed a language so that they could communicate. You know where they could keep adding vocabulary. You know they could keep adding vocabulary and that they must have just taken over everything immediately. They just totally took over just because of their speed of teamwork, their speed of getting things done. And then the next one was writing when they could write. And then you have another jump, because with writing came reading and then the next one came printing. You know, and I thought that when the microchip came in and you had digital language, I said this is the next gem. But digital language is just a really, really fast form of printing actually. It's just fast, but artificial intelligence is a fundamental breakthrough. So, we're right at the beginning. Gutenberg is like 1455, and it must have been amazing to him and the people who knew about him that he could produce what it would take, you know, a hand writer would take months and months that he could produce one in a matter of you know hours. He could produce in hours, but as many as you wanted. Dean: I wonder what the trickle down, like you know the transition, how long it took to eliminate the scribe industry. Dan: Well, I will tell you this that they have statistics that within 40 years after Gutenberg there were 30,000 presses across northern Europe. So it took off like a rocket. You know it took off. And I mean, and you know, and it I mean in the next 150 years, we're just pure turmoil politically, economically, culturally in. Europe after that came and I think we're in that. We're in that period right now. We're feeling it, yeah, I think so too. Everybody's going to have to have a newcomer. Dean: Yeah, that's right. Dan: Probably on rescue all day 60 minutes at a time, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah, anyway. What have we gotten today? What have we? What's the garden produced today? Dean: Well, I think that this, I think we had this thought of, I think you and I always come the two types of abilities. Well, the capability and the ability. No, theoretically ambitious and actionability Actionability- Theoretically ambitious and actionably ambitious. Dan: The vast majority of people are theoretically ambitious. Dean: They're not actionable. Yes. Dan: I think that's a good distinction. Dean: I do too. That was what I was going to say that level and I think that the you know, when you see more that the I think, being an idea person, like a visionary, it's very difficult to see that there's a lot of people that don't have that ability. But you don't, because we take it for granted that we have that ability to see things and and have that uh, access to that. It doesn't feel like you know almost like you can't uh, you've got the curse of knowledge. We know what it's like to constantly have vision and see things, that the way things could be, um, and not really realize that most people don't have that, and I think it's we discount it, um, or you can't discount it by thinking, well, that that can't be do you know what I? mean that there's got to be more to. It mean there's got to be, more to it. Well, that's the easy part or whatever, but it's not and that's yeah. I think that the more I saw Kevin Smith, the filmmaker, the director. He was on there's a series online called the Big Think and they have, you know, different notable people talking about just their life philosophies or the things, and he said something that on his, the moment he decided to move into being kevin smith professionally, that that, the more he just decided to double down on just being more kevin smith for a living it's like he's really without using the words of unique ability or those things that that was the big shift for him is just to realize that the unique view, vision, perspective that he has is the more he doubles down on that, the more successful things have been for him. Yep, yep. So there's nothing you know, you've been Dan Sullivan professionally or professional. Dan Sullivan for years. Dan: Yeah Well, 51, 51. Yeah, yeah, uh, it's created all sorts of tools. I mean uh you know, I remember the psychiatrist I went to the amen clinic to receive my um add diagnosis, you know because he's got. He's got about seven different types of ADD. Dean: Yes, which one do you? Dan: have. Yeah well, mine's not hyperactive at all. Dean: No me neither yeah. Dan: I mean it takes a lot to get me to move, Anyway, but mine is the constant being barbaric. It's sort of I'm thinking of this and then all of a sudden I think of something else. Dean: And then. Dan: now I've got two things to think about, and then the third one wants to join the party and everything else, and meanwhile I had something to do this morning and I just blew right past it. Dean: Anyway. Dan: Right, yeah, so anyway, but I had filled in. There's like 100 questions that you have to fill in online before they'll even accept you, and you know what's your day look like. You know mine pretty relaxed, good structure, everything like that. But the test, they do all sorts of brain scans. They test out concentration, they test out how long you can maintain attention on something. They do it at rest, they do it after exercise and everything like that. It's about three days. There's about nine hours of it that they do. And so we got together and she said you know, if you look at how you answered our questionnaire, online and you look at our test. These are in separate universes. They don't have any relationship to each other. To each other. She said I've never seen such a wide span between the two. So well, I'm sorry, you know we just pretty soon we got to what I do for a living and I said well, I create thinking tools for entrepreneurs. And so I told her, I gave her a couple of examples and she said well, I don't know who else you created these for, but you sure created them for yourself. And that's really what we do. Is that what we are best at in the marketplace is what we're trying to figure out for ourselves? Dean: Yes, I think that's absolutely true. Dan: We sell our therapies to others, that's right. We want to see if our self-therapies go beyond ourselves. Dean: Yeah, exactly. Dan: Yeah, yeah, all righty. Dean: Okay Dan. That was a good one, yeah, are we on next week? Dan: Yeah, oh, yeah, yeah, Perfect, perfect, okay, I'll be back. Dean: I'll meet you here. Dan: Okay, thanks Bye, thanks Bye. Thanks for watching.

Are we ready for the AI era or are we stuck in an imagination gap? In this special 200th episode, recorded live at Creative Destruction Lab's Super Session, John Stackhouse and Sonia Sennik sit down with Minister Evan Solomon, Canada's first-ever Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation. From national sovereignty and productivity to global competition and culture, Solomon outlines a bold vision for Canada's AI future - what he calls a “Gutenberg moment” in human progress.Drawing on findings from the new RBC Thought Leadership report The AI Imagination Gap, this episode explores why Canadian enterprises are hesitating on AI adoption and how the right mix of policy, ambition, and imagination can close the gap. Minister Solomon speaks candidly about the four key pillars of Canada's AI strategy: scaling champions, adoption, trust, and sovereignty, and offers tangible insights into how SMEs, researchers, and public institutions can all benefit from AI's abundance, if the right supports are in place.This wide-ranging conversation dives into Canada's AI spine, the importance of protecting national culture through digital sovereignty, and how government, startups, and citizens alike must embrace this pivotal moment with urgency, collaboration, and creativity. Download AI Report:Bridging the Imagination Gap: How Canadian Companies can become global leaders in AI adoption

Building High-Performing WordPress Sites: Insights from Meeky Hwang, CEO of NdevrIn this episode of The Thoughtful Entrepreneur, host Josh Elledge speaks with Meeky Hwang, CEO and Co-Founder of Ndevr, a development firm specializing in high-performing WordPress solutions. Meeky shares how digital publishers can scale effectively, the "three-legged stool" framework for site success, and how to secure and optimize WordPress for high traffic and e-commerce.The Three-Legged Stool of WordPress SuccessMeeky emphasizes that a successful WordPress site rests on three foundational pillars: audience experience, editor experience, and developer experience. For site visitors, speed, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility are crucial. A seamless front-end experience keeps users engaged and ensures compliance with accessibility standards.From an editorial standpoint, she advises leveraging the Gutenberg block editor and custom workflows to streamline publishing. An intuitive backend not only enhances productivity but also reduces content errors and improves team morale. Editors need tools that fit their workflow, not ones they must work around.For developers, Meeky recommends maintaining a clean codebase, using version control systems like Git, and implementing continuous integration and deployment pipelines. This technical foundation supports performance, security, and scalability—especially critical for high-traffic sites. All three experiences must work in harmony for a WordPress site to perform at its best.About Meeky Hwang:Meeky Hwang is the CEO and Co-Founder of Ndevr, a WordPress development agency trusted by leading digital media and enterprise companies. With over 20 years of experience in web development and open-source technology, she specializes in optimizing complex digital ecosystems, strengthening DevOps, and aligning technology decisions with business goals. A passionate advocate for women in tech, Meeky is also a frequent contributor to Forbes, BuiltIn, and Thrive Global, where she shares leadership and digital strategy insights.About Ndevr:Ndevr is a WordPress development agency focused on high-traffic digital publishers and WooCommerce-driven e-commerce businesses. Their services include site audits, performance optimization, custom development, and strategic consulting.Links Mentioned in this Episode:Meeky Hwang on LinkedInNdevr Official WebsiteEpisode Highlights:The "three-legged stool" framework: audience, editor, and developer experience.Key WordPress best practices for high traffic and enterprise-grade publishing.How Ndevr grows through partnerships and referrals.WooCommerce security and performance strategies.Why regular audits and managed hosting are essential for WordPress success.ConclusionJosh and Meeky highlight the importance of strategic infrastructure and balanced user experiences in building successful WordPress sites. From scalability to security, Ndevr's insights provide a blueprint for digital publishers and e-commerce leaders aiming to optimize performance. Whether you're a growing brand or a seasoned media company, implementing Meeky's advice will help future-proof your web presence.Apply to be a Guest on The Thoughtful Entrepreneur: https://go.upmyinfluence.com/podcast-guestMore from UpMyInfluence:We are...

Today we are talking about DrupalCon, Wordpress, and what a wordpress guy can learn at a Drupal Event with guest Chris Reynolds. We'll also cover Shortcode as our module of the week. For show notes visit: https://www.talkingDrupal.com/509 Topics The Pros and Cons of Short Codes Chris Reynolds' Journey to DrupalCon Comparing DrupalCon and WordCamp Funding and Organization of WordPress Events The Collaborative Spirit of the Drupal Community Wishlist for WordPress Features Composer Support in WordPress and Drupal Backward Compatibility in WordPress Challenges with Composer in Drupal Config Management in WordPress vs. Drupal Responsive Image Management User Experience in Drupal Community Collaboration Between WordPress and Drupal Resources A Wordpresser Goes To DrupalCon Atlanta 2025 wpcfm Longhorn PHP Conference Oct 23-25 in Austin, TX Call for proposals through July 18 Join #texas-camp in Drupal Slack if you're interested in organizing a mini Texas Camp to pair with Longhorn PHP WP community collective Guests Chris Reynolds - jazzsequence.com jazzsequence Hosts Nic Laflin - nLighteneddevelopment.com nicxvan John Picozzi - epam.com johnpicozzi JD Leonard - jdleonard MOTW Correspondent Martin Anderson-Clutz - mandclu.com mandclu Brief description: Have you ever wanted your Drupal site to support WordPress-style shortcodes, macros to be used within content? There's a module for that. Module name/project name: Shortcode Brief history How old: created in Sep 2010 by Dénes Szabó (denes.szabo) of Tag1 Versions available: 2.0.3, which supports ^9.3 ^10 ^11 Maintainership Security coverage Test coverage Number of open issues: 30 open issues, 3 of which are bugs against the current branch Usage stats: 13,260 sites (almost 70% are D7 however) Module features and usage For anyone not familiar with WordPress short codes, the documentation describes them as macros, and most often they are used for inserting elements into content such as image galleries, videos, playlists, and more. Shortcodes can also wrap content, however, and it's possible to nest shortcodes as well. Drupal typically solves the problems addressed by shortcodes using custom HTML elements, as implemented in the media ecosystem, or with the Entity Embed module. I think that shortcodes may also be useful in places where Drupal might also rely on tokens, albeit with an additional module like Token Filter. Gutenberg includes a Shortcode block that can be used as a flexible way to add a variety of elements into a post's content. I think Shortcodes are an interesting paradigm because they're really a tool for power users. Instead of providing a UI to browse and choose elements for something like an image gallery, they allow a savvy editor to quickly write a tag that will construct a gallery using numerical ID values. I don't think this is a tool that most Drupal sites will need, but it could be a really good way for experienced WordPress teams to feel more at home when starting to work with Drupal.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, I reconnect with Dan Sullivan for another wide-ranging conversation that blends current events, history, technology, and human behavior. We start by reflecting on the safety and comfort of life in Canada while discussing the news of missile strikes in Israel. From there, we explore the idea that innovation often advances when entrenched leaders move on—whether in science, business, or geopolitics. Dan brings up Thomas Kuhn's idea that progress happens after the old guard exits, creating room for new ways of thinking. Our conversation shifts into the role of AI as a horizontal layer over everything—similar to electricity. We compare this shift to earlier transitions like the printing press and the rise of coffee culture. Dan shares his belief that while AI will transform systems, the core of human life will still revolve around handled needs and personal desires. We wrap by talking about convenience as the ultimate driver of progress. From automated cooking to frictionless hospitality, we recognize that people mostly want things to be “handled.” Despite how fast technology evolves, it's clear that unless something is of deep personal interest, most people will let it pass by. As always, the conversation leaves room for reflection and humor, grounded in the reality that technological change doesn't always mean personal change. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Dan and I explore the complexities of living in a "world-class" city like Toronto, discussing its cultural vibrancy against the backdrop of global geopolitical tensions. Dan delves into Toronto's significant role as a financial and technological hub, emphasizing its strategic importance in trade with the United States, where a substantial portion of Canadian exports cross the border. We discuss the transformative potential of AI in today's digital revolution, drawing parallels with historical innovations like Gutenberg's printing press, and how these advancements continuously redefine our society. We examine the evolution of Starbucks, from a unique third space with artisanal baristas to a more automated environment, and ponder the implications of this shift on quality and customer experience. The conversation shifts to the rise of independent coffee shops, highlighting how they meet the demands of discerning customers by offering premium experiences. Dean reflects on our relentless pursuit of convenience in modern urban life, where technological advancements shape our daily routines and enhance our quality of life. We conclude with a discussion on habit formation and the role of technology in reinforcing existing habits, while considering the balance between maintaining old routines and embracing new ones. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan, Dan: Mr Jackson, I hope the rest of your day yesterday went well. Dean: Oh, delightful, I learned stuff yesterday. That was a very nice day, beautiful, beautiful weather today. You know what, dan, if you could, as an option at the Hazleton, upgrade to include your perfect weather for $1,000, this is what you'd order, it's this kind of day. Yeah, mid-70s perfect white fluffy clouds. Yes, it's why. Dan: Living in a safe, globally unimportant country. That's exactly right. Holy cow, I don't know if you've seen, yeah, what's uh? I woke up like literally just a few minutes ago seeing all the, uh, the raining missiles on israel right now from Iran. Have you seen that this morning? Dean: Oh yeah, there's a lot of them. Most of them don't hit anything and most of them are shot down, but still it puts some excitement in your day. Dan: I mean really, yeah, these ones look like. They're something unique about these ones that they're supersonicersonic and many of them are hitting, yeah, different than what we've normally seen. Like normally, when you see it, it's the, the iron dome or whatever is, you know, intercepting them, which is always interesting, but these ones are like Direct, like you can see them hitting in inrael that's. I mean, could you imagine, dan, like you, just look at how geographically we are. You know we've won the geographic lottery in where we're positioned here, you know, just realizing that's never. Even though you can, all you know you always take precautions with the umbrella above us, over the outside. Dean: But I mean still that today. I've lived in Toronto for 54 years now, just past the anniversary, the 54th anniversary and I think that, first of all, when you have a really large city like Toronto, the center of a lot of things that go on in Canada, A world-class city like Toronto. Well, it's not a world-class city. But yeah, they have to go five years. I'm putting a new rule in for world-class cities. You have to go five years without ever saying the words. Dan: Yeah, we're a world-class city. Dean: We're a world-class city. And that takes you to stage one probation. Dan: Yeah. Dean: No, that takes you to stage two, probation, and then stage three probation is where all the people who've been saying it's a world-class city have either died or moved, and then it's sort of like science. There was a famous he wasn't a scientist, but he was a, I think, a science historian. Thomas Kuhn K-U-H-N if you ever came across that name wrote in the 1960s and he wrote a very influential book which is called the Structure of Scientific Revolutions, and he was asked many times when you have a sudden series of scientific breakthroughs and we really haven't had any for quite a long time, it's been mostly almost a century since we've had any real scientific revolutions. So all the progress we've made over the last century were for discoveries in physics and magnetism and electricity and uh, you know nuclear but they had already worked out how that was going to happen in the by the 1920s. and he said what when, all of a sudden, when you get a breakthrough, let's say, for example, they discover a new hydrogen atom and it essentially gives everybody free energy? That would be a scientific breakthrough. Do you think that I mean? Would you think? Dan: that would be. Dean: Yeah, yeah. In other words, energy just didn't cost anything anymore, you know, and the price of energy would go down. Dan: That would free up a lot of that, free up a lot of other things energy would go down that would free up a lot of that'd free up a lot of other things, and, uh, and, and he said, the single biggest cause for scientific breakthroughs is the funerals of old scientists. Oh who everybody defers to that you can't first them. Dean: Yeah, well, defers to, but they control promotion of young scientists. They control where the money goes for a scientist and then they die and their control loosens up and to the degree that control disappears. Now you get new. Dan: Yes. Dean: Yeah, so that's a long way around. But I think that in the world today there are people who are basically in control of geopolitical systems, economic systems, you know, cultural systems, and in the next 10 years, I think, a lot of the controllers are going. They'll either die or people will think they've already died. They don't have to actually die, they just have to be in a room somewhere and no one's heard, and no one's heard anything from them recently, and uh and uh, you know, and everything like that, and then things change and then things really shifted. But my sense about Toronto is that it's going to be the Geneva of the Western Hemisphere. Dan: Okay, that's interesting. Dean: Switzerland from a geopolitical standpoint really. I mean, nobody ever talks about well, what do the Swiss think about this? But lots of stuff happens in Geneva. People meet in Geneva. There's tons of money that goes through Geneva and you know, when you know people who hate each other want to talk to each other and feel safe about it, they do it in Geneva that's interesting. Dan: How did Switzerland become its neutrality known for? Is that just because of its positioning between Austria? Dean: and Germany mountains. Yeah, the uh, the germans had given some thought during the second world war to invade switzerland, and switzerland can put into the field in a very short period of time a very big army. I don't know what the numbers are. But the other thing is, uh, for the longest period I know maybe a century long they've been howling out the mountains. So they've got, you know, they've got secret bases inside the mountains, but there's also they've created lots of dams with big reservoirs and if there was ever an invasion they would just blow up the dams and they would flood the entire lowlands of. You know, people are told to the mountains, the entire lowlands of you know, people are told to the mountains, get to your bunker. You know everybody's got a bunker and they've all got guns and they do it. You know they just want to. They're in the middle of one of the most warfare inclined continents in human history. Europe is very warlike. It's always been warlike. Dan: Europe is very warlike. It's always been warlike, but they haven't wanted to be part of the wars, so they've taken the other approach. Dean: Yeah, and Canada is kind of like that, but the US is very uniquely positioned, because a lot of people don't know this. I mean, you come to Toronto and it's big skyscrapers, yeah, you know, and it's a financial center. It's very clearly a big financial center, it's a big communication center, it's a big tech center. But a lot of people don't know it's a big manufacturing center. There's the airport here. Dan: Oh yeah, All around the airport. Dean: Mile after mile of low-rise manufacturing Industrial yeah, all around the airport Mile after mile of low-rise manufacturing Industrial. Yeah Actually, sasha Kurzmer, who you'll see tomorrow, you'll see Sasha says it's the hottest real estate in Toronto right now is industrial space Really Wow, yeah. Yeah, we have enough condos for the next 10 years. I mean most of the condos we got enough. Dan: It's enough already. Yeah, that's true. That's funny right. Dean: I mean the vast number of them are empty. They're just. You know they just built them. Dan: Money lockers. Dean: Right yeah, money lockers right, yeah and uh, but a semi-truck you know like a big semi-truck loaded with industrial products can reach 100 million americans in 24 hours and that's where the wealth. That's where the wealth of toronto comes from. It comes from that distribution. Dan: Access to American market. Dean: Yeah, that's true. So you have the bridge at Buffalo, the big bridge at Buffalo. That goes across to New York and you have the big bridge at Detroit or at Windsor that goes across to Michigan and 80% of all the exports that Canada makes goes over those two bridges. Dan: Wow. Dean: Rapid-fire factoids for our listening audience. Dan: Yeah, absolutely, I mean that's. Dean: I like things like that. I like things like that. Dan: I do too. I always learn. You know, and that's kind of the you think about those as those are all mainland exports physical goods and the like but you know that doesn't. Where the real impact is is all the Cloudlandia transfers. You know, the transfer of digital stuff that goes across the border. There are no borders in Cloudlandia. That's the real exciting thing. This juxtaposition is like nothing else. I mean, you see, navigating this definite global migration to Cloudlandia. That's why I'm so fascinated by it. You know is just the implications. You know and you see. Now I saw that Jeff Bezos is back, apparently after stepping down. He's gotten so excited about AI that's bringing him back into the fold, you know. Dean: What at Amazon? Dan: Yes. Dean: Oh, I didn't know that. Dan: I saw that just yesterday, but he was talking about AI being, you know, a horizontal layer over everything, like electricity was layer over everything. Like electricity was, like the internet is, like AI is just going to be a horizontal, like over everything layer that will there's not a single thing that AI will not impact. It's going to be in everything. And so when you think about it, like electricity, like that I think I mentioned a few weeks ago that was kind of a curiosity of mine Now is seeing who were and what was the progression of electricity kind of thing, as a you know where it, how long it took for the alternate things to come aside from just lighting and now to where it's just everything we take for granted, right, like like you can't imagine a world without electricity. We just take it for granted, it's there, you plug something in and it and it works. Dean: You know, yeah, no, I, I agree, I agree, yeah, and so I wonder who I mean? Dan: do you? Uh and I think I go all the way back to you know that was where, like gutenberg, you know, like the first, the transition there, like when you could print Bibles okay, then you could print, you know, multiple copies and you know, took a vision, applied to it and made it a newspaper or a magazine. You know all the evolution things of it. Who were the organizers of all of these things? And I wonder about the timelines of them, you know? Dean: And I wonder about the timelines of them. You know Well, I do know, because I think that Gutenberg is a real, you know, it's a real watershed and I do know that in Northern Europe so Gutenberg was in Germany, that in Northern Europe, right across the you know you would take from Poland and then Germany, you would take from Poland and then Germany, and then you would take Scandinavia, then the low countries. Lux date that they give for Gutenberg is 1455. That's when you know a document that he printed. It has the year 1455, that within about a 30-year period there were 30,000 working presses in Northern Europe. How many years. That'd be about 30 years after 1455. So by the end of the—you've already surpassed 30,000 presses. Yes, but the vast majority of it wasn't things like Bibles. Dan: The vast majority of it was't things like Bibles. Dean: The vast majority of it was contracts. It was regulations. Dan: It was trade agreements. Dean: It was mostly commercial. It went commercial and so actually maps, maps became a big deal, yeah, yeah. So that made a difference and also those next 150 years were just tumultuous, I mean politically, economically I mean yeah yeah, enormous amount of warfare, enormous amount of became. Dan: Uh, I imagine that part of that was the ability for a precise idea to spread in the way it was intended to spread, like unified in its presentation, compared to an oral history of somebody saying, well, he said this and this was an actual, you know, duplicate representation of what you wanted, because it was a multiplier, really right. Dean: I mean that's, yeah, I'm. It was a bad time for monasteries yeah, exactly. Dan: They started drinking and one of them said you know what? We should start selling this beer. That's what we should be doing. Dean: We should get one of those new printing presses and print ads labels. Dan: Oh, we got to join in. Oh man, it's so funny, dan, that's so true, right? I mean every transition. It's like you know what did the buggy whip people start transitioning into? We're not strangers to entire industries being wiped out, you know, in the progress of things, yeah. Dean: Well, it wasn't until the end of the Second World War that horses really disappeared, certainly in Europe, certainly in Europe. It's. One of the big problems of the Germans during the Second World War is that most of their shipping was still by horses. Throughout the Second World War, you know they presented themselves as a super modern army military. You know they had the Air Force and everything like that, but their biggest problem is that they had terrible logistical systems, because one of the problems was that the roads weren't everywhere and the railroads were different gauges. They had a real problem, and horses are really expensive. I mean, you can't gas up a horse like you can gas up a truck, and you have to take care of them, you have to feed them. You have to use half of them to. You have to use half the horses to haul the food for the other half for all the horses. Dan: It's a self-perpetuating system. Yeah, exactly, that's so funny. Dean: Yeah, it's really an interesting thing, but then there's also a lot of other surprises that happen along the way. You know, happen with electricity and you know everything, but it's all gases and beds. Dan: Well, that's exactly it, and I think that it's clear. Dean: It'd be interesting with Bezos whether he can come back, because he had all sorts of novel ideas, but those novel ideas are standard now throughout the economy. And can he? I don't know how old he is now. Is he 50s? I guess 50s. Dan: Yeah, he might be 60-something. Dean: Yeah, well, well, there's probably some more ingenious 20 year olds that are. Dan: You know that are coming up with new stuff yeah, that were born when amazon already existed, you know I mean, it's like howard schultz with starbucks. Dean: He had the sweet spot for about 10 years, I think, probably from, I would say probably from around 90 to 2000. Starbucks really really had this sweet spot. They had this third space. You know, they had great baristas. Dan: They had. Dean: You walked in and the smell of coffee was fantastic and everything. And then they went public and it required that they put the emphasis on quantity rather than quality, and the first thing they had to do was replace the baristas with automatic machines. Okay, so you know, a personal touch went out of it. The barista would remember your drink. You know, yeah, a personal touch went out of it. The barista would remember your drink you know yeah. Dan: They were artists and they could create you know they punched the buttons and do the things, but they were not really making. Dean: Yeah, and then the other thing was that they went to sugar. They, you know, they brought in all sorts of sugar drinks and pastries and everything else. And now it wasn't the smell of coffee. When you walked in, it was the smell of sugar drinks and pastries and everything else. And now it wasn't the smell of coffee. When you walked in, it was the smell of sugar and uh and uh. So that I mean, people are used to sugar, but it's an interesting you know, and then he also, he trained his competition, you know, if you look at all the independent coffee places that could have a great barista and have freshly ground coffee. He trained all those people and then they went into competition with him. Dan: I think what really you know, the transition or the shift for Starbucks was that it was imagined in a time when the internet was still a place that you largely went to at home or at work, and the third place was a necessary, like you know, a gathering spot. But as soon as I think the downfall for that was when Wi-Fi became a thing and people started using Starbucks as their branch office. They would go and just sit there, take up all their tables all day. Dean: I'm guilty. Dan: I'm guilty, right exactly and that that kind of economically iconic urban locations, you know where you would be a nice little oasis. Yeah, it was exotically, exotically. European, I mean, he got the idea sitting in the. Dean: Grand Plaza in Venice you know that's where he got the idea for it, and yeah, so it was a period in a period in time. He had an era, period in time to take advantage and of course he did. You know he espresso drinks to. Dan: North. Dean: America. We, you know, maxwell House was coffee before Jeff Bezos, you know, and yeah, I think there's just a time. You, you know, I mean one of the things is that we talk about. We have Jeff Madoff and I are writing a book called Casting, not Hiring where we talk about bringing theater into your business and we study Starbucks and we say it's a cautionary tale and the idea that I came up with is that starbucks would create the world's greatest barista school and then you would apply to be, uh, become a barista in a starbucks and you would get a certification, okay, and then they would cream. They would always take the best baristas for their own stores and and. But then other people could buy a license to have a barista licensed, starbucks licensed barista license yes. And that he wouldn't have gone as quickly but he would have made quality brand. Yeah, but I think not grinding the coffee was the big, the big thing, because the smell of coffee and they're not as good. I mean, the starbucks drinks aren't as good as they. They were when they had the baristas, because it was just always freshly ground. You know, and yeah, that that was in the coffee and everything like that. I I haven't been. I actually haven't been to a starbucks myself in about two years that's interesting, we've got like it's very funny. Dan: But the in winter haven there's a independent you know cafe called haven cafe and they have won three out of five years the, the international competition in in Melbourne. Uh. Dean: Australia. Yeah see, that's good, that's fantastic yeah yeah yeah and Starbucks can't get back to Starbucks. Can't get back to that. You know that they're too big right, yeah, we just in winter. Dan: I haven't been yet because I've been up here, but it just opened a new Dutch Brothers coffee, which you know has been they've been more West Coast oriented, but making quite a stir. Dean: West Coast. That's where the riots are right. The riots are in the United. Dan: States. Dean: Oh man, holy cow, riot copy, riot copy. Dan: Yeah, exactly, I mean that's yeah. I can't imagine, you know, being in Los Angeles right now. That's just yeah unbelievable. Dean: Yeah, I think they're keeping it out of Santa Monica. That's all I really care about. Dan: Nothing at shutters right. Dean: Yeah, I mean Ocean Avenue and that. Have that tightly policed and keep them out of there. Dan: Yeah, exactly, it's amazing To protect the business. Yeah, I'm very interested in this whole, you know seeing, just looking back historically to see where the you know directionally what's going to happen with AI as it progresses here. Dean: Yeah, you know like learning from the platforms it's just constant discovery. I mean, you know like learning from that, it's just constant discovery. Dan: I mean uh, you know yeah yeah, I mean it's um. Dean: I had a podcast with mike kanix on tuesday and 60 days ago I thought it was going in this direction. Dan: He says now it's totally changed it and I said, well, that's probably going to be true 60 days from now yeah, I guess that's true, right, layer after layer, because we won't even know what it's going to, uh, what it's going to do. Yeah, I do just look at these uh things, though, you know, like the enabling everything, I'm really thinking more. I was telling you yesterday I was working on an email about the what if the robots really do take over? And just because everybody kind of says that with either fear or excitement, you know, and I think if you take it from. Dean: Well, what does take over mean? I mean, what does the word take over? Dan: mean, well, that's the thing, that's the word, right. That's what I mean is that people have that fear that they're going to lose control, but I think I look at it from that you get to give up control or to give control to the robot. You don't have to do anything. You know, I was thinking with with breakfast, with Chad Jenkins this morning, and we had, you and I had that delicious steak yesterday, we had one this morning and you know just thinking. You know, imagine that your house has a robot that is trained in all of the culinary, you know the very best culinary minds and you can order up anything you want prepared, exactly how it's prepared, you know, right there at your house, brought right to you by a robot. That's not, I mean, that's definitely in the realm of, of realistic here. You know, in the next, certainly, if we, if we take depending on how far a window out you take, right, like I think that things are moving so fast that that's, I think, 2030, you know, five years we're going to have a, even if just thinking about the trajectory that we've had right now yeah, my belief is that it's going to be um 90 of. Dean: It is going to be backstage and not front stage. That's going to be backstage yes, and that's got. You know I use the. Remember when google brought out their glasses, yeah, and they said this is the great breakthrough. You know all new technology does. And immediately all the bars and restaurants in San Francisco barred Google glasses. Dan: Okay, why? Dean: Well, because you can take pictures with them. Oh, I see, okay, and say you're not coming in here with those glasses and taking pictures of people who are having private meetings and private conversations. So yesterday after lunch I had some time to wander around. I wandered over to the new Hyatt. You know they completely remodeled the Hyatt. Dan: Yeah, how is? Dean: that it's very, very nice. It's 10 times better than the Four Seasons. First of all, they've got this big, massive restaurant the moment you walk into the lobby. I mean it probably has 100 seats in the restaurant. Dan: Like our kind of seats yeah. Dean: Yeah, I mean it's nice. I mean you might not like it, but you know you know, you walk into the Four Seasons and it's the most impersonal possible architecture and interior design. This is really nice. And so I just went over there and I, you know, and I just got on the internet and I was, you know, I was creating a new tool, I was actually creating a new tool and but I was thinking that AI is now part of reality. Dan: Yes. Dean: But reality is not part of AI. Dan: Say more about that. Dean: Well, it's not reality, it's artificial, oh it's artificial. Dan: It's artificial. Oh, exactly it's artificial. Dean: I mean, if you look up the definition of artificial, half of it means fake. Dan: Yes, exactly. Dean: Yeah, so part of our reality now is that there's a thing called AI, but AI is in a thing called reality, but reality is not in a thing called AI. Dan: Right. Dean: In other words, ai is continually taking pieces of reality and automating it and everything like that, and humans at the same time are creating more reality. That is not AI. Dan: AI, yeah, and that's I wonder. You know, this is kind of the thing where it's really the lines between. I'd be very interested to see, dan, in terms of the economy, like and I'll call that like a average you know family budget how much of it is spent on reality versus, you know, digital. You know mainland versus cloudlandia. Physical goods, food you know we talked about the different, you know the pillars of spending, mm-hmm and much of it you know on housing, transportation, food, health, kids. You know money and me, all of those things. Much of it is consumed in a. You know we're all everybody's competing outside of. You know, for everybody puts all this emphasis on Cloudlandia and I wonder you know what, how much of that is really? It's digital enabled. I don't know if you know. I just I don't know that. I told you yesterday. Dean: Yeah, but here, how much of it? The better question is. I mean to get a handle on this. How much of it is electricity enabled? Dan: Oh for sure, All of it. Dean: Most of it Well, not all of it, but most of it. I mean conversation, you know when you're sitting in a room with someone is I mean it's electronically enabled in the sense you like. Have it the temperature good and the lighting good and everything like that, but that's not the important thing. You would do it. Great conversations were happening before there was electricity, so yes, you know and any anything, but I think that most humans don't want to think about it. My, my sense is, you know, I don't want to have conversations about technology, except it's with someone like yourself or anything like that, but I don't spend most of my day talking about technology or electricity. The conversation we had last year about AI the conversation we're having about AI isn't much different than the conversation we're going to have about AI 10 years from now Did you? see this Next year. You're going to say did you see this new thing? And I said we were having a conversation like this 10 years ago. Yeah, yeah, that's absolutely true, I don't think it's going to change humanity at all. Dan: Yeah, I'm just going through like I'm looking at something you just said. We don't want to think about these things. Girding of that is our desire for convenience, progressively, you know, conserving energy, right. So it's that we've evolved to a point where we don't have to think about those things, like if we just take the, if we take the house or housing, shelter is is the core thing. That that has done. And our desire, you know, thousands of years ago, for shelter, even hundreds of years ago, was that it was, you know, safe and that it was gave did the job of shelter. But then, you know, when, electricity and plumbing and Wi-Fi and entertainment streaming and comfortable furniture and all these things, this progression, this ratcheting of elevations, were never. I think that's really interesting. We're never really satisfied. We're constantly have an appetite for progressing. Very few things do we ever reach a point where we say, oh, that's good enough, this is great. Like outhouses, you know, we're not as good as indoor plumbing and having, you know, having electricity is much nicer than having to chop wood and carry water. Dean: Yeah, well, I think the big thing is that efficiency and convenience and comfort, once you have them, no longer have any meaning. Dan: Right. But the ratchet is, once we've reached one level, we're ratcheted in at that level of acceptance. Dean: I mean possibly I don't know. I mean I don't know how you would measure this in relationship to everybody's after this. First of all, I don't know how you measure everybody and the big thing. I mean there are certain people who are keenly interested in this. It's more of an intellectual pleasure than it is actually. See that technology is of intellectual interest. You me, you know, you myself and everything else will be interested in talking about this, but I'm going home for a family reunion next weekend in Ohio. I bet in the four or five hours we're together none of us talks about this because it's of no intellectual interest to anyone else. Ok, so you know but it is for us. It's a, you know, and so I was reading. I'm reading a is the observation of the interest and behavior of a very small portion of the population who have freedom and money and that. And the era is defined by the interest of this very, very small portion, the rest of the people probably they're not doing things that would characterize the era. They're doing things that may have lasted for hundreds but it doesn't. It's not interesting to study, it's not interesting to write about, and you know, I mean we look at movies and we say, well, that's like America. No, that's like actors and producers and directors saying this is how we're going to describe America, but that's not how America actually lives. Dan: Yeah, that's interesting, right, movies are kind of holding up a mirror to the zeitgeist, in a way, right. Dean: Like Strategic Coast, is not a description of how the entrepreneurial world operates no, you know the yeah. Dan: The interesting thing thinking about your thinking is is transferable across all. You know it's a durable context. That's kind of the way. That's what I look about. That's what I love about the eight prophet activators. The breakthrough DNA model is very it's a durable context. It's timeless. Dean: Yes, I mean if the Romans had the eight prophet activators, and they did, but they just didn't know they did. Dan: Right. Dean: Yeah, and you go forward to the Star Wars cafe and probably the ones who are buying drinks for the whole house are the ones who know the eight prophet activators. Dan: Secretly, secretly, secretly. Who's that? Dean: weird. Who's that weird looking guy? I don't know if it's a guy. Who is it who you know? Well, I don't know, but buy him a drink oh my goodness, yeah, I'm. Dan: I think this thing that is convenience. We certainly want things to get easier. I mean, when you look at, I'm just looking down no, we want some things to get easier. What things do we not want to get easier? Dean: The things that are handled. We don't want to get easier. Dan: Oh right exactly. Dean: Yeah, for example, if there was a home robot, we would never buy one, because we've got things handled. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah, I have no interest in having a home robot. I have no interest in having a home shop for a cook. I have no interest in everything because it's already handled and it's not worth the thinking it would take to introduce that into my, into our life I mean yeah, and it right like that. So it's. Dan: There are certain things that we'd like to get easier okay, and we're and we're focused on that yeah, yeah, I think about that, like that's I was thinking, you know, in terms of you know the access we have through Cloudlandia is I can get anything that is from any restaurant you know delivered to my house in 22 minutes. You know, that's from the moment I have the thought, I just push the button and so, yeah, I don't have. There's no, no thinking about that. We were talking about being here in the. You know the seamlessness of you know being here at the Hazleton and of you know I love this, uh, environment, I love being right here in this footprint and the fact that you know the hotel allows you to just like, come, I can walk right in step, you know, get all the function of the shelter and the food and being in this environment without any of the concern of it, right? No yeah, no maintenance. No, I never think about it when I leave. Yeah, it's handled. Think about that compared to when I had a house here, you know you have so much. Yeah, that's the thing, that's a good word handled. We just want things handled. You know Our desires. We want our desires handled and our desires are not really. I think our basic desires don't really. Maybe they evolve, it's just the novelty of the things, but the actual verbs of what we're doing are not really. I think you look at, if we look at the health category, you know where you are a you know you are at the apex level of consumer of health and longevity. Consumer of health and longevity. You know all the offerings that are available in terms of you know, from the physio that you're doing to the stem cells, to the work with David Hasse, all of those things. You are certainly at the leading edge and it shows you're nationally ranked, internationally ranked, as aging backwards. Dean: I'm on the chart. You're on the chart exactly, but I got on the chart without knowing it. It's just a function of one of the tests that I take. Somebody created sort of a ranking out of this and I was on it. It's just part of something that I do every quarter that shows up on some sort of chart. They ask you whether you want to be listed or not, and I thought it was good for um, because your doctor is listed on it too, and I. I did it mostly because david hoss he gets credit for it, you know he does it for yeah you know, it's good. It's good for his advertising and you know his marketing and I mean it's just good for. It's just good for his advertising and you know his marketing, I mean it's just good for his satisfaction and everything like that. But you know that's a really good thing because you know I created that. It was like two years I created a workshop called well, it's a lifetime extender, and then I changed it to age reversal future, because not a really interesting term, because it's in the future somewhere. Right but age reversal you can actually see right now it's a more meaningful comparison number and I had hundreds of people. I had hundreds of people on that and to my knowledge nobody's done anything that we talked about which kind of proves to you, unless it's a keen interest you can have the information and you can have the knowledge. But if it isn't actually something of central motivational interest to you, the knowledge and the information just passes by. The knowledge and the information just passes. Dan: Yeah, and I think it goes. If you have to disrupt your established habits, what do you always say? We don't want any habits except for the ones that we have already established. Right, except for the ones that are existing. Dean: Reinforce them, yeah, reinforce them and anyway, today I'm going to have to cut off early because I have, and so in about two minutes I'm going to have to jump, but I'm seeing you tomorrow and I'm seeing you the next day. It's a banner week. It's four days in a row. We'll be in contact, so, anyway, you know what we're doing in context, so anyway you know what we're doing. We're really developing, you know, psychological, philosophical, conceptual structures here. How do you think about this stuff? That's what I think about it a lot. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's always pleasurable. Dan: Always, Dan, I will. I'll see you tomorrow At the party. That's right. Have an amazing day and I'll see you tomorrow night okay, thanks, bye.

"…nothing has to be true for ever. Just for long enough, to tell you the truth."The printing press flies into the city striking William de Worde with the inspiration for The Ankh-Morpork Times. PJ and Andy comment on the editorial team's confrontations with classic rogue archetypes Pin and Tulip, on Sam Vimes, and everything from Gutenberg to Watergate.00:00:00 Intro & Overview00:16:06 Part 100:47:12 Part 201:04:58 Part 301:23:26 Part 401:45:55 Bright Spots & QuotesListenings: https://pod.link/1645420990Watchings: https://youtube.com/@DiscworldGNUBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/discworldgnu.bsky.socialFacebook: https://facebook.com/discworldgnuAndy's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/andylukeI've Never Read Discworld is written, hosted and produced by PJ Hart and Andrew Luke.*Our other Bigjobs*VIDEOSCountry Rogues: comedy short film https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0022d39/comedy-shorts-series-1-2-country-roguesHelp - 360 VR Short Film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41T4Si5fPJsDoctor Who Dumpster Flower, Press Gang Readers Commentaries etc. https://www.youtube.com/@AndrewLukeAUDIOThe Divil's Own: folklore pod doc https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001yhg4BOOKSCoastlines After Dark https://books2read.com/coastlinesafterdarkAnother Time https://books2read.com/anothertime

El ecosistema de WordPress cambió radicalmente con la llegada del editor de bloques, en su momento conocido como Gutenberg. Lo que comenzó como una nueva forma de editar contenido se ha convertido en una arquitectura completa que permite diseñar sitios enteros con bloques reutilizables, plantillas y patrones. Para quienes trabajamos (en alguna de sus formas) […] El episodio Episodio 312: El editor de WordPress y sus bloques, con Paulo Carvajal es un podcast de Un billete a Chattanooga.

There are a lot of gamechanging inventions that shifted the trajectory of the Middle Ages, but one machine managed to hit at just the right time and place to create a massive enterprise in medieval Europe, with consequences that touched the entire globe: Gutenberg's printing press. This week, Danièle speaks with Eric White about Johannes Gutenberg's life, his early entrepreneurship, and the invention that changed the world.Support this podcast on Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/medievalists

Gaz Liddiard from Tropical Fuck Storm is here to discuss Fairyland Codex, running into kangaroos and routinely having one of the world's most poisonous snakes show up in your house, the Gutenberg printing press, the internet, and extremist ideologies, Kurt Cobain and cultural conformity vs. galvanization and shared experiences, his musical trajectory from Australia to London, a long tour including a Calgary stop for Sled Island, writing new music, other future plans, and much more.EVERY OTHER COMPLETE KREATIVE KONTROL EPISODE IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE TO MONTHLY $6 USD PATREON SUPPORTERS. Enjoy this excerpt and please subscribe now via this link to hear this full episode. Thanks!Thanks to Blackbyrd Myoozik, the Bookshelf, Planet Bean Coffee, and Grandad's Donuts. Support Y.E.S.S., Pride Centre of Edmonton, and Letters Charity. Follow vish online. Support vish on Patreon!Related episodes/links:Ep. #975: DeerhoofEp. #913: QuiversEp. #866: Jim White and Marisa AndersonEp. #849: Jim White and Guy PicciottoEp. #812: Michael Azerrad on ‘The Amplified Come As You Are – The Story of Nirvana'Ep. #720: OFF!Ep. #609: Gang of FourEp. #323: Nick Cave and Warren EllisEp. #170: Andy Gill of Gang of FourSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/kreative-kontrol. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Mi entrevistado en este episodio es Carlos A. Scolari, Catedrático del Departamento de Comunicación de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra – Barcelona. Ha sido Investigador Principal de diversos proyectos de investigación internacionales y estatales, desde el proyecto H2020 TRANSLITERACY (entre 2015 y 2018) hasta el proyecto LITERAC_IA, que comenzó en 2024 y dirige junto a María del Mar Guerrero. Sus últimos libros son Cultura Snack (2020), La guerra de las plataformas (2022) y Sobre la evolución de los medios (2024). Ahora está trabajando en un libro sobre los fósiles mediáticos.Notas del Episodio* Historia de ecologia de los medios* Historia de Carlos* Diferencias entre el anglosfero y el hispanosfero* La coevolucion entre tecnologia y humanos* La democratizacion de los medios* Evolucion de los medios* Alienacion y addiccion* Como usar los medios conscientementeTareaCarlos A. Scolari - Pagina Personal - Facebook - Instagram - Twitter - Escolar GoogleSobre la evolución de los mediosHipermediaciones (Libros)Transcrito en espanol (English Below)Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido al podcast el fin de turismo Carlos. Gracias por poder hablar conmigo hoy. Es un gran gusto tener tu presencia aquí conmigo hoy. Carlos: No gracias a ti, Chris, por la invitación. Es un enorme placer honor charlar contigo, gran viajero y bueno, yo nunca investigué directamente el tema del turismo.Pero bueno, entiendo que vamos a hablar de ecología de los medios y temas colaterales que nos pueden servir para entender mejor, darle un sentido a todo esto que está pasando en el mundo del turismo. Bueno, yo trabajo en Barcelona. No vivo exactamente en la ciudad, pero trabajo, en la universidad en Barcelona, en la zona céntrica.Y bueno, cada vez que voy a la ciudad cada día se incrementa la cantidad de turistas y se incrementa el debate sobre el turismo, en todas sus dimensiones. Así que es un tema que está la orden del día, no? Chris: Sí, pues me imagino que aunque si no te gusta pensar o si no quieres pensar en el turismo allá, es inevitable tener como una enseñanza [00:01:00] personal de esa industria.Carlos: Sí, hasta que se está convirtiendo casi en un criterio taxonómico, no? ...de clasificación o ciudades con mucho turista ciudades o lugares sin turistas que son los más buscados hasta que se llenan de turistas. Entonces estamos en un círculo vicioso prácticamente. Chris: Ya pues, que en algún memento se que se cambia, se rompe el ciclo, al menos para dar cuenta de lo que estamos haciendo con el comportamiento.Y, yo entiendo que eso también tiene mucho que ver con la ecología de los medios, la falta de capacidad de entender nuestros comportamientos, actitudes, pensamientos, sentimientos, etcétera. Entonces, antes de seguir por tu trabajo y obras, este me gustaría preguntarte de tu camino y de tu vida.Primero me pregunto si podrías definir para nuestros oyentes qué es la ecología de los medios y cómo te [00:02:00] interesó en este campo? Cómo llegaste a dedicar a tu vida a este estudio?Carlos: Sí. A ver un poco. Hay una, esta la historia oficial. Diríamos de la ecología de los medios o en inglés "media ecology," es una campo de investigación, digamos, eh, que nace en los años 60. Hay que tener en cuenta sobre todos los trabajos de Marshall McLuhan, investigador canadiense muy famoso a nivel mundial. Era quizá el filósofo investigador de los medios más famosos en los años 60 y 70.Y un colega de el, Neil Postman, que estaba en la universidad de New York en New York University un poco, digamos entre la gente que rodeaba estos dos referentes, no, en los años 60, de ahí se fue cocinando, diríamos, lo que después se llamó la media ecology. Se dice que el primero que habló de media ecology que aplicó esta metáfora a los medios, fue el mismo Marshall McLuhan en algunas, conversaciones privadas, [00:03:00] cartas que se enviaban finales dos años 50, a principios de los 60, se enviaban los investigadores investigadora de estos temas?Digamos la primera aparición pública del concepto de media ecology fue una conferencia en el año 1968 de Neil Postman. Era una intervención pública que la hablaba de un poco como los medios nos transforman y transforman los medios formar un entorno de nosotros crecemos, nos desarrollamos, no. Y nosotros no somos muy conscientes a veces de ese medio que nos rodea y nos modela.El utilizó por primera vez el concepto de media ecology en una conferencia pública. Y ya, si vamos a principio de los años 70, el mismo Postman crea en NYU, en New York University crea el primer programa en media ecology. O sea que ya en el 73, 74 y 75, empieza a salir lo que yo llamo la segunda generación, de gente [00:04:00] formada algunos en estos cursos de New York.Por ejemplo Christine Nystrom fue la primera tesis doctoral sobre mi ecology; gente como, Paul Levinson que en el año 1979 defiende una tesis doctoral dirigida por Postman sobre evolución de los medios, no? Y lo mismo pasaba en Toronto en los años 70. El Marshall McLuhan falleció en el diciembre del 80.Digamos que los años 70 fueron su última década de producción intelectual. Y hay una serie de colaboradores en ese memento, gente muy joven como Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, que después un poco siguieron trabajando un poco todo esta línea, este enfoque. Y ahí hablamos del frente canadiense, eh?Toda esta segunda generación fue desarrollando, fue ampliando aplicando. No nos olvidemos de Eric McLuhan, el hijo de Marshall, que también fue parte de toda esta movida. [00:05:00] Y si no recuerdo mal en el año 2000, se crea la asociación la Media Ecology Association, que es la Asociación de Ecología de los Medios, que es una organización académica, científica, que nuclea a la gente que se ocupa de media ecology. Si pensamos a nivel más científico epistemológico, podemos pensar esta metáfora de la ecología de los medios desde dos o tres perspectivas. Por un lado, esta idea de que los medios crean ambientes. Esta es una idea muy fuerte de Marsha McLuhan, de Postman y de todo este grupo, no? Los medios - "medio" entendido en sentido muy amplio, no, cualquier tecnología podría ser un medio para ellos.Para Marsha McLuhan, la rueda es un medio. Un un telescopio es un medio. Una radio es un medio y la televisión es un medio, no? O sea, cualquier tecnología puede considerarse un medio. Digamos que estos medios, estas tecnologías, generan un [00:06:00] ambiente que a nosotros nos transforma. Transforma nuestra forma, a veces de pensar nuestra forma de percibir el mundo, nuestra concepción del tiempo del espacio.Y nosotros no somos conscientes de ese cambio. Pensemos que, no sé, antes de 1800, si alguien tenía que hacer un viaje de mil kilómetros (y acá nos acercamos al turismo) kilómetros era un viaje que había que programarlo muchos meses antes. Con la llegada del tren, ya estamos en 1800, esos kilómetros se acortaron. Digamos no? Ahí vemos como si a nosotros hoy nos dicen 1000 kilómetros.Bueno, si, tomamos un avión. Es una hora, una hora y cuarto de viaje. Hoy 1000 kilómetro es mucho menos que hace 200 años y incluso a nivel temporal, se a checo el tiempo. No? Todo eso es consecuencia, digamos este cambio, nuestra percepción es consecuencia de una serie de medios y tecnologías.El ferrocarril. Obviamente, hoy tenemos los aviones. Las mismas redes digitales que, un poco nos han llevado esta idea de "tiempo [00:07:00] real," esta ansiedad de querer todo rápido, no? También esa es consecuencia de estos cambios ambientales generados por los medios y las tecnologías, eh? Esto es un idea muy fuerte, cuando McLuhan y Postman hablaban de esto en los años 60, eran fuertes intuiciones que ellos tenían a partir de una observación muy inteligente de la realidad. Hoy, las ciencias cognitivas, mejor las neurociencia han confirmado estas hipótesis. O sea, hoy existen una serie de eh metodología para estudiar el cerebro y ya se ve como las tecnologías.Los medios afectan incluso la estructura física del cerebro. No? Otro tema que esto es histórico, que los medios afectan nuestra memoria. Esto viene de Platón de hace 2500 años, que él decía que la escritura iba a matar la memoria de los hombres. Bueno, podemos pensar nosotros mismos, no, eh?O por lo menos esta generación, que [00:08:00] vivimos el mundo antes y después de las aplicaciones móviles. Yo hace 30 años, 25 años, tenía mi memoria 30-40 números telefónicos. Hoy no tengo ninguno. Y en esa pensemos también el GPS, no? En una época, los taxistas de Londres, que es una ciudad latica se conocían a memoria la ciudad. Y hoy eso, ya no hace falta porque tienen GPS.Y cuando han ido a estudiar el cerebro de los taxistas de Londres, han visto que ciertas áreas del cerebro se han reducido, digamos, así, que son las áreas que gestionaban la parte espacial. Esto ya McLuhan, lo hablaba en los años 60. Decía como que los cambios narcotizan ciertas áreas de la mente decía él.Pero bueno, vemos que mucha investigación empírica, bien de vanguardia científica de neurociencia está confirmando todas estos pensamientos, todas estas cosas que se decían a los años 60 en adelante, por la media ecology. Otra posibilidad es entender [00:09:00] esto como un ecosistema de medios, Marshall McLuhan siempre decía no le podemos dar significado,no podemos entender un medio aislado de los otros medios. Como que los medios adquieren sentido sólo en relación con otros medios. También Neil Postman y mucha otra gente de la escuela de la media ecology, defiende esta posición, de que, bueno, los medios no podemos entender la historia del cine si no la vinculamos a los videojuegos, si no lo vinculamos a la aparición de la televisión.Y así con todos los medios, no? Eh? Hay trabajos muy interesantes. Por ejemplo, de como en el siglo 19, diferentes medios, podríamos decir, que coevolucionaron entre sí. La prensa, el telégrafo. El tren, que transportaba los diarios también, aparecen las agencias de noticias. O sea, vemos cómo es muy difícil entender el desarrollo de la prensa en el siglo XIX y no lo vinculamos al teléfono, si no lo vinculamos a la fotografía, si no lo vinculamos a la radio fotografía, [00:10:00] también más adelante.O sea, esta idea es muy fuerte. No también es otro de los principios para mí fundamentales de esta visión, que sería que los medios no están solos, forman parte de un ecosistema y si nosotros queremos entender lo que está pasando y cómo funciona todo esto, no podemos, eh, analizar los medios aislados del resto.Hay una tercera interpretación. Ya no sé si es muy metafórica. No? Sobre todo, gente en Italia como el investigador Fausto Colombo de Milán o Michele Cometa, es un investigador de Sicilia, Michele Cometa que él habla de l giro, el giro ecomedial. Estos investigadores están moviéndose en toda una concepción según la cual, estamos en único ecosistema mediático que está contaminado.Está contaminado de "fake news" está contaminado de noticias falsas, está contaminado de discursos de odio, etcétera, etc. Entonces ellos, digamos, retoman esta metáfora ecológica para decir [00:11:00] precisamente tenemos que limpiar este ecosistema así como el ecosistema natural está contaminado, necesita una intervención de limpieza, digamos así de purificación, eh? También el ecosistema mediático corre el mismo peligro, no? Y esta gente también llama la atención, y yo estoy muy cerca de esta línea de trabajo sobre la dimensión material de la comunicación. Y esto también tiene que ver con el turismo, queriendo, no? El impacto ambiental que tiene la comunicación hoy.Entrenar una inteligencia artificial implica un consumo eléctrico brutal; mantener funcionando las redes sociales, eh, tiktok, youtube, lo que sea, implica millones de servidores funcionando que chupan energía eléctrica y hay que enfriarlos además, consumiendo aún más energía eléctrica. Y eso tiene un impacto climático no indiferente.Así que, bueno, digamos, vemos que está metáfora de lo ecológico, aplicado los medios da para dos o tres interpretaciones. Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. Siento que cuando yo empecé tomando ese curso de de Andrew McLuhan, el nieto de Marshall, como te mencioné, cambio mi perspectiva totalmente - en el mundo, en la manera como entiendo y como no entiendo también las nuestras tecnologías, mis movimientos, etcétera, pero ya, por una persona que tiene décadas de estudiando eso, me gustaría saber de de como empezaste. O sea, Andrew, por ejemplo tiene la excusa de su linaje, no de su papá y su abuelo.Pero entonces, como un argentino joven empezó aprendiendo de ecología de medios. Carlos: Bueno, yo te comento. Yo estudié comunicación en argentina en Rosario. Terminé la facultad. El último examen el 24 de junio del 86, que fue el día que nacía el Lionel Messi en Rosario, en Argentina el mismo día. Y [00:13:00] yo trabajaba, colaboraba en una asignatura en una materia que era teorías de la comunicación.E incluso llegué a enseñar hasta el año 90, fueron tres años, porque ya después me fui vivir Italia. En esa época, nosotros leíamos a Marshall McLuhan, pero era una lectura muy sesgada ideológicamente. En América latina, tú lo habrás visto en México. Hay toda una historia, una tradición de críticas de los medios, sobre todo, a todo lo que viene de estados unidos y Canadá está muy cerca de Estados Unidos. Entonces, digamos que en los años 70 y 80 y y hasta hoy te diría muchas veces a Marshall McLuhan se lo criticó mucho porque no criticaba los medios. O sea el te tenía una visión. Él decía, Neil Postman, si tenía una visión muy crítica. Pero en ese caso, este era una de las grandes diferencias entre Postman y McLuhan, que Marshall McLuhan, al menos en [00:14:00] público, él no criticaba los medios. Decía bueno, yo soy un investigador, yo envío sondas. Estoy explorando lo que pasa. Y él nunca se sumó... Y yo creo que eso fue muy inteligente por parte de él... nunca se sumó a este coro mundial de crítica a los medios de comunicación. En esa época, la televisión para mucha gente era un monstruo.Los niños no tenían que ver televisión. Un poco lo que pasa hoy con los móviles y lo que pasa hoy con tiktok. En esa época en la televisión, el monstruo. Entonces, había mucha investigación en Estados Unidos, que ya partía de la base que la televisión y los medios son malos para la gente. Vemos que es una historia que se repite. Yo creo que en ese sentido, Marshall McLuhan, de manera muy inteligente, no se sumó ese coro crítico y él se dedico realmente a pensar los medios desde una perspectiva mucho más libre, no anclada por esta visión yo creo demasiado ideologizada, que en América Latina es muy fuerte. Es muy fuerte. Esto no implica [00:15:00] bajar la guardia, no ser crítico. Al contrario.Pero yo creo que el el verdadero pensamiento crítico parte de no decir tanto ideológica, decimos "esto ya es malo. Vamos a ver esto." Habrá cosas buenas. Habrá cosas mala. Habrá cosa, lo que es innegable, que los medios mas ya que digamos son buenos son va, nos transforman. Y yo creo que eso fue lo importante de la idea McLuhaniana. Entonces mi primer acercamiento a McLuhan fue una perspectiva de los autores críticos que, bueno, sí, viene de Estados Unidos, no critica los medios. Vamos a criticarlo a nosotros a él, no? Y ese fue mi primer acercamiento a Marshall McLuhan. Yo me fui a Italia en la decada de 90. Estuve casi ocho años fuera de la universidad, trabajando en medios digitales, desarrollo de páginas, webs, productos multimédia y pretexto. Y a finales de los 90, dije quiero volver a la universidad. Quiero ser un doctorado. Y dije, "quiero hacer un doctorado. Bueno. Estando en Italia, el doctorado iba a ser de semiótica." Entonces hizo un [00:16:00] doctorado. Mi tesis fue sobre semiótica de las interfaces.Ahi tuve una visión de las interfaces digitales que consideran que, por ejemplo, los instrumentos como el mouse o joystick son extensiones de nuestro cuerpo, no? El mouse prolonga la mano y la mete dentro de la pantalla, no? O el joystick o cualquier otro elemento de la interfaz digital? Claro. Si hablamos de que el mouse es una extensión de la mano, eso es una idea McLuhaniana.Los medios como extensiones del ser humano de sujeto. Entonces, claro ahi yo releo McLuhan en italiano a finales de los años 90, y me reconcilio con McLuhan porque encuentro muchas cosas interesantes para entender precisamente la interacción con las máquinas digitales. En el a 2002, me mudo con mi familia a España. Me reintegro la vida universitaria. [00:17:00] Y ahí me pongo a estudiar la relación entre los viejos y los nuevos medios. Entonces recupero la idea de ecosistema. Recupero toda la nueva, la idea de ecología de mi ecology. Y me pongo a investigar y releer a McLuhan por tercera vez. Y a leerlo en profundidad a él y a toda la escuela de mi ecology para poder entender las dinámicas del actual ecosistema mediático y entender la emergencia de lo nuevo y cómo lo viejo lucha por adaptarse. En el 2009, estuve tres meses trabajando con Bob Logan en the University of Toronto. El año pasado, estuve en el congreso ahí y tuvimos dos pre conferencias con gente con Paolo Granata y todo el grupo de Toronto.O sea que, tengo una relación muy fuerte con todo lo que se producía y se produce en Toronto. Y bueno, yo creo que, a mí hoy, la media ecology, me sirve muchísimo junto a otras disciplina como la semiótica para poder entender el ecosistema [00:18:00] mediático actual y el gran tema de investigación mío hoy, que es la evolución del la ecosistema mediático.Mm, digamos que dentro de la media ecology, empezando de esa tesis doctoral del 79 de Paul Levinson, hay toda una serie de contribuciones, que un poco son los que han ido derivando en mi último libro que salió el año pasado en inglés en Routledge, que se llama The Evolution of Media y acaba de salir en castellano.Qué se llama Sobre La Evolución De los Medios. En la teoría evolutiva de los medios, hay mucha ecología de los medios metidos. Chris: Claro, claro. Pues felicidad es Carlos. Y vamos a volver en un ratito de ese tema de la evolución de medios, porque yo creo que es muy importante y obviamente es muy importante a ti. Ha sido como algo muy importante en tu trabajo. Pero antes de de salir de esa esquina de pensamiento, hubo una pregunta que me mandó Andrew McLuhan para ti, que ya ella contestaste un poco, pero este tiene que ver entre las diferencias en los [00:19:00] mundos de ecología de medios anglofonos y hispánicos. Y ya mencionaste un poco de eso, pero desde los tiempos en los 80 y noventas, entonces me gustaría saber si esas diferencias siguen entre los mundos intelectuales, en el mundo anglofono o hispánico.Y pues, para extender su pregunta un poco, qué piensas sería como un punto o tema o aspecto más importante de lo que uno de esos mundos tiene que aprender el otro en el significa de lo que falta, quizás. Carlos: Si nos focalizamos en el trabajo de Marshall McLuhan, no es que se lo criticó sólo de América Latina.En Europa no caía simpático Marshall McLuhan en los 60, 70. Justamente por lo mismo, porque no criticaba el sistema capitalista de medios. La tradición europea, la tradición de la Escuela de Frankfurt, la escuela de una visión anti [00:20:00] capitalista que denuncia la ideología dominante en los medio de comunicación.Eso es lo que entra en América Latina y ahí rebota con mucha fuerza. Quizá la figura principal que habla desde América Latina, que habló mucho tiempo de América latina es Armand Mattelart. Matterlart es un teórico en la comunicación, investigador de Bélgica. Y él lo encontramos ya a mediados de los años 60 finales de los 60 en Chile en un memento muy particular de la historia de Chile donde había mucha politización y mucha investigación crítica, obviamente con el con con con con el capitalismo y con el imperialismo estadounidense. Quizá la la obra clásica de ese memento es el famoso libro de Mattelart y Dorfman, eh, eh? Para Leer El Pato Donald, que donde ellos desmontan toda la estructura ideológica capitalista, imperialista, que había en los cics en las historietas del pato Donald.Ellos dicen esto se publicó a [00:21:00] principio los 70. Es quizá el libro más vendido de la comic latinoamericana hasta el día de hoy, eh? Ellos dicen hay ideología en la literatura infantil. Con el pato Donald, le están llenando la cabeza a nuestros niños de toda una visión del mundo muy particular.Si uno le el pato Donald de esa época, por lo menos, la mayor parte de las historia del pato Donald, que era, había que a buscar un tesoro y adónde. Eran lugares africana, peruviana, incaica o sea, eran países del tercer mundo. Y ahí el pato Donald, con sus sobrinos, eran lo suficientemente inteligentes para volverse con el oro a Patolandia.Claro. Ideológicamente. Eso no se sostiene. Entonces, la investigación hegemónica en esa época en Europa, en Francia, la semiología pero sobre todo, en América latina, era ésa. Hay que estudiar el mensaje. Hay que estudiar el contenido, porque ahí está la ideología [00:22:00] dominante del capitalismo y del imperialismo.En ese contexto, entra McLuhan. Se traduce McLuhan y que dice McLuhan: el medio es el mensaje. No importa lo que uno lee, lo que nos transforma es ver televisión, leer comics, escuchar la radio. Claro, iba contramano del mainstream de la investigación en comunicación. O sea, digamos que en América latina, la gente que sigue en esa línea que todavía existe y es fuerte, no es una visión muy crítica de todo esto, todavía hoy, a Marshal McLuhan le cae mal, pero lo mismo pasa en Europa y otros países donde la gente que busca una lectura crítica anti-capitalista y anti-sistémica de la comunicación, no la va a encontrar nunca en Marshall McLuhan, por más que sea de América latina, de de de Europa o de Asia. Entonces yo no radicaría todo esto en un ámbito anglosajón y el latinoamericano. Después, bueno, la hora de McLuhan es bastante [00:23:00] polisemica. Admite como cualquier autor así, que tiene un estilo incluso de escritura tan creativo en forma de mosaico.No era un escritor Cartesiano ordenadito y formal. No, no. McLuhan era una explosión de ideas muy bien diseñada a propósito, pero era una explosión de ideas. Por eso siempre refrescan tener a McLuhan. Entonces normal que surjan interpretaciones diferentes, no? En estados unidos en Canadá, en Inglaterra, en Europa continental o en Latinoamérica o en Japón, obviamente, no? Siendo un autor que tiene estas características. Por eso yo no en no anclaría esto en cuestiones territoriales. Cuando uno busca un enfoque que no tenga esta carga ideológica para poder entender los medios, que no se limite sólo a denunciar el contenido.McLuhan y la escuela de la ecología de los medios es fundamental y es un aporte muy, muy importante en ese sentido, no? Entonces, bueno, yo creo que McLuhan tuvo [00:24:00] detractores en Europa, tuvo detractores en América latina y cada tanto aparece alguno, pero yo creo que esto se ido suavizando. Yo quiero que, como que cada vez más se lo reivindica McLuhan.La gente que estudia, por ejemplo, en Europa y en América latina, que quizá en su época criticaron a McLuhan, todas las teorías de la mediatización, por ejemplo, terminan coincidiendo en buena parte de los planteos de la media ecology. Hoy que se habla mucho de la materialidad de la comunicación, los nuevos materialismos, yo incluyo a Marshall McLuhan en uno de los pioneros des esta visión también de los nuevos materialismos. Al descentrar el análisis del contenido, al medio, a la cosa material, podemos considerar a macl también junto a Bruno Latour y otra gente como pionero, un poco de esta visión de no quedarse atrapados en el giro lingüístico, no, en el contenido, en el giro semiótico e incorporar también la dimensión material de la comunicación y el medio en sí.[00:25:00] Chris: Muy bien. Muy bien, ya. Wow, es tanto, pero lo aprecio mucho. Gracias, Carlos. Y me gustaría seguir preguntándote un poco ahora de tu propio trabajo. Tienes un capítulo en tu libro. Las Leyes de la Interfaz titulado "Las Interfaces Co-evolucionan Con Sus Usuarios" donde escribes "estas leyes de la interfaz no desprecian a los artefactos, sus inventores ó las fuerzas sociales. Solo se limitan á insertarlos á una red socio técnica de relaciones, intercambios y transformaciones para poder analizarlos desde una perspectiva eco-evolutiva."Ahora, hay un montón ahí en este paragrafito. Pero entonces, me gustaría preguntarte, cómo vea los humanos [00:26:00] co-evolucionando con sus tecnologías? Por ejemplo, nuestra forma de performatividad en la pantalla se convierte en un hábito más allá de la pantalla.Carlos: Ya desde antes del homo sapiens, los homínidos más avanzados, digamos en su momento, creaban instrumentos de piedra. Hemos descubierto todos los neandertales tenían una cultura muy sofisticada, incluso prácticas casi y religiosas, más allá de la cuestión material de la construcción de artefactos. O sea que nuestra especie es impensable sin la tecnología, ya sea un hacha de piedra o ya sea tiktok o un smartphone. Entonces, esto tenemos que tenerlo en cuenta cuando analizamos cualquier tipo de de interacción cotidiana, estamos rodeados de tecnología y acá, obviamente, la idea McLuhaniana es fundamental. Nosotros creamos estos medios. Nosotros creamos estas tecnologías.Estas tecnologías también nos reformatean. [00:27:00] McLuhan, no me suena que haya usado el concepto de coevolución, pero está ahí. Está hablando de eso. Ahora bien. Hay una coevolución si se quiere a larguísimo plazo, que, por ejemplo, sabemos que el desarrollo de instrumentos de piedra, el desarrollo del fuego, hizo que el homo sapiens no necesitara una mandíbula tan grande para poder masticar los alimentos. Y eso produce todo un cambio, que achicó la mandíbula le dejó más espacio en el cerebro, etcétera, etcétera. Eso es una coevolución en término genético, digamos a larguísimo plazo, okey. También la posición eréctil, etcétera, etcétera. Pero, digamos que ya ahí había tecnologías humanas coevolucionando con estos cambios genéticos muy, muy lentos.Pero ahora tenemos también podemos decir esta co evolución ya a nivel de la estructura neuronal, entonces lo ha verificado la neurociencia, como dije antes. Hay cambio físico en la estructura del cerebro a lo largo de la vida de una persona debido a la interacción con ciertas tecnologías. Y por qué pasa eso?Porque [00:28:00] la producción, creación de nuevos medios, nuevas tecnologías se ido acelerando cada vez más. Ahi podemos hacer una curva exponencial hacia arriba, para algunos esto empezó hace 10,000 años. Para algunos esto se aceleró con la revolución industrial. Algunos hablan de la época el descubrimiento de América.Bueno, para alguno esto es un fenómeno de siglo xx. El hecho es que en términos casi geológicos, esto que hablamos del antropoceno es real y está vinculado al impacto del ser humano sobre nuestro ambiente y lo tecnológico es parte de ese proceso exponencial de co evolución. Nosotros hoy sentimos un agobio frente a esta aceleración de la tecnología y nuestra necesidad. Quizá de adaptarnos y coevolucionar con ella. Como esto de que todo va muy rápido. Cada semana hay un problema nuevo, una aplicación nueva. Ahora tenemos la inteligencia artificial, etc, etcétera. Pero esta sensación [00:29:00] no es nueva. Es una sensación de la modernidad. Si uno lee cosas escritas en 1,800 cuando llega el tren también la gente se quejaba que el mundo iba muy rápido. Dónde iremos a parar con este caballo de hierro que larga humo no? O sea que esta sensación de velocidad de cambio rápido ya generaciones anteriores la vivían. Pero evidentemente, el cambio hoy es mucho más rápido y denso que hace dos siglos. Y eso es real también. Así que, bueno, nuestra fe se va coevolucionando y nos vamos adaptando como podemos, yo esta pregunta se la hice hace 10 años a Kevin Kelly, el primer director de la revista Wire que lo trajimos a Barcelona y el que siempre es muy optimista. Kevin Kelly es determinista tecnológico y optimista al mismo tiempo. Él decía que "que bueno que el homo sapiens lo va llevando bastante bien. Esto de co evolucionar con la tecnología." Otra gente tiene una [00:30:00] visión radicalmente opuesta, que esto es el fin del mundo, que el homo sapiens estamos condenados a desaparecer por esta co evolución acelerada, que las nuevas generaciones son cada vez más estúpidas.Yo no creo eso. Creo, como McLuhan, que los medios nos reforman, nos cambian algunas cosas quizás para vivir otras quizá no tanto, pero no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de esto para nada. Chris: Bien, bien. Entonces cuando mencionaste lo de la televisión, yo me acuerdo mucho de de mi niñez y no sé por qué. Quizás fue algo normal en ese tiempo para ver a tele como un monstruo, como dijiste o quizás porque mis mis papás eran migrantes pero fue mucho de su idea de esa tecnología y siempre me dijo como no, no, no quédate ahí tan cerca y eso.Entonces, aunque lo aceptaron, ellos comprendieron que el poder [00:31:00] de la tele que tenía sobre las personas. Entonces ahora todos, parece a mí, que todos tienen su propio canal, no su propio programación, o el derecho o privilegio de tener su propio canal o múltiples canales.Entonces, es una gran pregunta, pero cuáles crees que son las principales consecuencias de darle a cada uno su propio programa en el sentido de como es el efecto de hacer eso, de democratizar quizás la tecnología en ese sentido? Carlos: Cuando dices su propio canal, te refieres a la posibilidad de emitir o construir tu propia dieta mediática.Chris: Bueno primero, pero puede ser ambos, claro, no? O sea, mi capacidad de tener un perfil o cuenta mía personal. Y luego como el fin del turismo, no? Y luego otro. Carlos: Sí, a ver. Yo creo que, bueno, esto fue el gran cambio radical que empezó a darse a partir la década del 2000 o [00:32:00] sea, hace 25 años. Porque la web al principio sí era una red mundial en los años 90. Pero claro la posibilidad de compartir un contenido y que todo el mundo lo pudiera ver, estaba muy limitado a crear una página web, etcétera. Cuando aparecen las redes sociales o las Web 2.0 como se la llamaba en esa época y eso se suma los dispositivos móviles, ahí se empieza a generar esta cultura tan difundida de la creación de contenido. Hasta digamos que hasta ese momento quien generaba contenido era más o menos un profesional en la radio y en la televisión, pero incluso en la web o en la prensa o el cine. Y a partir de ahí se empieza, digamos, a abrir el juego. En su momento, esto fue muy bien saludado fue qué bueno! Esto va nos va a llevar a una sociedad más democrática. 25 años después, claro, estamos viendo el lado oscuro solamente. Yo creo que el error hace 25 años era pensar solo las posibilidades [00:33:00] buenas, optimistas, de esto. Y hoy me parece que estamos enredados en discursos solamente apocalípticos no?No vemos las cosas buenas, vemos solo las cosas malas. Yo creo que hay de las dos cosas hoy. Claro, hoy cualquier persona puede tener un canal, sí, pero no todo el mundo crea un canal. Los niveles de participación son muy extraños, o sea, la mayor parte de la población de los usuarios y usuarias entre en las redes. Mira. Mete un me gusta. Quizá un comentario. Cada tanto comparte una foto. Digamos que los "heavy users" o "heavy producers" de contenido son siempre una minoría, ya sea profesionales, ya sea influencers, streamers, no? Es siempre, yo no sé si acá estamos en un 20-80 o un 10-90 son estas curvas que siempre fue así? No? Si uno ve la Wikipedia, habrá un 5-10 por ciento de gente que genera contenido mucho menos incluso. Y un 90 por ciento que se [00:34:00] beneficia del trabajo de una minoría. Esto invierte la lógica capitalista? La mayoría vive de la minoría y esto pasaba antes también en otros, en otros sistemas. O sea que en ese sentido, es sólo una minoría de gente la que genera contenido de impacto, llamémoslo así, de alcance mayor.Pero bueno, yo creo que el hecho de que cualquier persona pueda dar ese salto para mí, está bien. Genera otra serie de problemas, no? Porque mientras que genera contenido, es un profesional o un periodista, digamos, todavía queda algo de normas éticas y que deben cumplir no? Yo veo que en el mundo de los streamers, el mundo de los Tik tokers etcétera, etcétera, lo primero que ellos dicen es, nosotros no somos periodistas. Y de esa forma, se inhiben de cualquier, control ético o de respeto a normas éticas profesionales. Por otro lado, las plataformas [00:35:00] Meta, Google, todas. Lo primero que te dicen es nosotros no somos medio de comunicación. Los contenidos los pone la gente.Nosotros no tenemos nada que ver con eso. Claro, ellos también ahí se alejan de toda la reglamentación. Por eso hubo que hacer. Europa y Estados Unidos tuvo que sacar leyes especiales porque ellos decían no, no, las leyes del periodismo a nosotros no nos alcanzan. Nosotros no somos editores de contenidos.Y es una mentira porque las plataformas sí editan contenido a través los algoritmos, porque nos están los algoritmos, nos están diciendo que podemos ver y que no está en primera página. No están filtrando información, o sea que están haciendo edición. Entonces, como que se generan estas equivocaciones.Y eso es uno de los elementos que lleva esta contaminación que mencioné antes en el en los ámbitos de la comunicación. Pero yo, si tuviera que elegir un ecosistema con pocos enunciadores pocos medios controlados por profesionales y este ecosistema [00:36:00] caótico en parte contaminado con muchos actores y muchas voces, yo prefiero el caos de hoy a la pobreza del sistema anterior.Prefiero lidiar, pelearme con y estar buscar de resolver el problema de tener mucha información, al problema de la censura y tener sólo dos, tres puntos donde se genera información. Yo he vivido en Argentina con dictadura militar con control férreo de medios, coroneles de interventores en la radio y la televisión que controlaban todo lo que se decía.Y yo prefiero el caos de hoy, aún con fake news y todo lo que quieras. Prefiero el caos de hoy a esa situación. Chris: Sí, sí, sí, sí. Es muy fuerte de pensar en eso para la gente que no han vivido en algo así, no? Osea algunos familiares extendidos han vivido en mundos comunistas, en el pasado en el este de Europa y no se hablan [00:37:00] exactamente así.Pero, se se hablan, no? Y se se dicen que lo que lo que no tenía ni lo que no tiene por control y por fuerza. Entonces, en ese como mismo sentido de lo que falta de la memoria vivida, me gustaría preguntarte sobre tu nuevo libro. Y sobre la evolución de medios. Entonces me gustaría preguntarte igual por nuestros oyentes que quizás no han estudiado mucho de la ecología de los medios Para ti qué es la evolución de los medios y por qué es importante para nuestro cambiante y comprensión del mundo. O sea, igual al lado y no solo pegado a la ecología de medios, pero la evolución de los medios,Carlos: Sí, te cuento ahí hay una disciplina, ya tradicional que es la historia y también está la historia de la comunicación y historia de los medios. [00:38:00] Hay libros muy interesantes que se titulan Historia de la Comunicación de Gutenberg a Internet o Historia de la Comunicación del Papiro a Tiktok. Entonces, qué pasa? Esos libros te dicen bueno, estaba el papiro, después vino el pergamino, el manuscrito, después en 1450 vino Gutenberg, llegó el libro. Pero eso el libro no te cuentan que pasó con el manuscrito, ni que pasó con el papiro. Y te dicen que llega la radio en 1920 y en 1950 llega la televisión y no te dicen que pasó con la radio, que pasó con el cine.Son historias lineales donde un medio parece que va sustituyendo al otro. Y después tenemos muchos libros muy buenos también. Historia de la radio, historia de la televisión, historia de internet, historia del periodismo. Como dije antes, retomando una idea, de McLuhan no podemos entender los medios aislados.Yo no puedo entender la evolución de la radio si no la vinculo a la prensa, a [00:39:00] la televisión y otro al podcast. Okey, entonces digo, necesitamos un campo de investigación, llamémoslo una disciplina en construcción, que es una teoría y también es metodología para poder entender el cambio mediático, todas estas transformaciones del ecosistema de medios a largo plazo y que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino, ver cómo esa red de medios fue evolucionando. Y eso yo lo llamo una teoría evolutiva o una "media evolution" Y es lo que estoy trabajando ahora. Claro, esta teoría, este enfoque, este campo de investigación toma muchas cosas de la ecología de los medios, empezando por Marshall McLuhan pero también gente de la tradición previa a la media ecology como Harold Innis, el gran historiador, economista de la comunicación y de la sociedad, que fue quizás el intelectual más famoso en Canadá en la primera mitad del siglo XX. Harold Innis que influenció mucho a Marshall McLuhan [00:40:00] Marshall McLuhann en la primera página de Gutenberg Galaxy, dice este libro no es otra cosa que una nota al pie de página de la obra de Harold Innis Entonces, Harold Innis que hizo una historia de los tiempos antiguos poniendo los medios al centro de esa historia. Para mí es fundamental. Incluso te diría a veces más que McLuhan, como referencia, a la hora de hacer una teoría evolutiva del cambio mediático. Y después, obviamente tomo muchas cosas de la historia de los medios.Tomo muchas cosas de la arqueología de los medios (media archeology). Tomo cosas también de la gente que investigó la historia de la tecnología, la construcción social de la tecnología. O sea, la media evolution es un campo intertextual, como cualquier disciplina que toma cosas de todos estos campos para poder construir una teoría, un enfoque, una mirada que sea más a largo plazo, que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino que vea la evolución de todo el ecosistema mediático, prestando mucha atención a las relaciones [00:41:00] entre medios, y con esta visión más compleja sistémica de cómo cambian las cosas.Yo creo que el cambio mediático es muy rápido y necesitamos una teoría para poder darle un sentido a todo este gran cambio, porque si nos quedamos analizando cosas muy micro, muy chiquititas, no vemos los grandes cambios. No nos podemos posicionar... esto un poco como el fútbol. Los mejores jugadores son los que tienen el partido en la cabeza y saben dónde está todo. No están mirando la pelota, pero saben dónde están los otros jugadores? Bueno, yo creo que la media evolution sirve para eso. Más allá de que hoy estemos todos hablando de la IA generativa. No? Tener esta visión de de conjunto de todo el ecosistema mediático y tecnológico, yo creo que es muy útil.Chris: Mm. Wow Increíble, increíble. Sí. Sí. Pienso mucho en como las nuevas generaciones o las generaciones más jóvenes en el día de hoy. O sea, [00:42:00] al menos más joven que yo, que la mayoría, como que tiene 20 años hoy, no tienen una memoria vívida de cómo fuera el mundo, sin redes sociales o sin el internet. Y así como me voy pensando en mi vida y como yo, no tengo una memoria de vida como fuera el mundo sin pantallas de cualquier tipo, o sea de tele de compus. No solo de internet o redes. Carlos: Sí, no, te decia que mi padre vivió, mi padre tiene 90 años y él se recuerda en el año 58, 59, su casa fue la primera en un barrio de Rosario que tuvo televisión y transmitían a partir de la tarde seis, siete de la tarde. Entonces venían todos los vecinos y vecinas a ver televisión a la casa de mi abuela. Entonces cada uno, cada generación tiene sus historias. No? Chris: Ajá. Ajá. Sí. Pues sí. Y también, como dijiste, para [00:43:00] entender los medios como sujetos o objetos individuales, o sea en su propio mundo, no? Este recuerdo un poco de la metáfora de Robin Wall Kimmerer que escribió un libro que se llama Braiding Sweetgrass o Trenzando Pasto Dulce supongo, en español. Y mencionó que para entender el entendimiento indígena, digamos entre comillas de tiempo, no necesitamos pensar en una línea, una flecha desde el pasado hacia el futuro. Pero, un lago, mientras el pasado, presente, y futuro existen, a la vez, en ese lago.Y también pienso como en el lugar, el pasado, presente, y el futuro, como todos esos medios existiendo a la vez, como en un lago y obviamente en una ecología de su evolución de sus cambios. Carlos: Es, muy interesante eso. Después te voy a pedir la referencia del libro porque, claro, [00:44:00] McLuhan siempre decía que el contenido de un medio es otro medio. Entonces, puede pasar que un medio del pasado deja su huella o influye en un medio del futuro. Y entonces ahí se rompe la línea temporal. Y esos son los fenómenos que a mí me interesa estudiar. Chris: Mmm, mmm, pues Carlos para terminar, tengo dos últimas preguntas para ti. Esta vez un poco alineado con el turismo, y aunque no estas enfocado tanto en en el estudio de turismo. Por mis estudios y investigaciones y por este podcast, he amplificado esa definición de turismo para ver cómo existiría más allá de una industria. Y para mí, el turismo incluye también el deseo de ver una persona, un lugar o una cultura como destino, como algo útil, temporal en su valor de uso y por tanto, desechable. Entonces, me gustaría [00:45:00] preguntarte, si para ti parece que nuestros medios populares, aunque esto es un tiempo, digamos con más libertad de otros lugares o tiempos en el pasado, más autoritarianos o totalitarianos? Si te ves la posibilidad o la evidencia de que nuestros medios digamos como mainstream más usados, están creando o promoviendo un , un sentido de alienación en la gente por efectivamente quedarles a distancia al otro o la otra.Carlos: Yo ya te dije no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de los medios. Nunca, la tuve. Esto no quita de que los medios y como dijimos antes, tienen problemas. Generan también contaminación. Llamémoslo así si seguimos con la metáfora, ? El tema de alienación viene desde hace [00:46:00] muchísimos años. Ya cuando estudiaba en la universidad, nunca sintonicé con las teorías de la alienación.El concepto de alienación viene del siglo XIX. Toda una teoría de la conciencia, el sujeto, el proletario, llamémoslo, así que tenía que tomar conciencia de clase. Bueno, las raíces de esa visión del concepto alienación vienen de ahí. Yo, a mí nunca me convenció, justamente. Y acá si interesante.El aporte de América Latina en teorías de la comunicación siempre fue diferente. Fue reivindicar la resignificación, la resemantización el rol activo del receptor, cuando muchas veces las teorías que venían de Europa o Estados Unidos tenían esta visión del receptor de la comunicación como un ser pasivo. En ese sentido, la media ecology nunca entró en ese discurso porque se manejaba con otros parámetros, pero digamos que lo que era el mainstream de la investigación de estados unidos, pero también de Europa, siempre coincidían en esto en considerar el receptor pasivo, alienado, [00:47:00] estupidizado por los medios. Y yo realmente nunca, me convenció ese planteo, ni antes ni hoy, ni con la televisión de los 70 y 80, ni con el tiktok de hoy.Esto no quita que puede haber gente que tenga alguna adicción, etcétera, etcétera. Pero yo no creo que toda la sociedad sea adicta hoy a la pantallita. Deja de ser adicción. Okey. Esto no implica que haya que no tener una visión crítica. Esto no implica que haya que eventualmente regular los usos de ciertas tecnologías, obviamente.Pero de ahí a pensar que estamos en un escenario apocalíptico, de idiotización total del homo sapiens o de alienación. Yo no lo veo, ni creo que lo los estudios empíricos confirmen eso. Más allá que a veces hay elecciones y no nos gusten los resultados.Pero ahí es interesante, porque cuando tu propio partido político pierde, siempre se le echa la culpa a los medios porque ganó el otro. Pero cuando tu partido político gana, nadie dice nada de los medios. Ganamos porque somos mejores, [00:48:00] porque tenemos mejores ideas, porque somos más democráticos, porque somos más bonitos.Entonces, claro te das cuenta que se usan los medios como chivo expiatorio para no reconocer las propias debilidades políticas a la hora de denunciar una propuesta o de seducir al electorado.Chris: Claro, claro. Ya pues estos temas son vastos y complejos. Y por eso me gusta, y por eso estoy muy agradecido por pasar este tiempo contigo, Carlos.Pero los temas requieren un profundo disciplina para comprender, o al menos según yo, como alguien que está muy nuevo a estos temas. Entonces, a nuestra época, parece que somos, según yo, arrastrados a una velocidad sin precedentes. Nuestras tecnologías están avanzando y quizás socavando simultáneamente nuestra capacidad de comprender lo que está sucediendo en el mundo. Los usamos como protesta a veces como, como mencionaste, [00:49:00] pero sin una comprensión más profunda de cómo nos usan también. Entonces tengo la curiosidad por saber qué papel desempeña la ecología de los medios en la redención o curación de la cultura en nuestro tiempo. Cómo podría la ecología de los medios ser un aliado, quizás, en nuestros caminos? Carlos: Sí, yo creo que esta idea estaba presente, no? En los teóricos de la media ecology, digamos la primera generación.Ahora que lo pienso, estaba también en la semiótica de Umberto Eco, no? Cuando decía la semiótica más allá de analizar cómo se construye significado, también aporta a mejorar la vida significativa, o sea, la vida cultural, la vida comunicacional, nuestro funcionamiento como sujeto, digamos. Y yo creo que en ese sentido, la media ecology también.Digamos, si nosotros entendemos el ecosistema mediático, vamos a poder sacarlo mejor [00:50:00] coevolucionar mejor. Vamos a ser más responsables también a la hora de generar contenidos, a la hora de retwittear de manera a veces automática ciertas cosas. Yo creo que es todo un crecimiento de vivir una vida mediática sana, que yo creo que hoy existe esa posibilidad.Yo estoy en Twitter desde el 2008-2009 y sólo dos veces tuve así un encontronazo y bloqueé a una persona mal educada. Después el resto de mi vida en Twitter, es rica de información de contactos. Aprendo muchísimo me entero de cosas que se están investigando. O sea, también están uno elegir otras cosas.Y por ejemplo, donde veo que yo hay que hay redes que no me aportan nada, no directamente ni entro. También es eso de aprender a sacar lo mejor de este ecosistema mediático. Y lo mismo para el ecosistema natural. Así como estamos aprendiendo a preocuparnos de dónde viene la comida, [00:51:00] cuánto tiempo se va a tardar en disolver este teléfono móvil por los componentes que tiene. Bueno, también es tomar conciencia de eso. Ya sea en el mundo natural, como en el mundo de la comunicación. Y yo creo que todos estos conocimientos, en este caso, la media ecology nos sirve para captar eso, no? Y mejorar nosotros también como sujetos, que ya no somos más el centro del universo, que esta es la otra cuestión. Somos un átomo más perdido entre una complejidad muy grande. Chris: Mm. Mm, pues que estas obras y trabajos y estudios tuyos y de los demás nos da la capacidad de leer y comprender ese complejidad, no?O sea, parece más y más complejo cada vez y nos requiere como más y más discernimiento. Entonces, yo creo que pues igual, hemos metido mucho en tu voluntad y capacidad de [00:52:00] hacer eso y ponerlo en el mundo. Entonces, finalmente Carlos me gustaría a extender mi agradecimiento y la de nuestros oyentes por tu tiempo hoy, tu consideración y tu trabajo.Siento que pues, la alfabetización mediática y la ecología de los medios son extremadamente deficientes en nuestro tiempo y su voluntad de preguntar sobre estas cosas y escribir sobre ellas es una medicina para un mundo quebrantado y para mi turístico. Entonces, así que muchísimas gracias, Carlos, por venir hoy.Carlos: Gracias. Te agradezco por las preguntas. Y bueno, yo creo que el tema del turismo es un tema que está ocupa lugar central hoy. Si tú estuvieras en Barcelona, verías que todos los días se está debatiendo este tema. Así que yo creo que bueno, adelante con esa reflexión y esa investigación sobre el turismo, porque es muy pertinente y necesaria.Chris: Pues sí, gracias. [00:53:00] Igual yo siento que hay una conexión fuerte entre esas definiciones más amplias de turismo y la ecología de medios. O sea, ha abierto una apertura muy grande para mí para entender el turismo más profundamente. Igual antes de terminar Carlos, cómo podrían nuestros oyentes encontrar tus libros y tu trabajo?Sé que hemos hablado de dos libros que escribiste, pero hay mucho más. Muchísimo más. Entonces, cómo se pueden encontrarlos y encontrarte?Carlos: Lo más rápido es en en mi blog, que es hipermediaciones.com Ahí van a encontrar información sobre todos los libros que voy publicando, etcétera, etc. Y después, bueno, yo soy muy activo, como dije en Twitter X. Me encuentran la letra CEscolari y de Carlos es mi Twitter. Y bueno, también ahí trato de difundir información sobre estos [00:54:00] temas.Como dije antes, aprendo mucho de esa red y trato de también devolver lo que me dan poniendo siempre información pertinente. Buenos enlaces. Y no pelearme mucho.Chris: Muy bien, muy bien, pues voy a asegurar que esos enlaces y esas páginas estén ya en la sección de tarea el sitio web de El fin del turismo cuando sale el episodio. Igual otras entrevistas y de tus libros. No hay falta. Entonces, con mucho gusto, los voy compartiendo. Bueno, Carlos, muchísimas gracias y lo aprecio mucho.Carlos: Muchas gracias y nos vemos en México.English TranscriptionChris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism, Carlos. Thank you for being able to speak with me today. It's a great pleasure to have you here with me today.Carlos: No, thank you, Chris, for the invitation. It is a great pleasure and honor to chat with you, a great traveler and, well, I have never directly investigated the subject of tourism.Well, I understand that we are going to talk about media ecology and collateral issues that can help us better understand, give meaning to all that is happening in the world of tourism. Well, I work in Barcelona. I don't live in the city exactly, but I work at the university in Barcelona, in the central area.Well, every time I go to the city, the number of tourists increases every day and the debate on tourism in all its dimensions increases. So it is a topic that is on the agenda, right?Chris: Yes, well I imagine that even if you don't like to think or if you don't want to think about tourism there, it is inevitable to have a personal lesson [00:01:00] from that industry.Carlos: Yes, to the point that it is almost becoming a taxonomic criterion, right? ...of classification or cities with a lot of tourists, cities or places without tourists that are the most sought after until they are filled with tourists. So we are practically in a vicious circle.Chris: Well, at some point I know that it changes, the cycle breaks, at least to account for what we are doing with the behavior.And I understand that this also has a lot to do with the ecology of the media, the lack of ability to understand our behaviors, attitudes, thoughts, feelings, etc. So, before continuing with your work and deeds, I would like to ask you about your path and your life.First, I wonder if you could define for our listeners what media ecology is and how you [00:02:00] became interested in this field? How did you come to dedicate your life to this study?Carlos: Yes. Let's see a little bit. There is one, this is the official history. We would say media ecology, it is a field of research, let's say, that was born in the 60s. We must take into account above all the work of Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian researcher who is very famous worldwide. He was perhaps the most famous media researcher philosopher in the 60s and 70s.And a colleague of his, Neil Postman, who was at New York University, was a bit, let's say, among the people who surrounded these two references, no, in the 60s, from there it was brewing, let's say, what was later called media ecology. It is said that the first person to talk about media ecology, who applied this metaphor to the media, was Marshall McLuhan himself in some private conversations, [00:03:00] letters that were sent to each other in the late 50s, early 60s, by researchers on these topics?Let's say the first public appearance of the concept of media ecology was a lecture in 1968 by Neil Postman. It was a public speech that talked about how the media transforms us and how the media transforms us, forming an environment in which we grow, develop, and so on. And we are sometimes not very aware of this environment that surrounds us and shapes us.He first used the concept of media ecology in a public lecture. And then, if we go back to the early 70s, Postman himself created the first program in media ecology at NYU, at New York University. So, in 73, 74 and 75, what I call the second generation began to emerge, of people [00:04:00] some of whom were trained in these courses in New York.For example, Christine Nystrom was the first PhD thesis on my ecology; people like Paul Levinson who in 1979 defended a PhD thesis directed by Postman on the evolution of the media, right? And the same thing happened in Toronto in the 70s. Marshall McLuhan died in December 80.Let's say that the 70s were his last decade of intellectual production. And there are a number of collaborators at that time, very young people like Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, who later continued to work a bit along these lines, along these lines. And there we talk about the Canadian front, eh?This whole second generation was developing, expanding and applying. Let's not forget Eric McLuhan, Marshall's son, who was also part of this whole movement. [00:05:00] And if I remember correctly, in 2000, the Media Ecology Association was created, which is the Media Ecology Association, which is an academic, scientific organization that brings together people who deal with media ecology.If we think at a more scientific epistemological level, we can think of this metaphor of media ecology from two or three perspectives. On the one hand, this idea that media create environments. This is a very strong idea of Marsha McLuhan, of Postman and of this whole group, isn't it? The media - "medium" understood in a very broad sense, no, any technology could be a medium for them.For Marsha McLuhan, the wheel is a medium. A telescope is a medium. A radio is a medium and television is a medium, right? I mean, any technology can be considered a medium. Let's say that these media, these technologies, generate a [00:06:00] environment that transforms us. It transforms our way, sometimes our way of thinking, our way of perceiving the world, our conception of time and space.And we are not aware of that change. Let's think that, I don't know, before 1800, if someone had to make a trip of a thousand kilometers (and here we are approaching tourism) kilometers was a trip that had to be planned many months in advance. With the arrival of the train, we are already in 1800, those kilometers were shortened. Let's say no? There we see as if today they tell us 1000 kilometers.Well, yes, we take a plane. It's an hour, an hour and a quarter of a journey. Today, 1000 kilometres is much less than 200 years ago and even in terms of time, time has changed. Right? All of that is a consequence, let's say, of this change, our perception is a consequence of a series of media and technologies.The railroad. Obviously, today we have airplanes. The same digital networks that have somewhat brought us this idea of "time [00:07:00] real," this anxiety of wanting everything fast, right? That is also a consequence of these environmental changes generated by the media and technologies, eh? This is a very strong idea, when McLuhan and Postman talked about this in the 60s, they were strong intuitions that they had from a very intelligent observation of reality. Today, cognitive sciences, or rather neuroscience, have confirmed these hypotheses. In other words, today there are a series of methodologies to study the brain and we can already see how technologies...The media even affects the physical structure of the brain. Right? Another thing that is historical is that the media affects our memory. This comes from Plato 2,500 years ago, who said that writing would kill the memory of men. Well, we can think for ourselves, right?Or at least this generation, who [00:08:00] lived in a world before and after mobile apps. 30 years ago, 25 years ago, I had 30-40 phone numbers in my memory. Today I don't have any. And let's also think about GPS, right? At one time, taxi drivers in London, which is a Latin city, knew the city by heart. And today, that's no longer necessary because they have GPS.And when they went to study the brains of London taxi drivers, they saw that certain areas of the brain had shrunk, so to speak, which are the areas that manage the spatial part. McLuhan already talked about this in the 60s. He said that changes narcotize certain areas of the mind, he said.But well, we see that a lot of empirical research, very cutting-edge neuroscience research is confirming all these thoughts, all these things that were said in the 60s onwards, by media ecology. Another possibility is to understand [00:09:00] this as a media ecosystem, Marshall McLuhan always said we cannot give it meaning,We cannot understand a medium in isolation from other media. It is as if media only acquire meaning in relation to other media. Neil Postman and many other people from the school of media ecology also defend this position, that, well, we cannot understand the history of cinema if we do not link it to video games, if we do not link it to the appearance of television.And so with all the media, right? Eh? There are some very interesting works. For example, about how in the 19th century, different media, we could say, co-evolved with each other. The press, the telegraph. The train, which also transported newspapers, news agencies appeared. I mean, we see how it is very difficult to understand the development of the press in the 19th century and we don't link it to the telephone, if we don't link it to photography, if we don't link it to radio photography, [00:10:00] also later on.I mean, this idea is very strong. It is also one of the principles that I consider fundamental to this vision, which would be that the media are not alone, they are part of an ecosystem and if we want to understand what is happening and how all this works, we cannot, uh, analyze the media in isolation from the rest.There is a third interpretation. I don't know if it's too metaphorical, right? Above all, people in Italy like the researcher Fausto Colombo from Milan or Michele Cometa, he is a researcher from Sicily, Michele Cometa who talks about the turn, the ecomedia turn. These researchers are moving in a whole conception according to which, we are in a unique media ecosystem that is contaminated.It is contaminated by "fake news" it is contaminated by false news, it is contaminated by hate speech, etc., etc. So they, let's say, take up this ecological metaphor to say [00:11:00] We have to clean this ecosystem just as the natural ecosystem is contaminated, it needs a cleaning intervention, let's say a purification, eh?The media ecosystem is also in the same danger, isn't it? And these people are also calling attention, and I am very close to this line of work on the material dimension of communication. And this also has to do with tourism, right? The environmental impact that communication has today.Training an artificial intelligence involves a huge amount of electricity; keeping social networks running, eh, TikTok, YouTube, whatever, involves millions of servers running that suck up electricity and also have to be cooled, consuming even more electricity. And that has a significant impact on the climate.So, well, let's say, we see that this metaphor of the ecological, applied to the media, gives rise to two or three interpretations.Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. I feel like when I started taking that course from Andrew McLuhan, Marshall's grandson, as I mentioned, it changed my perspective completely - on the world, on the way I understand and how I don't understand our technologies, my movements, etc. But now, from a person who has been studying this for decades, I would like to know how you started. I mean, Andrew, for example, has the excuse of his lineage, not his father and his grandfather.But then, as a young Argentine, he began learning about media ecology.Carlos: Well, I'll tell you. I studied communication in Argentina, in Rosario. I finished college. The last exam was on June 24, 1986, which was the day that Lionel Messi was born in Rosario, Argentina, on the same day. And [00:13:00] I worked, I collaborated in a class in a subject that was communication theories.And I even taught until 1990, three years, because after that I went to live in Italy. At that time, we read Marshall McLuhan, but it was a very ideologically biased reading. In Latin America, you must have seen it in Mexico. There is a whole history, a tradition of criticism from the media, especially of everything that comes from the United States, and Canada is very close to the United States.So, let's say that in the 70s and 80s and until today I would tell you that Marshall McLuhan was often criticized because he did not criticize the media. I mean, he had a vision. He said, Neil Postman, yes, he had a very critical vision. But in that case, this was one of the big differences between Postman and McLuhan, that Marshall McLuhan, at least in [00:14:00] public, he did not criticize the media. He said, well, I am a researcher, I send out probes. I am exploring what is happening.And he never joined in... And I think that was very clever of him... he never joined in this worldwide chorus of criticism of the media. At that time, television was a monster for many people.Children were not supposed to watch television. A bit like what happens today with cell phones and what happens today with TikTok. At that time, television was the monster. At that time, there was a lot of research in the United States, which was already based on the premise that television and the media are bad for people.We see that it is a story that repeats itself. I think that in that sense, Marshall McLuhan, very intelligently, did not join that critical chorus and he really dedicated himself to thinking about the media from a much freer perspective, not anchored by this vision that I believe is too ideologized, which is very strong in Latin America. It is very strong. This does not imply [00:15:00] letting down one's guard, not being critical. On the contrary.But I think that true critical thinking starts from not saying so much ideology, we say "this is already bad. Let's look at this." There will be good things. There will be bad things. There will be things, which is undeniable, that the media, even if we say they are good, will transform us. And I think that was the important thing about the McLuhanian idea.So my first approach to McLuhan was from the perspective of critical authors who, well, yes, come from the United States, they don't criticize the media. We're going to criticize him, right? And that was my first approach to Marshall McLuhan.I went to Italy in the 90s. I was out of college for almost eight years, working in digital media, web development, multimedia products, and pretext. And in the late 90s, I said, I want to go back to college. I want to be a PhD. And I said, "I want to do a PhD. Well. Being in Italy, the PhD was going to be in semiotics." So I did a [00:16:00] PhD. My thesis was on semiotics of interfaces.There I had a vision of digital interfaces that consider, for example, instruments like the mouse or joystick as extensions of our body, right? The mouse extends the hand and puts it inside the screen, right? Or the joystick or any other element of the digital interface? Of course. If we talk about the mouse being an extension of the hand, that is a McLuhanian idea.The media as extensions of the human being as a subject. So, of course, I reread McLuhan in Italian at the end of the 90s, and I reconciled with McLuhan because I found many interesting things to understand precisely the interaction with digital machines.In 2002, I moved with my family to Spain. I returned to university life. [00:17:00] And there I began to study the relationship between old and new media. Then I recovered the idea of ecosystem. I recovered the whole new idea, the id

Hosted by Birgit Pauli-Haack, with special guest Anne McCarthy, this episode dives into recent happenings in the WordPress ecosystem, including updates from WordCamp Europe, the launch of the new WordPress AI Team, the Pride Photo Drive initiative, and the latest Gutenberg releases (20.9 and 21.0). WordCamp Europe Recap The community celebrated new milestones, including all…

In 1710, the British Parliament passed a piece of legislation entitled An Act for the Encouragement of Learning. It became known as the Statute of Anne, and it was the world's first copyright law. Copyright protects and regulates a piece of work - whether that's a book, a painting, a piece of music or a software programme. It emerged as a way of balancing the interests of authors, artists, publishers, and the public in the context of evolving technologies and the rise of mechanical reproduction. Writers and artists such as Alexander Pope, William Hogarth and Charles Dickens became involved in heated debates about ownership and originality that continue to this day - especially with the emergence of artificial intelligence. With:Lionel Bently, Herchel Smith Professor of Intellectual Property Law at the University of CambridgeWill Slauter, Professor of History at Sorbonne University, ParisKatie McGettigan, Senior Lecturer in American Literature at Royal Holloway, University of London. Producer: Eliane GlaserReading list:Isabella Alexander, Copyright Law and the Public Interest in the Nineteenth Century (Hart Publishing, 2010)Isabella Alexander and H. Tomás Gómez-Arostegui (eds), Research Handbook on the History of Copyright Law (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016)David Bellos and Alexandre Montagu, Who Owns this Sentence? A History of Copyrights and Wrongs (Mountain Leopard Press, 2024)Oren Bracha, Owning Ideas: The Intellectual Origins of American Intellectual Property, 1790-1909 (Cambridge University Press, 2016)Elena Cooper, Art and Modern Copyright: The Contested Image (Cambridge University Press, 2018)Ronan Deazley, On the Origin of the Right to Copy: Charting the Movement of Copyright Law in Eighteenth Century Britain, 1695–1775 (Hart Publishing, 2004)Ronan Deazley, Rethinking Copyright: History, Theory, Language (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2006)Ronan Deazley, Martin Kretschmer and Lionel Bently (eds.), Privilege and Property: Essays on the History of Copyright (Open Book Publishers, 2010)Marie-Stéphanie Delamaire and Will Slauter (eds.), Circulation and Control: Artistic Culture and Intellectual Property in the Nineteenth Century (Open Book Publishers, 2021) Melissa Homestead, American Women Authors and Literary Property, 1822-1869 (Cambridge University Press, 2005)Adrian Johns, Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates (University of Chicago Press, 2009)Meredith L. McGill, American Literature and the Culture of Reprinting, 1834-1853 (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002)Mark Rose, Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright (Harvard University Press, 1993)Mark Rose, Authors in Court: Scenes from the Theater of Copyright (Harvard University Press, 2018)Catherine Seville, Internationalisation of Copyright: Books, Buccaneers and the Black Flag in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge University Press, 2006)Brad Sherman and Lionel Bently, The Making of Modern Intellectual Property Law (Cambridge University Press, 1999)Will Slauter, Who Owns the News? A History of Copyright (Stanford University Press, 2019)Robert Spoo, Without Copyrights: Piracy, Publishing and the Public Domain (Oxford University Press, 2013)In Our Time is a BBC Studios Audio production

We welcome Erika Ahern of Catholic Vote to talk about what is happening in our educational institutions and how the misuse of technology is causing young people to be improperly formed and under-developed.  Show Notes How ChatGPT Blindsided Colleges (and no one can stop it) Episode 478 – We Need To Talk About AI | The Corbett Report  Opting Out of Technocracy – #SolutionsWatch | The Corbett Report  Diabolus Ex Machina - by Amanda Guinzburg Analog Hunger in a Digital World: Confronting Today's Identity Crisis World fertility rates in 'unprecedented decline', UN says Why South Korean women aren't having babies The Poor Old Liberal Arts The Death Of Christian Culture - Angelus Press Restoration of Christian Culture The LOOPcast - YouTube CatholicVote org Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business The Class of 2026: AI is doing to the universities what Gutenberg did to the monasteries iCatholic Mobile The Station of the Cross Merchandise - Use Coupon Code 14STATIONS for 10% off | Catholic to the Max Read Fr. McTeigue's Written Works! "Let's Take A Closer Look" with Fr. Robert McTeigue, S.J. | Full Series Playlist Listen to Fr. McTeigue's Preaching! | Herald of the Gospel Sermons Podcast on Spotify Visit Fr. McTeigue's Website | Herald of the Gospel Questions? Comments? Feedback? Ask Father!

Este episodio de Lágrimas en la lluvia, creado con NotebookLM a partir de esta página de Blogpocket, describe el Método Blogpocket, diseñado por A. Cambronero para crear y optimizar sitios web en WordPress, dirigida a creadores de contenido y pequeños negocios sin conocimientos técnicos avanzados. Este método propone un proceso en dos fases: primero, establecer una base sólida y superoptimizada (incluyendo hosting, dominio, WordPress básico, optimización de rendimiento y seguridad); y segundo, personalizar el sitio usando el editor nativo de WordPress, configurando SEO y aspectos legales. La guía evita los constructores visuales tradicionales, apostando por Gutenberg y herramientas gratuitas o premium de eficacia probada, con un enfoque en la optimización radical desde el inicio para asegurar el rendimiento y la independencia tecnológica.

Ambrogio Borsani"Di parlarti non ho coraggio"Poesie inedite per Roberto VolponiEdizioni Interlineawww.interlinea.comUn'inedita Alda Merini riemerge nei testi ritrovati di Di parlarti non ho coraggio, curati da Ambrogio Borsani ed editi da Interlinea, in libreria dal 28 ottobre, con anteprima al festival internazionale di poesia civile di Vercelli sabato 9 novembre alla libreria Mondadori di Vercelli alle ore 12.Le poesie inedite della raccolta celebrano la storia di un'amicizia insolita tra la poetessa dei Navigli e il giovane Roberto Volponi, figlio dello scrittore Paolo, nata nelle serate trascorse fino alle due a conversare nel bar libreria Chimera di Milano, rifugio di poeti e sognatori, da Tondelli a Busi, da Raboni a Lamarque.«Lui era affascinato dalla vicenda umana e letteraria della poetessa e soprattutto dalla sua libertà lessicale nel raccontarla» ricorda nella premessa il curatore Borsani, amico della Merini ed egli stesso frequentatore del Chimera: «mentre lei vedeva in lui un ragazzo appassionato, curioso, tenero, con una fede ostinata nelle utopie e una sorprendente partecipazione agli abissi delle umane vicende».Dopo la morte improvvisa del giovane Volponi in un incidente aereo nel 1989, Merini donò alla famiglia il gruppo di poesie di straordinaria intensità rimaste ignote fino a oggi anche per problemi filologici oggi risolti, ricordo della stima e dell'affetto profondo tra i due: «Purissima ambizione la mia / che tocco le tue vesti / colme di ingegno e poi / ti lasciarono andare le mie mani / come avessero avuto la maggiore / folgorazione. In vita eri sì bello / che ogni profilo tuo pieno di vento / diventava commiato di parola».I testi sono stati dattiloscritti dall'autrice con una macchina per scrivere con tasti dissestati e nastro scarico di inchiostro (tanto che in sostituzione del nastro spesso usava anche fogli di carta carbone) e pertanto la trascrizione ha dovuto interpretare le molte lettere digitate erroneamente.Di parlarti non ho coraggio. Poesie inedite per Roberto Volponi«Io di parlarti non ho coraggio, / né nominarti come solo amore»: un inedito sorprendente che la poetessa dei navigli ha composto su una macchina per scrivere dai tasti e nastro rovinati per ricordare l'amico Roberto Volponi, il figlio dello scrittore Paolo morto giovane in un incidente aereo. Sono testi che parlano di amore e morte, amicizia e dolore, con le illuminazioni di Alda Merini tanto amate dai suoi lettori. Come ricorda Ambrogio Borsani, amico di entrambi, frequentati al bar milanese Chimera con Tondelli, Busi, Consolo, Raboni e molti altri, è la testimonianza di una stagione unica da cui sono nate queste poesie che meritano di trovare «un posto nella vasta e variegata geografia poetica della Merini: la storia di un'amicizia insolita vissuta in un luogo rifugio di poeti e sognatori». Scrive lei: «Eri sì puro come una medaglia, / ed io medaglia che mi sono sfatta / brillo appena di luce sul tuo cuore».Alda Merini è nata a Milano nel 1931. Ha avuto riconoscimenti importanti alle sue prime raccolte, tra La presenza di Orfeo (1953) e Tu sei Pietro (1961). Sono seguiti vent'anni di silenzio per la drammatica esperienza dell'ospedale psichiatrico. Il suo capolavoro, La Terra Santa, uscì nel 1983 accolto da una sostanziale indifferenza. Nel 1986 raccontò l'esperienza del manicomio in L'altra verità. Diario di una diversa. Grazie a Giovanni Raboni riemerse all'attenzione del pubblico con Delirio amoroso, prose liriche del 1989. Nel 1993 vinse il premio Librex-Montale. Con Ballate non pagate (1995) vinse il premio Viareggio. La prima antologia, Fiore di poesia, curata da Maria Corti, uscì per Einaudi nel 1998 creando un caso editoriale. Iniziò una vasta produzione di plaquette e libri sparsi tra decine di editori. Nell'ultimo periodo scrisse diversi libri segnati da una vena di misticismo, come Francesco. Canto di una creatura (2007), e tra le ultime raccolte per Einaudi troviamo Superba è la notte (2000). Si spense all'Ospedale San Paolo di Milano il primo novembre del 2009. Il suono dell'ombra (2018) è la più ampia raccolta della sua produzione in prosa e poesia negli “Oscar” Mondadori. Interlinea ha già pubblicato di lei Più della poesia, due conversazioni con Paolo Taggi, che per primo la portò in tv, un libro-verità con dvd in cui lei si racconta come mai aveva fatto prima.Ambrogio Borsani ha scritto romanzi come L'ellisse di fuoco (Premio Pisa) e libri di viaggio: Addio Eden, Tropico dei sogni, Stranieri a Samoa (Finalista Premio Chatwin), Martinica incantatrice di poeti, Assalto al paradiso e Avventure di piccole terre. Ha fondato e diretto la rivista di storia del libro Wuz. Al mondo editoriale ha dedicato Il morbo di Gutenberg e altre patologie, L'arte di governare la carta, La claque del libro, Autori in cerca di autori. Ha lavorato come direttore creativo in agenzie di pubblicità internazionali (Leone d'argento al Cinema Pubblicitario di Cannes). Ha scritto molti libri per bambini e ha curato le opere principali di Alda Merini. Ha insegnato Comunicazione all'Università di Napoli “l'Orientale”, alla Statale di Milano e all'Accademia di Brera.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarewww.ilpostodelleparole.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.

Ta pravljica je iz zbirke Rdeča knjiga o vilah, poobjavljena v okviru projekta Gutenberg. Napisala jo je gospa d'Aulnoy in je malce drugačna. Kot bi se rahlo norčevala iz plemenitašev, kralja in kraljice in njune hčerke. Nekateri nastopajoči imajo nenavadna imena in se nenavadno tudi vedejo. Ampak, kot vedno se pravljica srečno konča za pridne in lepe in slabo za hudobne in grde. Prisluhni torej malce dolgi francoski pravljici Princesa MajaŠe prej pa morda neznana beseda: Flota so ladje ki plujejo skupaj z enakim namenom in pod skupnim poveljstvom.Vir: Rdeča pravljična knjiga vsebuje nekaj najbolj znanih pravljic, vzetih iz različnih virov.The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Red Fairy Book, Andrew Lang, Langmans, Green and Co, London; 1889, iz angleščine prevedla in priredila Nataša Holy, bere Nataša Holy

One of the most powerful and consistent forces pushing stock prices higher over time isn't just earnings or interest rates — it's human ingenuity. From the invention of the wheel in 3500 BC, to Gutenberg's printing press in 1440, to Space Travel in 1969, and now the rise of Artificial Intelligence, innovation has been the engine of progress. And nowhere is the impact of innovation more directly reflected than in the stock market. Unlike real estate, bonds, or Treasuries, which often lag behind in capturing the upside of breakthrough ideas, stocks give investors a front-row seat to benefit from human creativity and technological advancement — especially in the innovation-rich landscape of America. In this episode, we look back at some of history's greatest breakthroughs and look forward to how emerging technologies could shape not just the world — but your portfolio. Tune in and learn how to align your investments with the most powerful force on Earth: the endless spark of human ingenuity. Here's to wise investing, Brett Pattison & Brian Hunsaker

I'll be honest—I don't officially do web development anymore. But when a nonprofit asked for help, I thought I could knock out a simple WordPress portal in 25 hours using no-code tools like Zapier and Advanced Custom Fields. Boy, was I wrong.What started as a straightforward project quickly turned into a nightmare of under-scoping and tool limitations I never saw coming. Zapier didn't work with WordPress custom post types the way I expected. Advanced Custom Fields still requires custom coding for Gutenberg blocks after seven years. Google Sheets automation had quirks I'd never encountered. It was starting to look more like 60 hours, not 25.That's when I reluctantly turned to ChatGPT for help—and it completely saved my butt. Instead of writing custom code from scratch or going back to the client with double the budget, I started "vibe coding." I'd describe the problem, ChatGPT would write the solution, and we'd iterate together. It wrote nearly 2,000 lines of code for me, handled complex features I would've needed premium plugins for, and let me stay flexible when the client requested changes.The result? A 30-hour project instead of 60, a happy client, and a reminder that sometimes the tools we resist most can be the ones that save us.*Want 40+ automations plus my AI swipe files? Head over to https://casabona.org/streamlined*Top TakeawaysVibe coding can be a massive force multiplier, even if you're not a developer—ChatGPT walked me through everything and cut my project time in halfAlways scope projects more carefully by testing tool limitations upfront, especially when assuming "obvious" features exist (spoiler: they often don't)AI coding made me more flexible and agreeable to client requests because I wasn't emotionally attached to hand-written codeShow NotesI built an app with AI and now I'm scared for WordPressHow to vibe code: 11 vibe coding best practices to start building with AI ★ Support this podcast ★

True personalization is here – connecting with FinovateSpring Best of Show winner Finalytics on their award-winning solution. Detailed Summary: This episode of the Finovate Podcast features Craig McLaughlin (CEO) and Baron Conway (CSO) of Finalytics, a Best of Show winner at FinovateSpring. They join host Greg Palmer to talk about how their platform delivers real-time AI-driven personalization across digital channels by combining behavioral data with transactional and third-party data to create uniquely relevant experiences for each user in both authenticated and unauthenticated environments. This enables financial institutions to optimize marketing spend, improve conversion rates through personalized experiences, and provide full-funnel reporting that tracks customer journeys from first click to funded dollars. Finalytics focuses exclusively on credit unions and community banks because these institutions have traditionally centered their business models around member relationships. The platform helps translate the personalized, human-centered service typically found in physical branches into the digital realm. By creating tailored experiences—such as showing refinancing tools to mortgage browsers, reminding users of abandoned applications, or displaying financial literacy content to Gen Z members—Finalytics helps these institutions maintain their relationship-focused approach in digital channels while driving measurable business outcomes. The episode closes with a look toward the future. Both Craig and Baron believe AI will fundamentally transform banking within five years. Craig predicts a shift from traditional information architecture to contextual experiences where relevant content finds the user rather than users searching for content, while Baron suggests the power is shifting from financial institutions to individuals, comparing the impact of AI to that of the Gutenberg press. Both emphasize that financial institutions must embrace these technologies to remain competitive, asserting that those who fail to adapt "won't be here" in the future. More info: Finalytics: https://finalytics.ai/; https://www.linkedin.com/company/finalyticsai/ Craig McLaughlin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mclaughlincraig/ Baron Conway: https://www.linkedin.com/in/baronconway/ Greg Palmer: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregbpalmer/ Finovate: https://www.finovate.com; https://www.linkedin.com/company/finovate-conference-series/ FinovateSpring: https://informaconnect.com/finovatespring/ #Finovate #AIPodcast #FinancialServices #BankingInnovation #FinTech #personalization #data #AIExecution #DigitalTransformation #AI #innovation #financialservices #finovatespring

Episode: 1370 Anno Domini 1370: So much going on just below the surface.  Today, the story behind an arbitrary date.

Welcome to episode 117 of the Gutenberg Changelog podcast! In this jam-packed episode, host Birgit Pauli-Haack is joined by Ellen Bauer, product lead at WooCommerce for an insightful conversation covering all the latest developments in the WordPress ecosystem. Together, they dive into the progress on the new WooCommerce Starter Theme, its underlying “workhorse” philosophy, and…

Today, we delve into how Medieval Christians depicted ants and their predator, the sometimes legendary antlion, in Medieval bestiaries. Subscribe to my YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/@imightbelieveinfaeries7563I Might Believe in Faeries is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Resources: “The Aberdeen Bestiary | the University of Aberdeen.” Abdn.ac.uk, 2019, www.abdn.ac.uk/bestiary/. Aesop. “Library of Congress Aesop Fables.” Read.gov, read.gov/aesop/052.html. Badke, David. “Medieval Bestiary : Animals in the Middle Ages.” Bestiary.ca, 1 Oct. 2024, bestiary.ca/index.html. Accessed 10 May 2025. Druce, George C. “An Account of the Mυρμηκολέων or Ant-Lion.” The Antiquaries Journal, vol. 3, no. 4, Oct. 1923, pp. 347–364, bestiary.ca/etexts/druce-account-of-the-ant-lion.pdf, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003581500015031. Accessed 9 May 2025. The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville. Cambridge University Press, 8 June 2006. “Gregory the Great - Moralia in Job (Morals on the Book of Job) - Book v (Book 5) - Online.” Lectionarycentral.com, 2025, www.lectionarycentral.com/GregoryMoralia/Book05.html. Accessed 9 May 2025. Heck, Christian, and Rémy Cordonnier. The Grand Medieval Bestiary : Animals in Illuminated Manuscripts. New York, Ny, Abbeville Press, 2018. von Bingen, Hildegard, and Priscilla Throop. Hildegard von Bingen's Physica : The Complete Translation of Her Classic Work on Health and Healing. Rochester, Vt., Healing Arts Press, C, 1998. Hope, Louise, and Steve Schulze. “The Project Gutenberg EBook of Metamorphoses, by Ovid.” Gutenberg.org, 2021, www.gutenberg.org/files/21765/21765-h/21765-h.htm#bookVII_fableVI. Accessed 9 May 2025. Get full access to I Might Believe in Faeries at aaronirber.substack.com/subscribe

Audio file, also on Apple and SpotifyTyler Cowen, Ph.D, is the Holbert L. Harris Professor of Economics at George Mason University. He is the author of 17 books, most recently Talent.: How to Identify Energizers, Creatives, and Winners Around the World. Tyler has been recognized as one of the most influential economists of the past decade. He initiated and directs the philanthropic project Emergent Ventures, writes a blog Marginal Revolution, and a podcast Conversations With Tyler, and also writes columns for The Free Press." He is writing a new book (and perhaps his last) on Mentors. “Maybe AGI [Artificial General Intelligence] is like porn — I know it when I see it. And I've seen it.”—Tyler CowenOur conversation on acquiring information, A.I., A.G.I., the NIH, the assault on science, the role of doctors in the A.I. era,, the meaning of life, books of the future, and much more.Transcript with linksEric Topol (00:06):Well, hello. This is Eric Topol with Ground Truths, and I am really thrilled today to have the chance to have a conversation with Tyler Cowen, who is, when you look up polymath in the dictionary, you might see a picture of him. He is into everything. And recently in the Economist magazine 1843, John Phipps wrote a great piece profile, the man who wants to know everything. And actually, I think there's a lot to that.Tyler Cowen (00:36):That's why we need longevity work, right?Eric Topol (00:39):Right. So he's written a number of books. How many books now, Tyler?Tyler Cowen:17, I'm not sure.Eric Topol:Only 17? And he also has a blog that's been going on for over 20 years, Marginal Revolution that he does with Alex Tabarrok.Tyler Cowen (00:57):Correct.Eric Topol (00:57):And yeah, and then Conversations with Tyler, a podcast, which I think an awful lot of people are tuned into that. So with that, I'm just thrilled to get a chance to talk with you because I used to think I read a lot, but then I learned about you.“Cowen calls himself “hyperlexic”. On a good day, he claims to read four or fivebooks. Secretly, I timed him at 30 seconds per page reading a dense tract byMartin Luther. “—John Phipps, The Economist's 1843I've been reading more from the AIs lately and less from books. So I'll get one good book and ask the AI a lot of questions.Eric Topol (01:24):Yeah. Well, do you use NotebookLM for that?Tyler Cowen (01:28):No, just o3 from OpenAI at the moment, but a lot of the models are very good. Claude, there's others.Eric Topol (01:35):Yeah, yeah. No, I see how that's a whole different way to interrogate a book and it's great. And in fact, that gets me to a topic I was going to get to later, but I'll do it now. You're soon or you have already started writing for the Free Press with Barri Weiss.Tyler Cowen (01:54):That's right, yes. I have a piece coming out later today. It's been about two weeks. It's been great so far.“Tyler Cowen has a mind unlike any I've ever encountered. In a single conversation, it's not at all unusual for him to toggle between DeepSeek, GLP-1s, Haitian art, sacred Tibetan music, his favorite Thai spot in L.A., and LeBron James”—Bari WeissYeah, so that's interesting. I hadn't heard of it until I saw the announcement from Barri and I thought what was great about it is she introduced it. She said, “Tyler Cowen has a mind unlike any I've ever encountered. In a single conversation, it's not at all unusual for him to toggle between DeepSeek, GLP-1s, Haitian art, sacred Tibetan music, his favorite Thai spot in L.A., and LeBron James. Now who could do that, right. So I thought, well, you know what? I need independent confirmation of that, that is as being a polymath. And then I saw Patrick Collison, who I know at Stripe and Arc Institute, “you can have a specific and detailed discussion with him about 17th-century Irish economic thinkers, or trends in African music or the history of nominal GDP targeting. I don't know anyone who can engage in so many domains at the depth he does.” So you're an information acquirer and one of the books you wrote, I love the title Infovore.Tyler Cowen (03:09):The Age of the Infovore, that's right.Eric Topol (03:11):I mean, have people been using that term because you are emblematic of it?“You can have a specific and detailed discussion with him about 17th-century Irish economic thinkers, or trends in African music or the history of nominal GDP targeting. I don't know anyone who can engage in so many domains at the depth he does.”—Patrick CollisonIt was used on the internet at some obscure site, and I saw it and I fell in love with that word, and I thought I should try to popularize it, but it doesn't come from me, but I think I am the popularizer of it.Yeah, well, if anybody was ingesting more information and being able to work with it. That's what I didn't realize about you, Tyler, is restaurants and basketball and all these other fine arts, very impressive. Now, one of the topics I wanted to get into you is I guess related to a topic you've written about fair amount, which is the great stagnation, and right now we're seeing issues like an attack on science. And in the past, you've written about how you want to raise the social status of scientists. So how do you see this current, I would even characterize as a frontal assault on science?Tyler Cowen (04:16):Well, I'm very worried about current Trump administration policies. They change so frequently and so unpredictably, it's a little hard to even describe what they always are. So in that sense, it's a little hard to criticize them, but I think they're scaring away talent. They might scare away funding and especially the biomedical sciences, the fixed costs behind a lot of lab work, clinical trials, they're so high that if you scare money away, it does not come back very readily or very quickly. So I think the problem is biggest perhaps for a lot of the biomedical sciences. I do think a lot of reform there has been needed, and I hope somehow the Trump policies evolve to that sort of reform. So I think the NIH has become too high bound and far too conservative, and they take too long to give grants, and I don't like how the overhead system has been done. So there's plenty of room for improvement, but I don't see so far at least that the efforts have been constructive. They've been mostly destructive.Eric Topol (05:18):Yeah, I totally agree. Rather than creative destruction it's just destruction and it's unfortunate because it seems to be haphazard and reckless to me at least. We of course, like so many institutions rely on NIH funding for the work, but I agree that reform is fine as long as it's done in a very thought out, careful way, so we can eke out the most productivity for the best investment. Now along with that, you started Emergent Ventures where you're funding young talent.Tyler Cowen (05:57):That's right. That's a philanthropic fund. And we now have slightly over 1000 winners. They're not all young, I'd say they're mostly young and a great number of them want to go into the biomedical sciences or have done so. And this is part of what made me realize what an incredible influx of talent we're seeing into those areas. I'm not sure this is widely appreciated by the world. I'm sure you see it. I also see how much of that talent actually is coming from Canada, from Ontario in particular, and I've just become far more optimistic about computational biology and progress in biology and medical cures, fixes, whatever you want to call it, extending lives. 10 years ago, I was like, yeah, who knows? A lot of things looked pretty stuck. Then we had a number of years where life expectancy was falling, and now I think we're on the verge of a true golden age.Eric Topol (06:52):I couldn't agree with you more on that. And I know some of the people that you funded like Anne Wylie who developed a saliva test for Covid out of Yale. But as you say, there's so many great young and maybe not so young scientists all over, Canada being one great reservoir. And now of course I'm worried that we're seeing emigration rather than more immigration of this talent. Any thoughts about that?Tyler Cowen (07:21):Well, the good news is this, I'm in contact with young people almost every day, often from other countries. They still want to come to the United States. I would say I sign an O-1 letter for someone about once a week, and at least not yet has the magic been dissipated. So I'm less pessimistic than some people are, but I absolutely do see the dangers. We're just the biggest market, the freest place we have by far the most ambitious people. I think that's actually the most significant factor. And young people sense that, and they just want to come here and there's not really another place they can go that will fit them.Eric Topol (08:04):Yeah, I mean one of the things as you've probably noted is there's these new forces that are taking on big shouldering. In fact, Patrick Collison with Arc Institute and Chan Zuckerberg for their institute and others like that, where the work you're doing with Emergent Ventures, you're supporting important projects, talents, and if this whole freefall in NIH funding and other agency funding continues, it looks like we may have to rely more on that, especially if we're going to attract some talent from outside. I don't know how else we're going to make. You're absolutely right about how we are such a great destination and great collaborations and mentors and all that history, but I'm worried that it could be in kind of a threatened mode, if you will.Tyler Cowen (08:59):I hope AI lowers costs. As you probably know at Arc, they had Greg Brockman come in for some number of months and he's one of the people, well, he helped build up Stripe, but he also was highly significant in OpenAI behind the GPT-4 model. And to have Greg Brockman at your institute doing AI for what, six months, that's a massive acceleration that actually no university had the wisdom to do, and Arc did. So I think we're seeing just more entrepreneurial thinking in the area. There's still this problem of bottlenecks. So let's say AI is great for drug discovery as it may be. Well, clinical trials then become a bigger bottleneck. The FDA becomes a bigger bottleneck. So rapid improvement in only one area while great is actually not good enough.Eric Topol (09:46):Yeah, I'm glad you brought up that effect in Arc Institute because we both know Patrick Hsu, who's a brilliant young guy who works there and has published some incredible large language models applied to life science in recent months, and it is impressive how they used AI in almost a singular way as compared to as you said, many other leading institutions. So that is I think, a really important thing to emphasize.Tyler Cowen (10:18):Arc can move very quickly. I think that's not really appreciated. So if Patrick Hsu decides Silvana Konermann, Patrick Collison, if they decide something ought to be bought or purchased or set in motion, it can happen in less than a day. And it does happen basically immediately. And it's not only that it's quicker, I think when you have quicker decisions, they're better and it's infectious to the people you're working with. And there's an understanding that the core environment is not a bureaucratic one. So it has a kind of multiplier effect through the institution.Eric Topol (10:54):Yeah, I totally agree with you. It's always been a philosophy in your mind to get stuff done, get s**t done, whatever you want to call it. They're getting it done. And that's what's so impressive. And not just that they've got some new funds available, but rather they're executing in a way that's parallel to the way the world's evolving in the AI front, which is I think faster than most people would ever have expected, anticipated. Now that gets me to a post you had on Marginal Revolution just last week, which one of the things I love about Marginal Revolution is you don't have to read a whole lot of stuff. You just give the bullets, the juice, if you will. Here you wrote o3 and AGI, is April 16th AGI day? And everybody's talking about artificial general intelligence is here. It's going to be here five years, it's going to be seven years.Eric Topol (11:50):It certainly seems to be getting closer. And in this you wrote, “I think it is AGI, seriously. Try asking it lots of questions, and then ask yourself: just how much smarter was I expecting AGI to be? As I've argued in the past, AGI, however you define it, is not much of a social event per se. It still will take us a long time to use it properly. Benchmarks, benchmarks, blah blah blah. Maybe AGI is like porn — I know it when I see it. And I've seen it.” I thought that was really well done, Tyler. Anything you want to amplify on that?Tyler Cowen (12:29):Look, if I ask at economics questions and I'm trained as an economist, it beats me. So I don't care if other people don't call it AGI, but one of the original definitions of AGI was that it would beat most experts most of the time on most matters, say 90% or above, and we're there. So people keep on shifting the goalposts. They'll say, well, sometimes it hallucinates or it's not very good at playing tic-tac toe, or there's always another complaint. Those are not irrelevant, but I'll just say, sit down, have someone write at a test of 20 questions, you're a PhD, you take the test, let o3 take the test, then have someone grade, see how you've done, then form your opinion. That's my suggestion.Eric Topol (13:16):I think it's pretty practical. I mean, enough with the Turing test, I mean, we've had that Turing test for decades, and I think the way you described it is a little more practical and meaningful these days. But its capabilities to me at least, are still beyond belief eke out of current, not just the large language models, but large reasoning models. And so, it's just gotten to a point where and it's accelerating, every week there's so many other, the competition is good for taking it to the next level.Tyler Cowen (13:50):It can do tasks and it self improves. So o3-pro will be out in a few weeks. It may be out by the time you're hearing this. I think that's obviously going to be better than just pure o3. And then GPT-5 people have said it will be this summer. So every few months there are major advances and there's no sign of those stopping.Eric Topol (14:12):Absolutely. Now, of course, you've been likened to “Treat Tyler like a really good GPT” that is because you're this information meister. What do you ask the man who you can ask anything? That's kind of what we have when we can go to any one of these sites and start our prompts, whatever. So it's kind of funny in some ways you might've annotated this with your quest for knowledge.Tyler Cowen (14:44):Well, I feel I understand the thing better than most people do for that reason, but it's not entirely encouraging to me personally, selfishly to be described that way, whether or not it's accurate. It just means I have a lot more new competition.Eric Topol (14:59):Well, I love this one. “I'm not very interested in the meaning of life, but I'm very interested in collecting information on what other people think is the meaning of life. And it's not entirely a joke” and that's also what you wrote about in the Free Press thing, that most of the things that are going to be written are going to be better AI in the media and that we should be writing books for the AI that's going to ingest them. How do you see this human AI interface growing or moving?Tyler Cowen (15:30):The AI is your smartest reader. It's your most sympathetic reader. It will remember what you tell it. So I think humans should sit down and ask, what does the AI need to know? And also, what is it that I know that's not on the historical record anywhere? That's not just repetition if I put it down, say on the internet. So there's no point in writing repetitions anymore because the AI already knows those things. So the value of what you'd call broadly, memoir, biography, anecdote, you could say secrets. It's now much higher. And the value of repeating basic truths, which by the way, I love as an economist, to be clear, like free trade, tariffs are usually bad, those are basic truths. But just repeating that people will be going to the AI and saying it again won't make the AI any better. So everything you write or podcast, you should have this point in mind.Eric Topol (16:26):So you obviously have all throughout your life in reading lots of books. Will your practice still be to do the primary reading of the book, or will you then go to o3 or whatever or the other way around?Tyler Cowen (16:42):I've become fussier about my reading. So I'll pick up a book and start and then start asking o3 or other models questions about the book. So it's like I get a customized version of the book I want, but I'm also reading somewhat more fiction. Now, AI might in time become very good at fiction, but we're not there now. So fiction is more special. It's becoming more human, and I should read more of it, and I'm doing that.Eric Topol (17:10):Yeah, no, that's great. Now, over the weekend, there was a lot of hubbub about Bill Gates saying that we won't need doctors in the next 10 years because of AI. What are your thoughts about that?Tyler Cowen (17:22):Well, that's wrong as stated, but he may have put it in a more complex way. He's a very smart guy of course. AI already does better diagnosis on humans than medical doctors. Not by a lot, but by somewhat. And that's free and that's great, but if you need brain surgery for some while, you still need the human doctor. So human doctors will need to adjust. And if someone imagines that at some point robots do the brain surgery better, well fine. But I'm not convinced that's within the next 10 years. That would surprise me.Eric Topol (17:55):So to that point, recently, a colleague of mine wrote an op-ed in the New York Times about six studies comparing AI alone versus doctors with AI. And in all six studies, the AI did better than the doctors who had access to AI. Now, you could interpret that as, well they don't know how to use AI. They have automation bias or that is true. What do you think?Tyler Cowen (18:27):It's probably true, but I would add as an interpretation, the value of meta rationality has gone up. So to date, we have not selected doctors for their ability to work with AI, obviously, but some doctors have the personal quality, it's quite distinct from intelligence, but if just knowing when they should defer to someone or something else, and those doctors and researchers will become much more valuable. They're sufficiently modest to defer to the AI and have some judgment as to when they should do that. That's now a super important quality. Over time, I hope our doctors have much more of that. They are selected on that basis, and then that result won't be true anymore.Eric Topol (19:07):So obviously you would qualify. There's a spectrum here. The AI enthusiasts, you and I are both in that group, and then there's the doomsayers and there's somewhere middle ground, of course, where people are trying to see the right balance. Are there concerns about AI, I mean anything about that, how it's moving forward that you're worried about?Tyler Cowen (19:39):Well, any change that big one should have very real concerns. Maybe our biggest concern is that we're not sure what our biggest concern should be. One simple effect that I see coming soon is it will devalue the status of a lot of our intellectuals and what's called our chattering class. A lot of its people like us, we won't seem so impressive anymore. Now, that's not the end of the world for everyone as a whole, but if you ask, what does it mean for society to have the status of its elites so punctured? At a time when we have some, I would say very negative forces attacking those elites in other ways, that to me is very concerning.Eric Topol (20:25):Do you think that although we've seen what's happening with the current administration with respect to the tariffs, and we've already talked about the effects on science funding, do you see this as a short-term hit that will eventually prevail? Do you see them selectively supporting AI efforts and finding the right balance with the tech companies to support them and the competition that exists globally with China and whatnot? How are we going to get forward and what some people consider pretty dark times, which is of course, so seemingly at odds with the most extraordinary times of human support with AI?Tyler Cowen (21:16):Well, the Trump people are very pro AI. I think that's one of the good things about the administration, much pro AI and more interested than were the Biden people. The Biden people, you could say they were interested, but they feared it would destroy the whole world, and they wanted to choke and throttle it in a variety of ways. So I think there's a great number of issues where the Trump people have gone very badly wrong, but at least so far AI's not one of them. I'd give them there like an A or A+ so far. We'll see, right?Eric Topol (21:44):Yeah. As you've seen, we still have some of these companies in some kind of a hot seat like Meta and Google regarding their monopolies, and we saw how some of the tech leaders, not all of them, became very supportive, potentially you could interpret that for their own interests. They wanted to give money to the inauguration and also get favor curry some political favor. But I haven't yet seen the commitment to support AI, talk about a golden age for the United States because so much of this is really centered here and some of the great minds that are helping to drive the AI and these models. But I wonder if there's more that can be done so that we continue to lead in this space.Tyler Cowen (22:45):There's a number of issues here. The first is Trump administration policy toward the FTC, I think has not been wonderful. They appointed someone who seems like would be more appropriate for a democratic or more left-leaning administration. But if you look at the people in the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the White House, they're excellent, and there's always different forces in any administration. But again, so far so good. I don't think they should continue the antitrust suit against Google that is looking like it's going against Google, but that's not really the Trump administration, that's the judiciary, and that's been underway for quite some while. So with Trump, it's always very hard to predict. The lack of predictability, I would say, is itself a big problem. But again, if you're looking for one area where it's good, that would be my pick.Eric Topol (23:35):Yeah, well, I would agree with that for sure. I just want to see more evidence that we capitalize on the opportunities here and don't let down. I mean, do you think outlawing selling the Nvidia chips to China is the way to do this? It seems like that hurts Nvidia and isn't China going to get whatever they want anyway?Tyler Cowen (24:02):That restriction, I favored when it was put in. I'm now of the view that it has not proved useful. And if you look at how many of those chips get sold, say to Malaysia, which is not a top AI performer, one strongly suspects, they end up going to China. China is incentivized to develop its own high-quality chips and be fully independent of Western supply lines. So I think it's not worked out well.Eric Topol (24:29):Yeah, no, I see that since you've written so much about this, it's good to get your views because I share those views and you know a lot more about this than I would, but it seems like whether it's Malaysia or other channels, they're going to get the Blackwell chips that they want. And it seems like this is almost like during Covid, how you would close down foreign travel. It's like it doesn't really work that well. There's a big world out there, right?Tyler Cowen (25:01):It's an interesting question. What kind of timing do you want for when both America and China get super powerful AI? And I don't think you actually want only America to have it. It's a bit like nuclear weapons, but you don't want China to have it first. So you want some kind of staggered sequence where we're always a bit ahead of them, but they also maybe are constraining us a bit. I hope we're on track to get that, but I really, really don't want China to have it first.Eric Topol (25:31):Yeah, I mean I think there's, as you're pointing out aptly is a healthy managed competition and that if we can keep that lead there, it is good for both and it's good for the world ideally. But getting back, is there anything you're worried about in AI? I mean because I know you're upbeat about its net effective, and we've already talked about amazing potential for efficiency, productivity. It basically upends a lot of economic models of the past, right?Tyler Cowen (26:04):Yes. I think it changes or will change so many parts of life. Again, it's a bit difficult to specify worries, but how we think of ourselves as humans, how we think of our gods, our religions, I feel all that will be different. If you imagine trying to predict the effects of the printing press after Gutenberg, that would've been nearly impossible to do. I think we're all very glad we got the printing press, but you would not say all of it went well. It's not that you would blame the printing press for those subsequent wars, but it was disruptive to the earlier political equilibrium. I think we need to take great care to do it better this time. AI in different forms will be weaponized. There's great potential for destruction there and evil people will use it. So of course, we need to be very much concerned.Eric Topol (26:54):And there's obviously many of these companies have ways to try to have efforts to anticipate that. That is alignments and various safety type parallel efforts like Ilya did when he moved out of OpenAI and others. Is that an important part of each of these big efforts, whether it's OpenAI, Google, or the rest of them anthropic that they put in resources to keep things from going off the tracks?Tyler Cowen (27:34):That's good and it's important, but I think it's also of limited value because the more we learn how to control AI systems directly, the bad guys will have similar lessons, and they will use alignment possibly to make their AIs bad and worse and that it obeys them. So yeah, I'd rather the good guys make progress on what they're trying to do, but don't think it's going to solve the problem. It creates new problems as well.Eric Topol (28:04):So because of AI, do you think you'll write any more books in the future?Tyler Cowen (28:11):I'm writing a book right now. I suspect it will be my last. That book, its title is Mentors. It's about how to mentor individuals and what do the social sciences know about mentoring. My view is that even if the AI could write the book better than I can, that people actually want to read a book like that from a human. I could be wrong, but I think we should in the future, restrict ourselves to books that are better by a human. I will write every day for the rest of my life, but I'm not sure that books make sense at the current moment.Eric Topol (28:41):Yeah, that's a really important point, and I understand that completely. Now, when you write for the Free Press, which will be besides the Conversations with Tyler podcast and the Marginal Revolution, what kind of things will you be writing about in the Free Press?Tyler Cowen (28:56):Well, I just submitted a piece. It's a defense of elitism. So the problem with our elites is that they have not been elitist enough and have not adhered strictly enough to the scientific method. So it's a very simple point. I think to you it would be pretty obvious, but it needs to be said. It's not out there enough in the debate that yes, sometimes the elites have truly and badly let us down, but the answer is not to reject elitism per se, but to impose higher elitist standards on our sometimes supposed elites. So that's the piece I just sent in. It's coming out soon and should be out by the time anyone hears this.Eric Topol (29:33):Well, I look forward to reading that. So besides a polymath, you might be my favorite polymath, Tyler you didn't know that. Also, you're a futurist because when you have that much information ingested, and now of course with a super performance of AI to help, it really does help to try to predict where we're headed. Have I missed anything in this short conversation that you think we should touch on?Tyler Cowen (30:07):Well, I'll touch on a great interest of yours. I like your new book very much. I think over the course of the next 40 years working with AI, we will beat back essentially every malady that kills people. It doesn't mean you live forever. Many, many more people will simply die of what we now call old age. There's different theories as to what that means. I don't have a lot of expertise in that, but the actual things people are dying from will be greatly postponed. And if you have a kid today to think that kid might expect to live to be 97 or even older, that to me is extremely plausible.Tyler Cowen (30:45):I won't be around to see it, but that's a phenomenal development for human beings.Eric Topol (30:50):I share that with you. I'm sad that I won't be around to see it, but exactly as you've outlined, the fact that we're going to be able to have a huge impact on particularly the age-related diseases, but also as you touched on the genetic diseases with genome editing and many other, I think, abilities that we have now controlling the immune system, I mean a central part of how we get into trouble with diseases. So I couldn't agree with you more, and that's a really good note to finish on because so many of the things that we have discussed today, we share similar views and we come at it from totally different worlds. The economist that has a very wide-angle lens, and I guess you'd say the physician who has a more narrow lens aperture. But thank you so much, Tyler for joining me today.Tyler Cowen (31:48):My pleasure. Let me close by telling you some good news. I have AI friends who think you and I, I'm 63 will be around to see that, I don't agree with them they don't convince me, but there are smart people who think the benefits from this will come quite soon.Eric Topol (32:03):I sure hope they're right.Tyler Cowen (32:05):Yes.*******************************************SUPER AGERS, my new book, was released on May 6th. It's about extending our healthspan, and I introduce 2 of my patients (one below, Mrs. L.R.) as exemplars to learn from. This potential to prevent the 3 major age-related diseases would not be possible without the jumps in the science of aging and multimodal A.I. My op-ed preview of the book was published in The NY Times last week. Here's a gift link. I did a podcast with Mel Robbins on the book here. Here's my publisher ‘s (Simon and Schuster) site for the book. If you're interested in the audio book, I am the reader (first time I have done this, quite an experience!)The book was reviewed in WSJ. Here's a gift linkThere have been many pieces written about it. Here's a gift link to the one in the Wall Street Journal and here for the one in the New York Times .**********************Thanks for reading and subscribing to Ground Truths.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.All content on Ground Truths— newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of the Post Status Happiness Hour, host Michelle Frechette welcomes Brad Williams, Chief Executive Officer of Web Dev Studios, to discuss the new Theme Switcher Pro plugin. Brad introduces Theme Switcher Pro, a plugin designed to help WordPress users transition from the classic editor to the block editor (Gutenberg) without a complete site rebuild. They discuss the plugin's features, including its ability to switch themes for specific posts or pages, and its benefits for businesses and developers. The episode concludes with a focus on community support and upcoming WordPress events.Top TakeawaysTheme Switcher Pro Simplifies Testing and Switching Between WordPress Themes: Theme Switcher Pro is positioned as a powerful utility for developers and agencies to easily preview, switch, and test multiple WordPress themes on a live site without affecting the frontend user experience. It removes the friction from theme testing, making it safer and faster to compare themes, especially during redesigns or audits.Built Specifically for Agencies, Developers, and High-Volume Users: Brad Williams emphasized that Theme Switcher Pro is not just a hobby plugin—it's designed for professional workflows. Agencies managing many client sites or developers constantly evaluating new themes are the target audience. Features are built with this high-usage context in mind, including the ability to bookmark themes, preview them privately, and manage theme stacks.Theme Switcher Pro Reflects Real-World Workflow Pain Points: The product emerged from Brad's direct experience at WebDevStudios and feedback from others facing the same problem: managing and previewing themes across many sites was a repetitive, manual, and risky process. Theme Switcher Pro directly addresses these workflow inefficiencies and turns them into a smooth, controlled experience.Mentioned In The Show:Web Dev StudiosTheme Switcher ProOllieAsterGit Commit

É a hora de mergulhar no livro do Clube de Leitura 30:MIN de abril de 2025! Neste episódio, Arthur Marchetto, Cecilia Garcia Marcon e AJ Oliveira discutem Onde vivem as monstras, da autora japonesa Aoko Matsuda (ed. Gutenberg, trad. Rita Kohl).A coletânea de contos reconta histórias tradicionais do Japão, dando voz a mulheres que das narrativas originais. Matsuda escreve a partir das narrativas populares e histórias narrativas que refletem sobre papéis de gênero. No papo, o trio analisa a estrutura da coletânea, a habilidade da autora ao ressignificar o folclore e a roupagem adotada pelo elemento fantástico nessa leitura. Então, aperta o play e já se prepara para o próximo livro: Contra Fogo, de Pablo L. C. Casella (ed. Todavia)!

It's Thursday, May 8th, A.D. 2025. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  I'm Adam McManus. (Adam@TheWorldview.com) By Jonathan Clark Iran continues to imprison Christian pastor and wife Authorities in Iran continue to hold a pastor's wife, 56-year-old Lida Alexani, in solitary confinement after arresting the pastor, reports Article 18. Iranian-Armenian pastor Joseph Shahbazian was arrested in February and sent to the infamous Evin Prison in Tehran. He has faced prison time before for participating in a house church and collecting tithes. Authorities also arrested his wife last month. Iran has criminalized offering tithes to support church activities. The country is ranked ninth on the Open Doors' World Watch List of nations where it is most difficult to be a Christian.  India launched air strikes on Pakistan On Tuesday, India launched air strikes on Pakistan. India said it was in retaliation for an attack last month from alleged Pakistani nationals. India and Pakistan are on the brink of a wider conflict. Local church leaders are calling for Christians to pray for the countries. Bishop Nadeem Kamran is the head of the Anglican Church of Pakistan's Diocese of Lahore. He told Christian Daily International, “As the fear of war looms over the subcontinent, I ask all Christians in the two countries to observe … a day of prayer and fasting for peace in the region.” In 1 Timothy 2:1-2, the Apostle Paul wrote, “Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence.” Trump's truce with Houthis On Tuesday, President Donald Trump announced a truce with the Houthis in Yemen. The United States has been carrying out strikes on the Houthis in Yemen for weeks. This is in response to the Houthis attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea. Despite the truce, the Houthis said they will continue attacks on Israel in support of Palestinians in Gaza. Listen to Trump's comments at an Oval Office meeting. TRUMP: “The Houthis have announced that they don't want to fight anymore. We will honor that. We will stop the bombings. They have capitulated.” Trump will rebuild and reopen Alcatraz off San Francisco coast President Trump announced Sunday he is directing the Bureau of Prisons to rebuild and reopen Alcatraz. The small island is located 1.25 miles offshore from San Francisco near the Golden Gate Strait. The island was developed in the mid-19th century with facilities for a lighthouse, a military fortification, and a military prison. In 1934, the island was converted into a federal prison, Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary. The strong currents around the island and cold water temperatures made escape nearly impossible. The prison became one of the most notorious in American history. Trump posted on Truth Social that the infamous former prison will “house America's most ruthless and violent Offenders. We will no longer be held hostage to criminals, thugs, and judges that are afraid to do their job and allow us to remove criminals, who came into our Country illegally. The reopening of ALCATRAZ will serve as a symbol of Law, Order, and JUSTICE.” The prison closed 60 years ago, but once housed the likes of Al Capone, George “Machine Gun” Kelly, and James “Whitey” Bulger. HHS denounces misguided treatments for gender confusion The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released a report last Thursday, denouncing so-called treatments for gender confusion. The study evaluated the impact of transgender drugs and surgeries on children.  The department noted, “These interventions carry risk of significant harms including infertility/sterility, sexual dysfunction, impaired bone density accrual, adverse cognitive impacts, cardiovascular disease and metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, surgical complications, and regret.” Federal Reserve keeps interest rate in the 4.25%-4.5% range The Federal Reserve decided to keep interest rates unchanged on Wednesday.  The Fed's benchmark interest rate remains at 4.25% to 4.5%. The Fed warned of potentially higher unemployment and inflation as the economy adjusts to President Trump's tariff plan. Meanwhile, Trump continues to call for lower interest rates. World's largest page of Bible just printed to honor Gutenberg Press And finally, the International Gutenberg Society printed the world's largest page of the Bible, measuring 38 square yards, on April 26th, 2025 in Mainz, Germany. The event commemorated the 625th anniversary of the birth of Johannes Gutenberg. The German inventor created the moveable-type printing press. And he produced the first printed version of the Bible. The Gutenberg printing press revolutionized the dissemination of the Bible, making it more accessible to a wider audience than ever before. Prior to Gutenberg's invention, Bibles were hand-copied, a laborious process that made them expensive and rare. The printing press allowed for mass production, increasing availability and lowering costs. This led to a surge in literacy, the spread of the Bible, and Christianity. The commemorative event showcased a massive copy of the first page of John's Gospel. It was made from the largest industrial paper rolls available and covered nearly 400 square feet.  John 1:1-4 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Thursday, May 8th, my 59th birthday, in the year of our Lord 2025. Subscribe for free by Spotify, Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Adam McManus (Adam@TheWorldview.com). Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

S04E18 - La New York Public LibraryLa New York Public Library : Un temple du savoir au cœur de ManhattanLa New York Public Library, l'une des bibliothèques les plus emblématiques au monde, se dresse majestueusement sur la Cinquième Avenue, à l'angle de la 42e Rue, en plein cœur de Manhattan. Inaugurée en 1911, cette institution publique est bien plus qu'un simple lieu de lecture : c'est un symbole de savoir, de culture et d'accès à l'information pour tous.Son bâtiment principal, la Stephen A. Schwarzman Building, impressionne par son architecture de style Beaux-Arts. La façade en marbre blanc est gardée par deux célèbres lions de pierre, surnommés "Patience" et "Fortitude", qui sont devenus les fiers symboles de la bibliothèque. Dès l'entrée, le visiteur est accueilli par un hall majestueux menant à de vastes salles de lecture, dont la célèbre Rose Main Reading Room, avec ses plafonds ornés, ses longues rangées de tables en bois et ses lustres élégants.La bibliothèque abrite des millions de documents : livres, manuscrits rares, cartes, photographies, et archives historiques. Parmi ses trésors, on trouve une Bible de Gutenberg, les papiers de Malcolm X, ou encore des manuscrits originaux de Charles Dickens.Lieu d'étude, de recherche et de découverte, la New York Public Library est ouverte à tous, New-Yorkais comme visiteurs du monde entier. Elle accueille également de nombreuses expositions, conférences et événements culturels, perpétuant sa mission d'éducation et d'enrichissement intellectuel.Retrouvez tous les liens des réseaux sociaux et des plateformes du podcast ici : https://linktr.ee/racontemoinewyorkHébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, I chat with Dan about his recent journey to Buenos Aires for stem cell therapy on his knee. After living with an injury since 1975, he shares how advancements in medical technology are providing new solutions for pain and mobility. We discuss the challenges of recovery and the impressive potential of these therapies, along with vivid stories from his experience in this vibrant city. We also touch on the role of AI in our modern landscape, questioning its reliability and pondering whether it enhances creativity or simply recycles existing ideas. As we explore the implications of AI, we consider how it can assist in achieving desired outcomes without requiring individuals to develop new skills themselves. Sullivan emphasizes the importance of meaningful work and the balance between utilizing technology and fostering genuine human creativity. Our conversation wraps up by highlighting the ongoing journey of personal growth and the need for continuous improvement in an ever-evolving world. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Dan shares his personal journey to Buenos Aires for stem cell therapy to rejuvenate his knee cartilage, highlighting advancements in medical technology and the promising future of these treatments. We explore the historical significance of technological revolutions, from steam power to the creation of the alphabet and Arabic numbers, and their impact on communication and societal progress. The discussion delves into the rapid advancements in AI technology, questioning its role in creativity and entrepreneurship, and examining its potential for convenience and efficiency. Dan and I consider the distinction between ability and capability, reflecting on how current technological advancements like AI have amplified capabilities while individual aspirations may lag. We discuss the integration of AI in creative processes, highlighting how it can enhance productivity and creativity without diminishing human input. The conversation touches on the importance of efficiency and prioritization in personal growth, exploring strategies for optimizing tasks and delegating effectively. We conclude by reflecting on the ongoing nature of personal and technological growth, emphasizing the value of continuous improvement and collaboration in achieving success. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr. Sullivan. Dan: Mr Jackson, it's been a while, it's been a while. Dean: And yet here we are. Like no time has passed. Dan: Yes. Dean: Because it's now. Dan: But I've put on a lot of bear miles since I saw you last. Dean: Yeah, tell me about your journeys. Dan: Yeah well, buenos Aires. Yep Just got back yesterday and am in considerable pain. Oh really what happened. Well, they give you new stem cells. So now, they're going after. They're going still on the knee, but now they're going after tendons and ligaments, yeah, and so this may seem contrarian, but if you're in pain, it means that they're working. Dean: Oh, okay. Dan: How's that? For a compelling offer If you feel really bad about this, it means that what I'm offering you is a great solution. Dean: Yeah, with a name like Smuckers, it's got to be good, right yeah? What was that cough syrup that was known to taste so bad? Buckley's, buckley's. Dan: Tastes so bad. Tastes awful Works great. Dean: Yeah, that's right. That's the perfect thing. Tastes awful, works great. So were they completely pleased with your progress. Dan: it's, yeah, I think that the from what I can tell from they. They show you pictures of other complete cartridges. You know, okay, with other people and my left this is my left knee an injury from 1975. 1975, uh-huh, so 50 years, and it progressively wore down. It was a meniscus tear and in those days they would remove the torn part of the meniscus, which they don't do anymore. They have new surgical glue and they just glue it back together again. But this is the. This is one of the cost of living in over a period of history where things get better and so, as a result, I have a cartilage today which is equal and capability as it was before I tore it in 1975. However, all the adjustments my left leg and my head to make, 50-year period of adjusting to a deteriorating capability in my left there was a lot of calcification and stresses and strains on the tendons. So now that they can see the complete cartilage back, they can know exactly what they have to do with the otherons. So now that they can see the complete cartilage back, they can know exactly what they have to do with the other things. So they still reinforce it. So I get new stem cells for the cartilage because it has to be reinforced and so it's a good thing. I'm planning to live another 75 years because I think every quarter over that period I'm going to be going to Argentina. Dean: Oh boy, this is great. Dan: Or Argentina, is coming to me. They're going through their FDA phases right now and he's getting the doctor scientist who created this is getting his permanent resident card in the United States. So I think probably five years five years it'll be available to others. You know they don't have to make the trip. Dean: Well, that's great so now you've got the knee cartilage of a preteen Swedish boy. We were bouncing around the mountains. Dan: Yeah, something like that, yeah, something like that, something like that it's interesting that it wasn't 1975 when the $6 million man started out. Dean: That's what you're going to end up as the $6 million man. We can rebuild. We'll see. Dan: Yeah, but I had. While we were there, we had a longtime client from Phoenix was down. He was working on knees and rotator cuffs in his shoulders. Dean: And. Dan: I was able to say does it hurt? And he says yes, it does, and I said that means it's working. Dean: That means it's working. Dan: Yeah, and I said. He said you didn't tell me about the pain part before you encouraged me to come down here and I said, well, why? You know? Why, pull around with a clear message. Dean: And I said well, why, you know why fool around with a clear message, Right, I remember when Dave Astry had he had, like you know, a hundred thousand dollars worth of all of it done, all the joints, all the like full body stuff, and he was just in such pain afterwards for a little while. But how long does the pain last? Dan: Imagine it's like getting well, if I go by the previous trips, which were not equal in intensity to this one, there was about three or four days. Three or four days and then you know, you're, you're up and around. Yeah, as a result of this, I'm not going to be able to make my Arizona trip, because this week for genius Right, because? I'm going to have to be in wheelchairs and everything. And if there's one place in the world you don't want to be not able to walk around, it's Phoenix. Because, it's all walking. That's the truth. Yeah, up and down. So we're calling that off for now, and yeah, so anyway, and anyway. But they're really thriving down there. They're building a new clinic in a different part of the city, which is a huge city. I never realized how big Buenos Aires is. It's along the same size as London, you know London. Dean: England. Yeah right, you know how big London is. How long are you go on each trip? How long are you there? Dan: We arrive on a Sunday morning and we leave on a Friday night. Okay, so the whole week. Yeah, yeah, it's about eight days, eight travel days, because on Saturday we have to go to Atlanta to catch the next plane. Dean: Yeah. Dan: That's either a dog or a monkey. Which do you have there? Dean: That was a dog, my neighbor's. I'm sitting out in my courtyard. That was my neighbor's dog. It's an absolutely beautiful Florida morning today, I mean it is room temperature with a slight breeze. It's just so peaceful out here in my courtyard aside from working out Well. Dan: you're close to the Fountain of Youth. That's exactly right. How many? 100 miles? 100 miles to the north, st Augustine, that's right. That's exactly right. Dean: Yeah, this whole. Just look at. Dan: The De Leon. That's right yeah. Dean: This whole just look at the day. Leon, yeah, I know my I think we're going to look back at this time. You know like what? You are on the leading edge of big advantage of these treatments. You know the things that are available medically, medical science wise to us, and you realize how. I was having a conversation with Charlotte this morning about the I want to layer in you know the benchmarks technologically around the things that we've been talking about in terms of text and pictures and audio and video and seeing them as capabilities where it all started. You know, and it's amazing that really all of it, aside from the printing press with gutenberg, is really less than 150 years old, all of it, because she asked about the benchmarks along the way and if you went from Gutenberg to different evolutions of the press, to the typewriter, to the word processors in personal computing and digital, you know PDFs and all of that stuff and distribution has really only started. You know full scale in 150 years, along with the phonograph in the mid-1800s, the, you know, photography and moving pictures all kind of happened in that one 1850 to 1900 period. You know, but the big change of course, yeah, 1900 to 1950. Dan: Well, you know it's interesting because it's built like the question of what are the tallest mountains on the planet, and the answer is not Mount Everest. The tallest mountains on the planet are the Hawaiian Islands. Dean: Oh, okay. Dan: You know, the big one, the big island, I think the top peak there, Mauna Loa. I think Mauna Loa is a name of it and it's about 30,. Everest is 20, 29,000 and change, but Mauna Loa is around 32,000. Dean: Is that right yeah? Dan: but it's. You know that's an island that goes right down to the ocean floor and I think the same thing with technology is that we look back and we just take it back to sea level. We take technology back but we don't see the massive, you know, the mass amount of growth that was. That was over tens of thousands of years. That was before you could actual changing technology. I think probably have the perception maybe you know 150 or 200 years where we can see changes in technology over a decade. You know it would be a tremendous thing. It's the perception of change that I think has suddenly appeared on the planet. You know, and I think that the big one, there were three right in a row it was steam power, it was electricity and it was internal combustion. You had those three multiplier technologies Steam 18, no 1770s, 17,. You know it was fully developed probably right at the time of the American Revolution 1776. You had really, dependably, certain steam power right around then. You had to have that multiplier. You had to have that multiplier for there to be significant, frequent technological jumps. You had to have this. Before that, it was slavery. It was animals and slavery that got you, and that didn't change. Dean: Yeah, I mean because the steam. That's what really was. The next big revolution in the printing press was the steam powered printing Steam powered presses. Dan: Yeah, steam presses. Dean: That allowed the newspapers to really take off then yeah. Dan: Yeah, it's fascinating. Dean: You know that you have Charlotte in my who knows all of that. Dan: You better explain that, you better explain that. Dean: I think all of our for the new listeners. Well, there may be new people. There may be new people today. Dan: You know, yes, I don't want my reputation. Dean: That's so funny. Well, even that you know having an AI that we have named Charlotte, my chat GPT buddy, to be able to bounce these ideas off and she gets it. I mean, she sees the thing, ideas off and she gets it. I mean, she sees the thing. But you know, it's really what you said about the islands. You know the sea floor right, the bedrock, the level all the way down is where that is. And I think if you look at, even before Gutenberg, the platform that was built on, for there to be movable type, there had to be type, that had to be the alphabet, the alphabet had to be. And it's just amazing when you think about what would have been the distribution method and the agreement that this was the alphabet. This is what this, this is what we're all gonna do and these are the words. Dan: And I'm fascinated by that whole, that whole development, because all that, yeah, yeah, it's really interesting because, as far as we can tell, it's it's roughly about 3 000 years ago. The alphabet eastern mediterranean is basically, but where it really took on that we notice a historical impact is with the Greeks. Their alphabet and ours isn't all that different. I think it's got a few letters different using our set of ABC. It's like 80%, 80%, 85% similarity between that and the. Greek alphabet. And the other thing is did the culture, or did the country, if you will, that? Had it, did they have any other powers? I mean, were they military powers, were they? Maritime powers and the Greeks had it. The Greeks were, they had military power. They had, you know, they were you know they weren't an island, but they had a lot of ports to the Mediterranean. And did they have ideas to go along with the alphabet? Did they have significant, significant ideas? Powerful because they were that's where the spotlight was for new thinking about things at the same time that the alphabet appeared. So they could, you know, they could get this out to a lot of different people and but it's not. It's not very old in terms of time on the planet. Right when you think about the big picture, yeah, yeah, and you could see how the countries that the civilizations, countries, cultures that did not have the alphabet, how they didn't make the same kind of progress. Dean: Yeah, that's. Dan: I mean, it's really and then the Arabic numbering system was huge, where you had zero, you had nine, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, and you had zero, and zero made all this. Nothing made all the difference in the world. Nothing made all the difference. Dean: oh, that's funny, I heard a comedian talking about the Greek salad. It was such a. It gave us so much so early. But really all we've gotten in the last few hundred years is the salad, the Greek salad they've kind of been resting on their laurels, you know. Dan: Yeah, don't forget souvlaki. Dean: Oh yes, souvlaki, Exactly. Dan: Souvlaki is a very big contribution to human progress. Dean: Uh-huh and baklava, Baklava yeah. Yes, that's so funny. I had an interesting thought the other day. I was talking with someone about where does this go? You start to see now the proliferation of AI being used in content creation poll. You know 82% of people don't trust any content that's created to be. You know whether it's authentic or whatever, or real compared to. Dan: AI created and yeah, of course I don't trust that poll. Dean: Right, exactly. Dan: None of that. How could you possibly get a poll? Dean: I know. Dan: I mean how you know your hundred closest friends. Dean: I mean, is that what I mean exactly? Dan: I think that whole thing 82 out of my hundred closest friends who's? Got a hundred close. Who's got a hundred closest friends? You know, like that yeah and you know I mean so. It's ridiculous. What we know is that it's pervasive and it's growing. Dean: Yes, that's true, I can tell. Dan: And you know I was really struck by it, like if I go back two years, let's say, you know the spring of 23. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And yeah, and I'm having my connector calls, especially with the raise owners, and you know so maybe there's 15 people on the call two years ago and maybe one of them is one of these lead scouts. He does things technological, you know, it could be Lior Weinstein or Chad Jenkins, like that, or Mike Koenigs might be Mike Koenigs, and of course they're into it and they're into it and they're making very confident predictions about where this is all going, and I go to three weeks ago, when I had two FreeZone podcasts day after each other, tuesday and Wednesday, and there might have been a combined 23 different people. A couple of people appeared twice, so 23 people and every one of them was involved in some way with AI. That had happened over a two-year period and there wasn't any, what I would say, wonder about this. There wasn't any sense. Of you know, this is amazing or anything. They're just talking about it as if it's a normal thing. So fundamental capability has gotten into the entrepreneurial marketplace and is now considered normal. Dean: Yeah, Just the way like yeah. And Wi-Fi is, you know, internet. We take that for granted. Yeah, I worry, though, that I think like, generationally, where does this head? I'm saying that it just seems like a proliferation of intellectual incest is where we're headed with that, that if all the new you know, generative ai are just regurgitating, assembling stuff that already exists, who's creating the new thoughts in there? Dan: you know, well you say you're worried I'm not worried. Dean: I don't, I mean you're not worried, I'm not worried, I'm just, you're like one of those people who says they're curious, but they actually don't care. I don't, I don't really care. You're right, they want to be seen as caring. Dan: You want to be seen as worrying. Dean: Yeah, thanks for calling me out. Dan: You're not worried at all. Dean: Yeah, that's it. I need you to keep me in check. Dan: Actually, you're luxuriating in your inequality. Dean: Yes, exactly Because I know I'm coming up with original ideas. That's right. Well, has it changed at all? No, I think that's the thing. I'm just observing it. I'm really starting to see. I think I mentioned years ago, probably when we first started the Joy of Procrastination podcast I read an article about the tyranny of convenience and I thought that was really interesting. Right, that convenience is kind of an unrated driver of things. We're like on the, you know, at the we're on the exponential curve of convenience now that there's very little need to do anything other than decide that's what you want, you know, and I think, riding on that level, I just see, like, where things are going now, like, if you think about it, the beginning of the 1900s we were, if you wanted to go anywhere, it was with a horse right. And we're at a situation now I've had it my the new tesla self-driving, they've got the full self-driving thing is, I was, I went to meet with Ilko in Vero Beach, which is about an hour and a half away, hour and 15 minutes away, and I pulled out of my driveway not even out of my driveway, I just pulled out of my garage and I said you know, navigate to the restaurant where we were meeting in Vero Beach, and then I, literally, dan, did not touch the wheel as we pulled into the restaurant All the way. The entire drive was done by Tesla and to me. You know, you see now that we're literally one step away from hopping in the backseat and just waking up when you get there, kind of thing. We're inches away from that now because functionally, it's already happening and I have 100% confidence in it. It's you, it's. It's an amazing advancement and I just think about every single thing, like you know, every possible thing that could be done for you is that's where we're moving towards. Do you know, dan Martell? Have you met dan? Dan: no, I heard his name, so he's a really cool guy. Dean: He wrote a book recently called buy back your time, but his, you know, he's made his name with sas companies, he had a sas academy and he's a investor and creates that. But he said the modern, the new modern definition is, you know, instead of software as a service, it's we're moving into success as a service, that it's delivering the result to people, as opposed to the tool that you can use to create the result. And I think that's where we're going with AI more than I don't think people learn how to use the tool as much as people organizing the tool to deliver popular results that people are going to want. And I think that that's really what you know. Electricity, if you go all the way back, like if you think about that's probably on the magnitude of the impact, right, but even way beyond that. But if you think about it, wasn't just electricity, it was what that capability, the capability of electricity, opened up, the possibility for the ability to have constant refrigeration. You know some of the application of that core capability and lighting, and lighting exactly. Dan: Lighting, lighting, yeah. Dean: So I think that's where we're yeah, looking back you know you know. Dan: The thing that strikes me, though, is it all depends on the aspirations of the individual who has these things available and my sense is, I don't see any increase, relatively speaking, in people's aspiration you don't see any increase in people's aspiration. I don't think people are any more ambitious now than when I started coaching, so they have I'll just quote you back a distinction which you made, which I think is an incredibly important distinction the ability, the difference between an ability and a capability. People have enormous capability, exponential capability, but I don't see their abilities getting any better. Right, I agree. Yes. So it doesn't mean that everybody can do anything. Actually only a very small few of people can do anything yeah. And so I think people's ability to be in the gap has gone up exponentially because they're not taking advantage of the capabilities that are there. So they feel actually, as things improve, they're getting worse. That's why the drug addiction is so high. Drug addiction is so high and addiction is so high is that people have a profound sense that, even though the world around them is getting better, they're not. Dean: Yeah, I just thought. As you're saying, all that you know is thinking about that capability and ability. That's a profound distinction. I think so, yeah. Dan: But also the the thing I'll write it down, and I'll write it down and send to you to know that. Dean: I'm serious about it, okay, but the thing people's desire for the things that ability can provide, you know, is I think there's a opportunity there in if you have the capability to, if you have the ability to apply a capability to get somebody a result that they want and value without having to go and develop the ability to create it, I think there's an opportunity there. That's kind of along the lines of that success as a service. Dan: No on an individual basis yes. But nothing's changed between the inequality of certain individuals and other individuals. Dean: Nothing's changed there. No, I think you're right, it's still distribution. Dan: Except that I think people are feeling it's still distribution, Except that the people who I think people are feeling more unequal. Dean: Yeah, yeah, but the ability to and I think AI gives people, you know, the ability to do create content at scale that they wouldn't have the ability to do otherwise. You know, even though it's mediocre, I think that's really the thing we're going to be able to have a, you know, an onslaught of no, I think it magnifies who you are to begin with. Dan: If you're mediocre, I think you get exponential mediocrity I guess. Dean: Thank you, I don't think. Dan: I don't think it takes a poor writer and makes them into a great writer. No, it does not. Dean: That's what I'm saying. Dan: Because they don't have the discernment between what's good writing and bad writing to start with. Well, how would they know when to get the AI back? I mean grammatically, I mean if they're bad at grammar, correct spelling, but that's not meaning, that doesn't have anything to do with meaning. So, yeah, so you know, I'm noticing. I mean I've normalized it already. I mean I put everything through perplexity. I read a whole paragraph and I run it through and then I'll add context to it, I'll add dimensions to it and I think but I'm the one coming up with the prompts, I doing the prompts, it's not prompting. It doesn't prompt me at all right you know, yeah, it doesn't impress me. Till the day I start in the morning, says Dan, while you were sleeping, while you were having, you know, reading and everything else. I've been doing some thinking on your behalf and I've thought this through. Now I'm impressed. Dean: I wonder how far we are away from that. Dan: I mean infinity away, uh-huh right, because that's not what it does. That's what we do. Yeah, yeah. Where do you think the desire comes from? Where do you think the desire because I see it almost as a desire is that we're completely replaceable? Where do you think that desire comes from? Dean: The desire for that people have. I think if you go down to the that technology can completely replace me. Dan: I mean, it seems to me to be an odd aspiration. Dean: I wonder what the I heard. I saw somebody let me see if I get the words right saying that I don't want to. I don't want AI to create art and writing so that I can do the dishes. I want AI to do the dishes and cook so that I can create art and music. Which is so yeah, I mean, when you look at the fundamental things like why does anybody do anything? What drives desire? I think, if you go back to the core thing, like the life that we live right now is so far removed from the life of ancestors. You know, in terms of the daily, you know, if you just look at what even going to Maslow's needs right of the if everybody we want to have a nice house, we want to have a car to drive around in, we want to have food, meals that are plentiful and delicious, and money to do the things that we want to do, but I think that most people would be content with those things. I think it's a very rarefied exception of people that are ambitious beyond their comfort requirements. Like you look at, why does somebody who you know you look at those things that once somebody reaches economic freedom kind of thing or whatever, it's very it's not uncommon that the people who don't need to continue doing stuff continue to do stuff. You know that can, like you're baked in ambition and I think score right if you look at the things that you're beyond, you don't need that at 80. Dan: I like being fully occupied with meaningful work. Dean: Right. Dan: In other words, I like working, I really do like working. Yeah, and there's no difference between the amount of time working at age. I am 80, almost 81. Dean: Yeah. Dan: At age. I am 80, almost 81. And there's no difference between the amount of hours. If you measure me by a day a week, there's no difference in the number of hours that I'm working which qualifies under work. You know it's a focus day kind of work. There's no difference now than when I was 50. How I'm going about it is very different. What I'm surrounded by in terms of other capabilities, other people's capabilities, is very different. I'm surrounded with it by. Technology is very different, okay, but it's still the same. I have sort of a measure of quality. You know that the work is. I like doing the work I'm good at. The work is meaningful. I like doing the work I'm good at. The work is meaningful, I find the work energizing, I find the work rewarding stays exactly the same and that's what I'm always. So when ai comes along, I said does it affect the amount of meaningful work that I do? And so far it hasn't changed anything and it's actually increased it. It's like I would say it. Actually I find and I can just measure it in projects that I'll start and continue work through until the project is completed. It's gone up considerably since I've had perplexity yeah, oh, that's interesting. Dean: So what would you say, like, what are the top few ways that you like? Integrate perplexity to an advantage like that for you, then? Because? Dan: you're basically, you're an observer of what you know and you're thinking about your thinking that hiring with Jeff Madoff and Jeff is working on the part of the book that involves interviews with people in show business and people who really understand the concept of casting rather than hiring, and the people who've built their businesses on a theater approach. So Jeff's doing that and we have our team supporting him. They're setting up the interviews, we're recording the interviews and we're putting them into print form for him. But the interesting thing about it is that I'm just working on the tool part of the book, the four-by-four casting tool, which is actually going to be five chapters. It's actually five chapters of the book Because the entire psychology of having people create their own roles inside your company is the essence of what casting, not hiring, really means is that you're not giving people job descriptions. You're what a completed project looks like, what a completed process looks like and everything else, but how they go about it they create for themselves. They actually create it. So they're not automatons. We're not creating robots here. We're creating people and we want them to be alert, curious, responsive and resourceful. What does? that mean we want things to happen faster, easier, bigger and better. What does that mean? We want them to create projects with a sense of commitment, courage and capability and confidence. So we're laying this out, so it's like a human being's brain manual, basically, as we're putting together that when you're involved in teamwork, what it looks like like. So what I'll do is I'll write a paragraph on my own time, just on word. I write in maybe a hundred word paragraph and what's going to be the context of this, and then I'll immediately go to perplexity and I said now I want you to take the this hundred word paragraph and I want you to come. I want you to divide it into three 50 word paragraphs and stressing these, and have one distinct idea for each paragraph. But I want the meaning of the three paragraphs to integrate with each other and reinforce each other. But there's a distinctly new thought. So I just give it all directions, I press the button and out it comes. So I said okay now looking at the essence of each of the three paragraphs, I'd like you to give each one of them a really great punchy subhead thing. I got my subheads, but I'm really engaged with, I'm sort of in real teamwork. I'm teamwork with this other intelligence and that feels yeah, really terrific, that feels really terrific. Dean: That feels really terrific, that's great. So you're using it to, you're the. You know I heard somebody talk about that the 10, 80, 10 situation where you're the beginning 10% of something, then let it create, expand that, create the 80%, and then you're the final 10 on weaving, yeah, together and except I would have about five, ten, eighty tens for the complete right. Dan: You know, yeah, and, like in perplexity, you just have the ask me line. I'll go through five or six of those and right in the course of producing what I you know, and I end up totally. I'll probably end up with about 200 words and you know it's broken down and some of them are bullet points and some of them are main paragraphs and everything, but I enjoy that. And then at the end I say now rewrite all of this in the concise, factual, axiomatic style of strategic coach Dan Sullivan. Use a maximum of Anglo-Saxon words, a maximum of active passive verbs, everything in the second person singular. You voice Helvetica and then Helvetica, please, Helvetica new standard Helvetica. Dean: New standard Exactly yes so funny, right, yeah I love that. Dan: But here's the thing, the whole question, I think, in all human experience, when you experience something new, how long is it that before amazing becomes normal and expected? Dean: yeah, yeah, and not long, no, not long. Once we get the hang of something, I think what you've had three expectations that's a good way to think about it. Actually, the way you're using it is very that's very useful yeah, and I don't keep my prompts either. Dan: I don't keep my prompts because then I'm becoming a bit of an automaton, right? So every time I start I go through the prompt, you know. And you know, I kind of have it in my head what the prompts are, but I want to see each time. Maybe I'll make a change this time and I don't want to cut myself out from the change, right, yeah, but my sense is that you went back and you could actually observe yourself learning the alphabet, you know first grade for me or learning the numbering system first grade for me. I bet the Dan who's going through this AI experience at 80 isn't much different from the. Dan at six years old, going through learning how to read and write and doing arithmetic. I bet I'm following pretty much the same pattern and that's a capability, that's a yeah, that is a really capability. Dean: Isn't that funny. It's like I remember I still remember like vividly being in kindergarten in january of 1972 and learning that something happened over the Christmas break there that we switched to, we had a new year and now it's not 1971, it's 1972. I remember just. I'm just. It's so funny how that made such an impression on me that now I knew something new. You know this is. Dan: I don't, you know how you just have total unawareness of something. Dean: And then all of a sudden now I know it's 1972, I know my place in time here yeah, yeah, I used to, I, when I was coaching. Dan: You know the first year of strategic coach program and I would talk about how long things took to get a result. You know. Dean: Yeah. Dan: So I said you know you know. I said the big difference that you're going to find being a coach is that you're essentially you're going from a time and effort economy to get a result just getting a result and shortening the amount of time it takes you to get a result. I said that's the big change that's going to take in the program. And I said, for example, I've noticed because I had a lot of really top life insurance agents in the program in the 1970s and 1980s insurance agents in the program in the 1970s and 1980s and they would talk about the big cases. You know the big cases, you know where they would get paid in those days. They get paid $100,000 for life insurance policy and they say you know those big cases, they can take two or three years. You know, take two or three years before them. And I said, actually, I said they were instantaneous. Actually, you got the sale instantaneously. And they said well, what do you mean? No, I put two. No, I said it took two or three years not getting Getting the case was actually instantaneous. It's just that you spend a lot of time not getting the case. What? if you just eliminated the amount of time not getting the case. What if you just eliminated the amount of time not getting the case and just got the case? Then the results would be instantaneous. I think that's really what we're after. Dean: Yes, I agree. I was just talking with somebody about that today. I didn't use those words, but the way you describe it is. You know that people spend a long time talking about realtors in specific. You know that they're getting the listing happens right away, but they do spend a lot of time not getting the listing here. Dan: Yeah, yeah, I remember. First I think it was certainly in the first five years I had a guy from Alberta who was apparently the top residential real estate. You know he was the top agent for the year. He had 240 sales in one year. And people say how does he do that? You can't do that number of presentations in a year, you just can't do that. I said, well, he doesn't do any presentations, he's got trained actors who do presentations. Right, he said a lot of actors spend 90% of their career unemployed. They've got to be waiters or they've got to do this and that. And he just found really great presenters who put on a great theatrical performance and they would do five or six of five or six of them a day, and he had a limousine driver. He had a limousine service that picked them up he would even have the limousine pick up the people to come for the presentation and they said yeah, but look at the cost. I said what cost? what cost indeed, but there you find the divide line between a mediocre person is the cost. He didn't think it was the cost at all. It was just an investment in him not doing presentations. And then he had an accountant who did all the you know he had a trained accountant who did all the. You know the paperwork. Dean: Yes, yeah, I think that's amazing Duplicating. Somebody has the capability to do a presentation, an actor. They're armed with the right script. They have the ability now to further somebody's goal. I meant to mention Dan. You've got a big day in Ohio this weekend. You got Shadur Sanders, went to the Browns in the NFL draft. Dan: I think they've made some bad moves, but I think that one's going to turn out to be one of their good ones. Dean: Yeah, I think so too. Dan: Especially for the coach he's getting. If you're a pocket quarterback, you do Stefanski, you know. I mean, yeah, he's a good coach. Dean: I forget whether are you a Browns or Bengals. Bengals. Cincinnati they're part of the Confederacy. Dan: They're part of the Confederacy, you know we don't yeah. They're a little bit too south. You know Cleveland. Actually, the first game I ever saw was with Jim Brown breaking the rushing record. His rookie year he broke one game rushing record. That was the first year. Dean: I ever saw a game. Dan: Yeah and yeah, yeah. It's in the blood, can't get rid of it. You know everything. Dean: Yeah, but anyway, but I rid of it, you know everything. Dan: Yeah, but anyway. But I think this is. You know we're zeroing in on something neat here. It's not getting anything you want. It's the result you want. How long does it take you to get it? I think that's really the issue. Dean: Yeah, yeah and people are vastly different in terms of the results that they were but I think that there's a difference too, that you mentioned that there's a lot of room for the gap, and I think there's a big gap between people's desires and what they're able to actually achieve. You know that I think people would love to have six-pack abs if they didn't have to go through the work of getting them. You know if there's a bypass to that, if you could just have somebody else do the sit-ups and you get the six-pack. That's what I think that AI and I mean the new, that amplified kind of capability multiplier is, but it requires vision to attach to it. It's almost like the software, yeah. Dan: Yeah, Meaning, making meaning, actually creating meaning. One of my quarterly books was you Are Not a Computer you know where. I just argue against the case that the human brain is just an information processor and therefore machines that can process information faster than human beings, then they're smarter. Dean: And. Dan: I said, if human beings were information processors. Actually I don't think we're very good information processors from the standpoint of accuracy and efficiency. I think we're terrible. Actually, I think we're terrible. We want to change things like repeat this sentence. It's got 10 words in it. We get about two words, seven or eight. We said yeah, I think I'm gonna go change one of the words right, you know very easy see what happens here, and I think what we're looking for is new, interesting combinations of experiences. I think we really like that. I think we like putting things together in a new way that gives us a little, gives us a little jolt of dopamine. Dean: I think that's true. That's like music, you know. It's like every. All the notes have already been created, but yet we still make new songs, some combination of the same eight notes in an octave, you know, yeah I think it would be. Dan: Uh, what was that song for that celine dion's name from the titanic? You know they were. The two lovers were in front of the boat and then yes, the wind blowing them in there. Seeing the sun interesting song the first time you heard it. But you're in a cell by yourself and there it plays every three minutes, 24 hours a day. You'd hang yourself. Dean: Absolutely yeah. Dan: That's the truth. Yeah, what'd you get? What's a pickup from the day. Dean: I like your approach of you know, of using the way you're using perplexity. I think that's a big planting for me to think about over the next week. Here is this using capabilities to create an ability bypass for people that they don't need to have the ability to get the result that they want. You know, because that's kind of the thing, even though people they would have the capability to create a result but they don't have an ability, comes in many different ways. You know, I think that the technical know-how, the creative ability, the executive function, the discipline, the patience, all those things are application things and if we can bypass all of that, I the that kind of blends with this idea of results but it's being in the process of constantly being in the action and the activity of making something faster and easier. Dan: I don't think. I think it's the activity of making things easier and faster, and bigger and better. I think that's what we love. We love that experience of doing that. And once we've done it once, we're not too interested in doing it the next time. Dean: We're looking for something else to do it with, I think who, not how, fits in that way right of doing you see what, you see what you want, and not having that awareness, even your, you know your checklist of can I get this without doing anything? Yeah, you know, or what's the least that I mean and the answer is never. Dan: No, right, almost never. Dean: Never, yes, right. Dan: Yeah, what happens is I identify just the one thing I have to do. I just have to do this one thing. Then the next question is what's the least I can do to get it? And I say this one thing Can I get it faster or easier? Okay, and then the third thing is then who's somebody else who can do that faster, easier thing for you? And then you're on to the next thing. But I think it's a continual activity. It isn't. It's never a being there you know, because then you're in the gap that's right yeah, yeah, anyway, always delightful dan another, uh, one hour of sunday morning well spent. Dean: Yeah, absolutely that's exactly right, always enjoyable. Are we on next week? Dan: yes, I believe yes, we are perfect, all right, okay here, okay, thank you thanks dan bye okay, bye.

En la 1391-a E_elsendo el la 25.04.2025 ĉe www.pola-retradio.org: • Antaŭ 20 jaroj, fine de marto 2005 en Bulonjo ĉe Maro disvolviĝis evento Bulonjo 2005 en la 100-a datreveno de la unua kongreso de esperantistoj en ĉi tiu franca urbo. Tiu eksterordinara evento riĉis je multaj eventoj, rememoroj, paroladoj. El ĝia programo ni memorigas hodiaŭ la 2-an kaj la lastan parton de aparta alparolo de fame konata Claude Piron. • En la komenca kulturkroniko ni informas pri disponigita  al la publiko – post dujaraj konservistaj laboroj - la unusola en Pollando ekzemplero de Gutenberg-biblio en la Dioceza Muzeo en Pelpin; pri famaj mielkukoj el Toruń, kiuj estis registritaj en la Landa Listo de la Kultura Heredaĵo. • En la E-komunuma segmento ni informas pri ebleco kontribui al la programo de la Kleriga Lundo dum la 110-a UK en Brno, GK -1228 (2025-04-22). • En nia hodiaŭa progamo aŭdiĝas kanto de Lilia Nikolova el la platformo Suno, kiu omaĝas la figuron de konata E-mecenato kaj aktivulo Etsuo Miyoshi - suno.com/song/c47dae53-70ea-424d-aa6d-f54dfa8ce863?sh=ZFQhswjGY7oT2tO2&fbclid=IwY2xjawJ4Z-5leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETBCcVdNMDNDTFhiQ0JGRGtPAR7XACLSvrA_X_V3ZXZ7MSHP8nVCzuzsbraYZpVSm2HX3WMZ2aZN_omRFliz8g_aem_FS0tzC8fkpJ74Oo0krmWx. La hodiaŭan programinformon akompanas foto mielkuko el Toruń. • En unuopaj rubrikoj de nia paĝo eblas konsulti la paralele legeblajn kaj aŭdeblajn tekstojn el niaj elsendoj, kio estas tradicio de nia Redakcio ekde 2003. La elsendo estas aŭdebla en jutubo ĉe la adreso: https://www.youtube.com/results?q=pola+retradio&sp=CAI%253D I.a. pere de jutubo, konforme al individua bezono, eblas rapidigi aŭ malrapidigi la parolritmon de la sondokumentoj, transsalti al iu serĉata fragmento de la elsendo.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ represents a pivotal moment that transformed both history and our personal relationship with God. When Jesus calls us by name, our sorrows are silenced, our standing secure, and our stories forever shaped by His triumph over the grave.• Some days change the world – Gutenberg's printing press (1440), American Independence (1776), Pearl Harbor (1941), 9/11 (2001)• Other days change our personal world – weddings, births, hard news• Mary Magdalene stood between two world-changing days – Jesus' crucifixion and His unexpected resurrection• The resurrection silences our sorrow – when Jesus simply spoke Mary's name, her weeping turned to joy• Our sorrows have an expiration date because of the resurrection (Revelation 21:4)• The resurrection secures our standing – Jesus now calls disciples "brothers" and speaks of "my Father and your Father"• In John's Gospel, Jesus mentions "Father" 120 times, but only after resurrection does He say "your Father"• The resurrection shapes our story – Mary's testimony became simply "I have seen the Lord"• All believers share this core testimony regardless of how they came to faith• We are resurrection people not just on Easter but every dayIf you don't yet have this story as your own, today can be the day the resurrection changes everything for you. Come talk to a pastor about how you can know Jesus personally.

Invenzione della stampa di Johann Gutenberg: data, precedenti, caratteristiche, il primo libro stampato e le conseguenze.

It's a small world. The great David Rieff came to my San Francisco studio today for in person interview about his new anti-woke polemic Desire and Fate. And half way through our conversation, he brought up Daniel Bessner's This Is America piece which Bessner discussed on yesterday's show. I'm not sure what that tells us about wokeness, a subject which Rieff and I aren't in agreement. For him, it's the thing-in-itself which make sense of our current cultural malaise. Thus Desire and Fate, his attempt (with a great intro from John Banville) to wake us up from Wokeness. For me, it's a distraction. I've included the full transcript below. Lots of good stuff to chew on. Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. 5 KEY TAKEAWAYS * Rieff views "woke" ideology as primarily American and post-Protestant in nature, rather than stemming solely from French philosophy, emphasizing its connections to self-invention and subjective identity.* He argues that woke culture threatens high culture but not capitalism, noting that corporations have readily embraced a "baudlerized" version of identity politics that avoids class discussions.* Rieff sees woke culture as connected to the wellness movement, with both sharing a preoccupation with "psychic safety" and the metaphorical transformation of experience in which "words” become a form of “violence."* He suggests young people's material insecurity contributes to their focus on identity, as those facing bleak economic prospects turn inward when they "can't make their way in the world."* Rieff characterizes woke ideology as "apocalyptic but not pessimistic," contrasting it with his own genuine pessimism which he considers more realistic about human nature and more cheerful in its acceptance of life's limitations. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, as we digest Trump 2.0, we don't talk that much these days about woke and woke ideology. There was a civil war amongst progressives, I think, on the woke front in 2023 and 2024, but with Donald Trump 2.0 and his various escapades, let's just talk these days about woke. We have a new book, however, on the threat of woke by my guest, David Rieff. It's called Desire and Fate. He wrote it in 2023, came out in late 2024. David's visiting the Bay Area. He's an itinerant man traveling from the East Coast to Latin America and Europe. David, welcome to Keen on America. Do you regret writing this book given what's happened in the last few months in the United States?David Rieff: No, not at all, because I think that the road to moral and intellectual hell is trying to censor yourself according to what you think is useful. There's a famous story of Jean Paul Sartre that he said to the stupefaction of a journalist late in his life that he'd always known about the gulag, and the journalist pretty surprised said, well, why didn't you say anything? And Sartre said so as not to demoralize the French working class. And my own view is, you know, you say what you have to say about this and if I give some aid and comfort to people I don't like, well, so be it. Having said that, I also think a lot of these woke ideas have their, for all of Trump's and Trump's people's fierce opposition to woke, some of the identity politics, particularly around Jewish identity seems to me not that very different from woke. Strangely they seem to have taken, for example, there's a lot of the talk about anti-semitism on college campuses involves student safety which is a great woke trope that you feel unsafe and what people mean by that is not literally they're going to get shot or beaten up, they mean that they feel psychically unsafe. It's part of the kind of metaphorization of experience that unfortunately the United States is now completely in the grips of. But the same thing on the other side, people like Barry Weiss, for example, at the Free Press there, they talk in the same language of psychic safety. So I'm not sure there's, I think there are more similarities than either side is comfortable with.Andrew Keen: You describe Woke, David, as a cultural revolution and you associated in the beginning of the book with something called Lumpen-Rousseauism. As we joked before we went live, I'm not sure if there's anything in Rousseau which isn't Lumpen. But what exactly is this cultural revolution? And can we blame it on bad French philosophy or Swiss French?David Rieff: Well, Swiss-French philosophy, you know exactly. There is a funny anecdote, as I'm sure you know, that Rousseau made a visit to Edinburgh to see Hume and there's something in Hume's diaries where he talks about Rousseau pacing up and down in front of the fire and suddenly exclaiming, but David Hume is not a bad man. And Hume notes in his acerbic way, Rousseau was like walking around without his skin on. And I think some of the woke sensitivity stuff is very much people walking around without their skin on. They can't stand the idea of being offended. I don't see it as much - of course, the influence of that version of cultural relativism that the French like Deleuze and Guattari and other people put forward is part of the story, but I actually see it as much more of a post-Protestant thing. This idea, in that sense, some kind of strange combination of maybe some French philosophy, but also of the wellness movement, of this notion that health, including psychic health, was the ultimate good in a secular society. And then the other part, which again, it seems to be more American than French, which is this idea, and this is particularly true in the trans movement, that you can be anything you want to be. And so that if you feel yourself to be a different gender, well, that's who you are. And what matters is your own subjective sense of these things, and it's up to you. The outside world has no say in it, it's what you feel. And that in a sense, what I mean by post-Protestant is that, I mean, what's the difference between Protestantism and Catholicism? The fundamental difference is, it seems to me, that in Roman Catholic tradition, you need the priest to intercede with God, whereas in Protestant tradition, it is, except for the Anglicans, but for most of Protestantism, it's you and God. And in that sense it seems to me there are more of what I see in woke than this notion that some of the right-wing people like Chris Rufo and others have that this is cultural French cultural Marxism making its insidious way through the institutions.Andrew Keen: It's interesting you talk about the Protestant ethic and you mentioned Hume's remark about Rousseau not having his skin on. Do you think that Protestantism enabled people to grow thick skins?David Rieff: I mean, the Calvinist idea certainly did. In fact, there were all these ideas in Protestant culture, at least that's the classical interpretation of deferred gratification. Capitalism was supposed to be the work ethic, all of that stuff that Weber talks about. But I think it got in the modern version. It became something else. It stopped being about those forms of disciplines and started to be about self-invention. And in a sense, there's something very American about that because after all you know it's the Great Gatsby. It's what's the famous sentence of F. Scott Fitzgerald's: there are no second acts in American lives.Andrew Keen: This is the most incorrect thing anyone's ever said about America. I'm not sure if he meant it to be incorrect, did he? I don't know.David Rieff: I think what's true is that you get the American idea, you get to reinvent yourself. And this notion of the dream, the dream become reality. And many years ago when I was spending a lot of time in LA in the late 80s, early 90s, at LAX, there was a sign from the then mayor, Tom Bradley, about how, you know, if you can dream it, it can be true. And I think there's a lot in identitarian woke idea which is that we can - we're not constricted by history or reality. In fact, it's all the present and the future. And so to me again, woke seems to me much more recognizable as something American and by extension post-Protestant in the sense that you see the places where woke is most powerful are in the other, what the encampment kids would call settler colonies, Australia and Canada. And now in the UK of course, where it seems to me by DI or EDI as they call it over there is in many ways stronger in Britain even than it was in the US before Trump.Andrew Keen: Does it really matter though, David? I mean, that's my question. Does it matter? I mean it might matter if you have the good or the bad fortune to teach at a small, expensive liberal arts college. It might matter with some of your dinner parties in Tribeca or here in San Francisco, but for most people, who cares?David Rieff: It doesn't matter. I think it matters to culture and so what you think culture is worth, because a lot of the point of this book was to say there's nothing about woke that threatens capitalism, that threatens the neo-liberal order. I mean it's turning out that Donald Trump is a great deal bigger threat to the neoliberal order. Woke was to the contrary - woke is about talking about everything but class. And so a kind of baudlerized, de-radicalized version of woke became perfectly fine with corporate America. That's why this wonderful old line hard lefty Adolph Reed Jr. says somewhere that woke is about diversifying the ruling class. But I do think it's a threat to high culture because it's about equity. It's about representation. And so elite culture, which I have no shame in proclaiming my loyalty to, can't survive the woke onslaught. And it hasn't, in my view. If you look at just the kinds of books that are being written, the kinds of plays that are been put on, even the opera, the new operas that are being commissioned, they're all about representing the marginalized. They're about speaking for your group, whatever that group is, and doing away with various forms of cultural hierarchy. And I'm with Schoenberg: if it's for everybody, if it's art, Schoenberg said it's not for everybody, and if it's for everybody it's not art. And I think woke destroys that. Woke can live with schlock. I'm sorry, high culture can live with schlock, it always has, it always will. What it can't live with is kitsch. And by which I mean kitsch in Milan Kundera's definition, which is to have opinions that you feel better about yourself for holding. And that I think is inimical to culture. And I think woke is very destructive of those traditions. I mean, in the most obvious sense, it's destructive of the Western tradition, but you know, the high arts in places like Japan or Bengal, I don't think it's any more sympathetic to those things than it is to Shakespeare or John Donne or whatever. So yeah, I think it's a danger in that sense. Is it a danger to the peace of the world? No, of course not.Andrew Keen: Even in cultural terms, as you explain, it is an orthodoxy. If you want to work with the dominant cultural institutions, the newspapers, the universities, the publishing houses, you have to play by those rules, but the great artists, poets, filmmakers, musicians have never done that, so all it provides, I mean you brought up Kundera, all it provides is something that independent artists, creative people will sneer at, will make fun of, as you have in this new book.David Rieff: Well, I hope they'll make fun of it. But on the other hand, I'm an old guy who has the means to sneer. I don't have to please an editor. Someone will publish my books one way or another, whatever ones I have left to write. But if you're 25 years old, maybe you're going to sneer with your pals in the pub, but you're gonna have to toe the line if you want to be published in whatever the obvious mainstream place is and you're going to be attacked on social media. I think a lot of people who are very, young people who are skeptical of this are just so afraid of being attacked by their peers on various social media that they keep quiet. I don't know that it's true that, I'd sort of push back on that. I think non-conformists will out. I hope it's true. But I wonder, I mean, these traditions, once they die, they're very hard to rebuild. And, without going full T.S. Eliot on you, once you don't think you're part of the past, once the idea is that basically, pretty much anything that came before our modern contemporary sense of morality and fairness and right opinion is to be rejected and that, for example, the moral character of the artist should determine whether or not the art should be paid attention to - I don't know how you come back from that or if you come back from that. I'm not convinced you do. No, other arts will be around. And I mean, if I were writing a critical review of my own book, I'd say, look, this culture, this high culture that you, David Rieff, are writing an elegy for, eulogizing or memorializing was going to die anyway, and we're at the beginning of another Gutenbergian epoch, just as Gutenberg, we're sort of 20 years into Marshall McLuhan's Gutenberg galaxy, and these other art forms will come, and they won't be like anything else. And that may be true.Andrew Keen: True, it may be true. In a sense then, to extend that critique, are you going full T.S. Eliot in this book?David Rieff: Yeah, I think Eliot was right. But it's not just Eliot, there are people who would be for the wokesters more acceptable like Mandelstam, for example, who said you're part of a conversation that's been going on long before you were born, that's going to be going on after you are, and I think that's what art is. I think the idea that we make some completely new thing is a childish fantasy. I think you belong to a tradition. There are periods - look, this is, I don't find much writing in English in prose fiction very interesting. I have to say I read the books that people talk about because I'm trying to understand what's going on but it doesn't interest me very much, but again, there have been periods of great mediocrity. Think of a period in the late 17th century in England when probably the best poet was this completely, rightly, justifiably forgotten figure, Colley Cibber. You had the great restoration period and then it all collapsed, so maybe it'll be that way. And also, as I say, maybe it's just as with the print revolution, that this new culture of social media will produce completely different forms. I mean, everything is mortal, not just us, but cultures and civilizations and all the rest of it. So I can imagine that, but this is the time I live in and the tradition I come from and I'm sorry it's gone, and I think what's replacing it is for the most part worse.Andrew Keen: You're critical in the book of what you, I'm quoting here, you talk about going from the grand inquisitor to the grand therapist. But you're very critical of the broader American therapeutic culture of acute sensitivity, the thin skin nature of, I guess, the Rousseau in this, whatever, it's lumpen Rousseauanism. So how do you interpret that without psychologizing, or are you psychologizing in the book? How are you making sense of our condition? In other words, can one critique criticize therapeutic culture without becoming oneself therapeutic?David Rieff: You mean the sort of Pogo line, we've met the enemy and it is us. Well, I suppose there's some truth to that. I don't know how much. I think that woke is in some important sense a subset of the wellness movement. And the wellness movement after all has tens and tens of millions of people who are in one sense or another influenced by it. And I think health, including psychic health, and we've moved from wellness as corporal health to wellness as being both soma and psyche. So, I mean, if that's psychologizing, I certainly think it's drawing the parallel or seeing woke in some ways as one of the children of the god of wellness. And that to me, I don't know how therapeutic that is. I think it's just that once you feel, I'm interested in what people feel. I'm not necessarily so interested in, I mean, I've got lots of opinions, but what I think I'm better at than having opinions is trying to understand why people think what they think. And I do think that once health becomes the ultimate good in a secular society and once death becomes the absolutely unacceptable other, and once you have the idea that there's no real distinction of any great validity between psychic and physical wellness, well then of course sensitivity to everything becomes almost an inevitable reaction.Andrew Keen: I was reading the book and I've been thinking about a lot of movements in America which are trying to bring people together, dealing with America, this divided America, as if it's a marriage in crisis. So some of the most effective or interesting, I think, thinkers on this, like Arlie Hochschild in Berkeley, use the language of therapy to bring or to try to bring America back together, even groups like the Braver Angels. Can therapy have any value or that therapeutic culture in a place like America where people are so bitterly divided, so hateful towards one another?David Rieff: Well, it's always been a country where, on the one hand, people have been, as you say, incredibly good at hatred and also a country of people who often construe themselves as misfits and heretics from the Puritans forward. And on the other hand, you have that small-town American idea, which sometimes I think is as important to woke and DI as as anything else which is that famous saying of small town America of all those years ago which was if you don't have something nice to say don't say anything at all. And to some extent that is, I think, a very powerful ancestor of these movements. Whether they're making any headway - of course I hope they are, but Hochschild is a very interesting figure, but I don't, it seems to me it's going all the other way, that people are increasingly only talking to each other.Andrew Keen: What this movement seems to want to do is get beyond - I use this word carefully, I'm not sure if they use it but I'm going to use it - ideology and that we're all prisoners of ideology. Is woke ideology or is it a kind of post-ideology?David Rieff: Well, it's a redemptive idea, a restorative idea. It's an idea that in that sense, there's a notion that it's time for the victims, for the first to be last and the last to be first. I mean, on some level, it is as simple as that. On another level, as I say, I do think it has a lot to do with metaphorization of experience, that people say silence is violence and words are violence and at that point what's violence? I mean there is a kind of level to me where people have gotten trapped in the kind of web of their own metaphors and now are living by them or living shackled to them or whatever image you're hoping for. But I don't know what it means to get beyond ideology. What, all men will be brothers, as in the Beethoven-Schiller symphony? I mean, it doesn't seem like that's the way things are going.Andrew Keen: Is the problem then, and I'm thinking out loud here, is the problem politics or not enough politics?David Rieff: Oh, I think the problem is that now we don't know, we've decided that everything is part, the personal is the political, as the feminists said, 50, 60 years ago. So the personal's political, so the political is the personal. So you have to live the exemplary moral life, or at least the life that doesn't offend anybody or that conforms to whatever the dominant views of what good opinions are, right opinions are. I think what we're in right now is much more the realm of kind of a new set of moral codes, much more than ideology in the kind of discrete sense of politics.Andrew Keen: Now let's come back to this idea of being thin-skinned. Why are people so thin-skinned?David Rieff: Because, I mean, there are lots of things to say about that. One thing, of course, that might be worth saying, is that the young generations, people who are between, let's say, 15 and 30, they're in real material trouble. It's gonna be very hard for them to own a house. It's hard for them to be independent and unless the baby boomers like myself will just transfer every penny to them, which doesn't seem very likely frankly, they're going to live considerably worse than generations before. So if you can't make your way in the world then maybe you make your way yourself or you work on yourself in that sort of therapeutic sense. You worry about your own identity because the only place you have in the world in some way is yourself, is that work, that obsession. I do think some of these material questions are important. There's a guy you may know who's not at all woke, a guy who teaches at the University of Washington called Danny Bessner. And I just did a show with him this morning. He's a smart guy and we have a kind of ironic correspondence over email and DM. And I once said to him, why are you so bitter about everything? And he said, you want to know why? Because I have two children and the likelihood is I'll never get a teaching job that won't require a three hour commute in order for me to live anywhere that I can afford to live. And I thought, and he couldn't be further from woke, he's a kind of Jacobin guy, Jacobin Magazine guy, and if he's left at all, it's kind of old left, but I think a lot of people feel that, that they feel their practical future, it looks pretty grim.Andrew Keen: But David, coming back to the idea of art, they're all suited to the world of art. They don't have to buy a big house and live in the suburbs. They can become poets. They can become filmmakers. They can put their stuff up on YouTube. They can record their music online. There are so many possibilities.David Rieff: It's hard to monetize that. Maybe now you're beginning to sound like the people you don't like. Now you're getting to sound like a capitalist.Andrew Keen: So what? Well, I don't care if I sound like a capitalist. You're not going to starve to death.David Rieff: Well, you might not like, I mean, it's fine to be a barista at 24. It's not so fine at 44. And are these people going to ever get out of this thing? I don't know. I wonder. Look, when I was starting as a writer, as long as you were incredibly diligent, and worked really hard, you could cobble together at least a basic living by accepting every assignment and people paid you bits and bobs of money, but put together, you could make a living. Now, the only way to make money, unless you're lucky enough to be on staff of a few remaining media outlets that remain, is you have to become an impresario, you have become an entrepreneur of your own stuff. And again, sure, do lots of people manage that? Yeah, but not as many as could have worked in that other system, and look at the fate of most newspapers, all folding. Look at the universities. We can talk about woke and how woke destroyed, in my view anyway, a lot of the humanities. But there's also a level in which people didn't want to study these things. So we're looking at the last generation in a lot places of a lot of these humanities departments and not just the ones that are associated with, I don't know, white supremacy or the white male past or whatever, but just the humanities full stop. So I know if that sounds like, maybe it sounds like a capitalist, but maybe it also sounds like you know there was a time when the poets - you know very well, poets never made a living, poets taught in universities. That's the way American poets made their money, including pretty famous poets like Eric Wolcott or Joseph Brodsky or writers, Toni Morrison taught at Princeton all those years, Joyce Carol Oates still alive, she still does. Most of these people couldn't make a living of their work and so the university provided that living.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Barry Weiss earlier. She's making a fortune as an anti-woke journalist. And Free Press seems to be thriving. Yascha Mounk's Persuasion is doing pretty well. Andrew Sullivan, another good example, making a fortune off of Substack. It seems as if the people willing to take risks, Barry Weiss leaving the New York Times, Andrew Sullivan leaving everything he's ever joined - that's...David Rieff: Look, are there going to be people who thrive in this new environment? Sure. And Barry Weiss turns out to be this kind of genius entrepreneur. She deserves full credit for that. Although even Barry Weiss, the paradox for me of Barry Weiss is, a lot of her early activism was saying that she felt unsafe with these anti-Israeli teachers at Columbia. So in a sense, she was using some of the same language as the woke use, psychic safety, because she didn't mean Joseph Massad was gonna come out from the blackboard and shoot her in the eye. She meant that she was offended and used the language of safety to describe that. And so in that sense, again, as I was saying to you earlier, I think there are more similarities here. And Trump, I think this is a genuine counterrevolution that Trump is trying to mount. I'm not very interested in the fascism, non-fascism debate. I'm rather skeptical of it.Andrew Keen: As Danny Bessner is. Yeah, I thought Danny's piece about that was brilliant.David Rieff: We just did a show about it today, that piece about why that's all rubbish. I was tempted, I wrote to a friend that guy you may know David Bell teaches French history -Andrew Keen: He's coming on the show next week. Well, you see, it's just a little community of like-minded people.David Rieff: There you go. Well, I wrote to David.Andrew Keen: And you mentioned his father in the book, Daniel.David Rieff: Yeah, well, his father is sort of one of the tutelary idols of the book. I had his father and I read his father and I learned an enormous amount. I think that book about the cultural contradictions of capitalism is one of the great prescient books about our times. But I wrote to David, I said, I actually sent him the Bessner piece which he was quite ambivalent about. But I said well, I'm not really convinced by the fascism of Trump, maybe just because Hitler read books, unlike Donald Trump. But it's a genuine counterrevolution. And what element will change the landscape in terms of DI and woke and identitarianism is not clear. These people are incredibly ambitious. They really mean to change this country, transform it.Andrew Keen: But from the book, David, Trump's attempts to cleanse, if that's the right word, the university, I would have thought you'd have rather admired that, all these-David Rieff: I agree with some of it.Andrew Keen: All these idiots writing the same article for 30 years about something that no one has any interest in.David Rieff: I look, my problem with Trump is that I do support a lot of that. I think some of the stuff that Christopher Rufo, one of the leading ideologues of this administration has uncovered about university programs and all of this crap, I think it's great that they're not paying for it anymore. The trouble is - you asked me before, is it that important? Is culture important compared to destroying the NATO alliance, blowing up the global trade regime? No. I don't think. So yeah, I like a lot of what they're doing about the university, I don't like, and I am very fiercely opposed to this crackdown on speech. That seems to be grotesque and revolting, but are they canceling supporting transgender theater in Galway? Yeah, I think it's great that they're canceling all that stuff. And so I'm not, that's my problem with Trump, is that some of that stuff I'm quite unashamedly happy about, but it's not nearly worth all the damage he's doing to this country and the world.Andrew Keen: Being very generous with your time, David. Finally, in the book you describe woke as, and I thought this was a very sharp way of describing it, describe it as being apocalyptic but not pessimistic. What did you mean by that? And then what is the opposite of woke? Would it be not apocalyptic, but cheerful?David Rieff: Well, I think genuine pessimists are cheerful, I would put myself among those. The model is Samuel Beckett, who just thinks things are so horrible that why not be cheerful about them, and even express one's pessimism in a relatively cheerful way. You remember the famous story that Thomas McCarthy used to tell about walking in the Luxembourg Gardens with Beckett and McCarthy says to him, great day, it's such a beautiful day, Sam. Beckett says, yeah, beautiful day. McCarthy says, makes you glad to be alive. And Beckett said, oh, I wouldn't go that far. And so, the genuine pessimist is quite cheerful. But coming back to woke, it's apocalyptic in the sense that everything is always at stake. But somehow it's also got this reformist idea that cultural revolution will cleanse away the sins of the supremacist patriarchal past and we'll head for the sunny uplands. I think I'm much too much of a pessimist to think that's possible in any regime, let alone this rather primitive cultural revolution called woke.Andrew Keen: But what would the opposite be?David Rieff: The opposite would be probably some sense that the best we're going to do is make our peace with the trash nature of existence, that life is finite in contrast with the wellness people who probably have a tendency towards the apocalyptic because death is an insult to them. So everything is staving off the bad news and that's where you get this idea that you can, like a lot of revolutions, you can change the nature of people. Look, the communist, Che Guevara talked about the new man. Well, I wonder if he thought it was so new when he was in Bolivia. I think these are - people need utopias, this is one of them, MAGA is another utopia by the way, and people don't seem to be able to do without them and that's - I wish it were otherwise but it isn't.Andrew Keen: I'm guessing the woke people would be offended by the idea of death, are they?David Rieff: Well, I think the woke people, in this synchronicity, people and a lot of people, they're insulted - how can this happen to me, wonderful me? And this is those jokes in the old days when the British could still be savage before they had to have, you know, Henry the Fifth be played by a black actor - why me? Well, why not you? That's just so alien to and it's probably alien to the American idea. You're supposed to - it's supposed to work out and the truth is it doesn't work out. But La Rochefoucauld says somewhere no one can stare for too long at death or the sun and maybe I'm asking too much.Andrew Keen: Maybe only Americans can find death unacceptable to use one of your words.David Rieff: Yes, perhaps.Andrew Keen: Well, David Rieff, congratulations on the new book. Fascinating, troubling, controversial as always. Desire and Fate. I know you're writing a book about Oppenheimer, very different kind of subject. We'll get you back on the show to talk Oppenheimer, where I guess there's not going to be a lot of Lumpen-Rousseauism.David Rieff: Very little, very little love and Rousseau in the quantum mechanics world, but thanks for having me.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

On the podcast today we have Milana Cap, and she's here to talk about her presentation at WordCamp Asia in Manila, titled "WordPress gems for developers: fresh new features you'll actually want to use." Milana, a WordPress Engineer at XWP from Serbia, discusses the significance of the Interactivity API and HTML API in modern WordPress development. The Interactivity API enables communication between Gutenberg blocks, while the HTML API simplifies server-side DOM manipulation using PHP. These advancements enhance WordPress' interactivity, boost performance, and provide standardised solutions for developers, improving efficiency and moving WordPress into the future. If you're a developer looking to leverage these new WordPress features, this episode is for you.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, we start by unraveling the intriguing concept of global time zones. We humorously ponder the idea of a unified world clock, inspired by China's singular time zone. The discussion expands to how people in countries like Iceland adapt to extreme daylight variations and the impact of climate change narratives that often overlook local experiences. We then explore the power of perception and emotion in shaping our reactions to world events. The conversation delves into how algorithms on platforms shape personal experiences and the choice to opt out of traditional media in favor of a more tailored information stream. The shift from curated media landscapes to algorithm-driven platforms is another key topic, highlighting the challenges of navigating personalized information environments. Finally, we tackle the critical issue of government financial accountability. We humorously consider where vast sums of unaccounted-for money might go, reflecting on the importance of financial transparency. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS In the episode, Dan and I explore the concept of a unified global time zone, drawing inspiration from China's singular time zone. We discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of such a system, including the adaptability of people living in areas with extreme daylight variations like Iceland. We delve into the complexities of climate change narratives, highlighting how they often lack local context and focus on global measurements, which can lead to stress and anxiety due to information overload without agency. The power of perception and emotion is a focal point, as we discuss how reactions are often influenced by personal feelings and past experiences rather than actual events. This is compared to the idealization of celebrities through curated information. Our conversation examines the shift from curated media landscapes to algorithm-driven platforms, emphasizing how algorithms shape personal experiences and the challenges of researching topics like tariffs in a personalized information environment. We discuss the dynamic between vision and capability in innovation, using historical examples like Gutenberg's printing press to illustrate how existing capabilities can spark visionary ideas. The episode explores the complexities of international trade, particularly the shift from tangible products to intangible services, and the challenges of tracking these shifts across borders. We address the issue of government financial accountability, referencing the $1.2 trillion unaccounted for last year, and the need for financial transparency and accountability in the current era. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan. Dan: Yes, and I forgot my time zones there almost for a second. Are you in Chicago? Yeah, you know. Why can't we just all be in the same time zone? Dean: Well. Dan: I know that's what China does. Yeah, Well, that's a reason not to do it. Then you know, I learned that little tidbit from we publish something and it's a reason not to do it. Dean: then that was. You know I learned that little tidbit from. We publish something and it's a postcard for, you know, realtors and financial advisors or business owners to send to their clients as a monthly kind of postcard newsletter, and so every month it has all kinds of interesting facts and whatnot, and one of them that I heard on there is, even though China should have six time zones, they only have one. That's kind of an interesting thing. Imagine if the. United States had all one time zone, that would be great. Dan: Yeah, I think there would be advantages and disadvantages, regardless of what your time system is. Dean: Well, that'd be like anything really, you know, think about that. In California it would get light super early and we'd be off a good dock really early too we'd be off and get docked really early too. Yeah, I spent a couple of summers in Iceland, where it gets 24 hours of light. Dan: You know June 20th and it's. I mean, it's disruptive if you're just arriving there, but I talked to Icelanders and they don't really think about it. It's, you know, part of the year it's completely light all day and part of the year it's dark all day. And then they've adjusted to it. Dean: It happens in Finland and Norway and Alaska. We're adaptable, dan, we're very adaptable. Dan: And those that aren't move away or die. Dean: I heard somebody was talking today about. It was a video that I saw online. They were mentioning climate change, global warming, and that they say that global warming is the measurement is against what? Since when? Is the question to ask, because the things that they're talking about are since 1850, right, it's warmed by 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1850. We've had three periods of warming and since you know, the medieval warming and the Roman warming, we're actually down by five degrees. So it's like such a so when somebody says that we're global warming, the temperature is global warming and the question is since when? That's the real question to ask. Dan: Yeah, I think with those who are alarmist regarding temperature and climate. They have two big problems. They're language problems, Not so much language, but contextual problems. Nobody experiences global. That's exactly right. The other thing is nobody experiences climate. What we experience is local weather. Dean: Yes. Dan: Yeah, so nobody in the world has ever experienced either global or climate. You just experience whatever the weather is within a mile of you you know within a mile of you. That's basically and it's hard to it's hard to sell a theory. Dean: That, you know. That ties in with kind of the idea we were talking about last week that the you know, our brains are not equipped, we're not supposed to have omniscience or know of all of the things that are happening all over the world, of all of the things that are happening all over the world, where only our brains are built to, you know, be aware of and adapt to what's happening in our own proximity and with the people in our world. Our top 150 and yeah, that's what that's the rap thing is that we're, you know, we're having access to everybody and everything at a rate that we're not access to everybody and everything at a rate that we're not supposed to Like. Even when you look back at you know, I've thought about this, like since the internet, if you think about since the 90s, like you know, my growing up, my whole lens on the world was really a, you know, toronto, the GTA lens and being part of Canada. That was really most of our outlook. And then, because of our proximity to the United States, of course we had access to all the US programming and all that stuff, but you know, you mostly hear it was all the local Buffalo programming. That was. They always used to lead off with. There was a lot of fires in Tonawanda, it seemed happening in Buffalo, because everything was fire in North Tonawanda. It still met 11. And that was whole thing. We were either listening to the CBC or listening to eyewitness news in Buffalo, yeah. But now, and you had to seek out to know what was going on in Chicago, the only time you would have a massive scale was happening in Chicago. Right, that made national news the tippy top of the thing. Dan: Yeah, I wonder if you said an interesting thing is that we have access to everyone and everything, but we never do it. Dean: It's true we have access to the knowledge right Like it's part of you know how, when you I was thinking about it, as you know how you define a mess right as an obligation without commitment that there's some kind of information mess that we have is knowledge without agency? You know we have is knowledge without agency. You know we have no agency to do anything about any of these bad things that are happening. No, it's out of our control. You know what are we going to do about what's happening in Ukraine or Gaza or what we know about them? You know, or we know, everybody's getting stabbed in London and you know you just hear you get all these things that fire off these anxiety things triggers. It's actually in our mind, yeah that's exactly right, that our minds with access to that. That triggers off the hormone or the chemical responses you know that fire up the fight or flight or the anxiety or readiness. Dan: Yeah, it's really interesting. I've been giving some thought to well, first of all, the perception of danger in the world, and what we're responding to is not actual events. What we're responding to is our feelings. Yes, that's exactly right, yeah. You've just had an emotional change and you're actually responding to your own emotions, which really aren't that connected to what actually triggered your emotions. You know it might have been something that happened to you maybe 25 years ago. That was scary and that memory just got triggered by an event in the world. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Yeah, and the same thing with celebrity. Celebrity because I've been thinking about celebrity for quite a long time and you know, each of us you and I, to a certain extent are a celebrity in certain circles, and what I think is responsible for that is that they've read something or heard something or heard somebody say something that has created an image of someone in their mind, but it's at a distance, they don't actually meet you at a distance. And the more that's reinforced, but you never meet them the image of that person gets bigger and bigger in your mind. But you're not responding to the person. You're responding just to something that you created in your mind. Dean: I think part of that is because you know if you see somebody on video or you hear somebody on audio or you see them written about in text, that those are. It's kind of residue from you know it used to be the only people that would get written about or on tv or on the radio were no famous people yeah, famous, and so that's kind of it. I think that the same yeah, everybody has access to that. Now Everybody has reach. You know to be to the meritocracy of that because it used to be curated, right that there was some, there were only, so somebody was making the decision on who got to be famous. Like that's why people used to really want to own media. Like that's why people used to really want to own media. That's why all these powerful people wanted to own newspapers and television and radio stations, because they could control the messaging, control the media. You know? Dan: Yeah, it's really interesting. Is it you that has the reach, or someone else has reach that's impacting you? Dean: Yeah, I mean I think that we all have it depends on whether you're on the sending end or the receiving end of reach. Yeah, like we've seen a shift in what happens, like even in the evolution of our ability to be able to consume. It started with our ability to consume content, like with all of those you know, with MP3s and videos, and you know, then YouTube was really the chance for everybody to post up. You know you could distribute, you had access to reach, and in the last 10 years, the shift has been that you had to in order to have reach, you had to get followers right. That were people would subscribe to your content or, you know, like your content on Facebook or be your friend or follower, and now we've shifted to every. That doesn't really matter. Everything is algorithmic now. It's like you don't have to go out and spread the word and gather people to you. Your content is being pushed to people. That's how Stephen Paltrow can become, can reach millions of people, because his content is scratching an itch for millions of people who are, you know, seeking out fertility content, content, and that is being pushed to you. Now, that's why you're it's all algorithm based, you know, and it's so. It's really interesting that it becomes this echo chamber, that you get more of what you respond to. So you know you're get it. So it's amazing how every person's algorithm is very different, like what shows up on on things, and that's kind of what you've really, you know, avoided is you've removed yourself from that. You choose not to participate, so you're the 100%. Seek out what you're looking for. It's not being dictated to you. Dan: Not quite understanding that. Dean: Well you have chosen that you don't watch news. You don't participate in social media. You don't have an Instagram or anything like that where they're observing what you're watching and then dictating what you see next. You are an active like. You go select what you're going to watch. Now you've chosen real clear politics as your curator of things, so that's the jump. Dan: Peter Zion. Dean: But you're self-directing your things by asking. You're probably being introduced to things by the way. You interact with perplexity by asking it 10 ways. This is affecting this or the combination of this and this. Dan: Yeah, I really don't care what perplexity, you know what it would want to tell me about. Dean: You just want to ask, you want to guide the way it responds. Yeah yeah, and that's very it's very powerful. Dan: It's very powerful. I mean, I'm just utterly pleased with what perplexity does for me. You know like you know, I just considered it. You know an additional capability that I have daily, that you know I can be informed in a way that suits me, like I was going over the tariffs. It was a little interesting on the tariff side because I asked a series of questions and it seemed to be avoiding what I was getting at. This is the first time I've really had that. So I said yeah, and I was asking about Canada and I said what tariffs did Canada have against the United States? I guess you can say against tariff, against before 2025. And it said there were no retaliatory tariffs against the United States before 2025. And I said I didn't ask about retaliatory tariffs, I asked about tariffs, you know. And that said, well, there were no reciprocal tariffs before 2025. And I said, no, I want to know what tariffs. And then this said there was softwood and there was dairy products, and you know. I finally got to it. I finally got to it and I haven't really thought about it, because it was just about an hour ago that I did it and I said why did it avoid my question? I didn't. I mean, it's really good at knowing exactly what you're saying. Why did it throw a couple of other things in there? Dean: Yeah, misdirection, right, or kind of. Maybe it's because what, maybe it's because it's the temperature. You know of what the zeitgeist is saying. What are people searching about? And I think maybe those, a lot of the words that they're saying, are. You know, the words are really important. Dan: Not having a modifier for a tariff puts you in a completely different, and those tariffs have been in place for 50 or 60 years. So the interesting thing about it. By the way, 50 countries are now negotiating with the United States to remove tariffs how interesting. And he announced it on Wednesday. Dean: Yeah. Dan: He just wanted to have a conversation with you and wanted to get your attention. Dean: Yeah, wanted to get your attention. Yeah, have your attention, yeah, okay, let's talk about this. Dan: Yeah and everything. But other than that, I'm just utterly pleased with what it can do to fashion your thoughts, fashion your writing and everything else. I think it's a terrific tool. Dean: I've been having a lot of conversations around these bots. Like you know, people are hot on creating bots now like a Dan bot. Creating bots now like a Dan bot. Like oh Dan, you could say you've got so many podcasts and so much content and so many recordings of you, let's put it all in and train up Dan bot and then people could ask they'd have access to you as an AI. Dan: Yeah, the way I do it. I ask them to send me a check and then they could. Dean: But I wonder the thing about it that most of the things that I think are the limitations of that are that it's not how to even take advantage of that, because they don't know what you know to be able to, of that. Because they're bringing it, they don't know what you know to be able to access that you know and how it affects them you know. I first I got that sense when somebody came. They were very excited that they had trained up a Napoleon Hill bot and AI and you can ask Napoleon anything and I thought, thought you know, but people don't know what to ask. I'd rather have Napoleon ask me questions and coach me. You know like I think that would be much more useful is to have Napoleon Hill kind of ask me questions, engage where I am and then make you know, then feed me his thinking about that. If the goal is to facilitate change, you know, or to give people an advantage, I don't know. It just seems like we're very limited. Dan: I mean, you know, my attitude is to increase the engagement with people I'm already engaged with. Yeah, like I don't feel I'm missing anyone, you know? I never feel like I'm missing someone in the world you know, or somehow my life is deficient because I'm not talking to 10 times more people that I'm talking to now, because I'm not really missing anything. I'm fully engaged. I mean, eight different podcast series is about the maximum that I can do, so I don't really need any. But to increase the engagement of the podcast, that would be a goal, because it's available. I don't. I don't wish for things, that is, that aren't accessible you know, and it's very interesting. I was going to talk to you about this subject, but more and more I've got a new tool that I put together. I don't think you have vision before you have capability. Okay, say more Now. What I mean by that is think of a situation where you suddenly thought hey, I can do this new thing. And you do the new thing and satisfy yourself that it's new and it's useful, and then all of a sudden your brain says, hey, with this new thing, you can do this, you can do this, you can do this, do this, you can do this, you can do this. And my sense is the vision of that you can do this is only created because you have the capability. Dean: It's the chicken and the egg. Dan: Yeah, but usually the chicken is nearby. In other words, it's something you can do today, you can do tomorrow, but the vision can be yours out. You know the vision, and my sense is that capabilities are more readily available than vision. Okay, and I'm making a distinction here, I'm not seeing the capability as a vision, I'm seeing that as just something that's in a very short timeframe, maybe a day, two days, you know, maximum I would say is 90 days and you achieve that. You start the quarter. You don't have the capability. You end the quarter you have the capability. Dean: And once you have that capability. Dan: all of a sudden, you can see a year out, you can see five years out. Dean: I bet that's true because it's repeatable, maybe out. Dan: I bet that's true because it's repeatable, maybe, so my sense is that focusing on capability automatically brings vision with it. Dean: Would you say that a capability? Let's go all the way back to Gutenberg, for instance. Gutenberg created movable type right and a printing press that allowed you to bypass the whole scribing. You know, economy or the ecosystem right, all these scribes that were making handwritten copies of things. So you had had a capability, then you could call that right. Dan: Well, what it bypassed was wood printing, where you had to carve the letters on a big flat sheet of wood and it was used just for one page containers and you could rearrange the letters in it and that's one page, and then you take the letters out and you rearrange another page. I think what he did, he didn't bypass the, he didn't bypass the. Well, he bypassed writing, basically you know because the monks were doing the writing, scribing, inscribing, so that bypassed. But what he bypassed was the laborious process of printing, because printing already existed. It's just that it was done with wood prints. You had to carve it. You had to have the carvers. The carvers were very angry at Gutenberg. They had protests, they had protests. They closed down the local universities. Protests against this guy, gutenberg, who put all the carvers out of work. Yeah, yeah, so, yeah. Dean: So then you have this capability and all of a sudden, europe goes crazy take vision and our, you know, newly defined progression of vision from a proposition to proof, to protocol, to property, that, if this was anything, any capability I believe has to start out with a vision, with a proposition. Hey, I bet that I could make cast letters that we could replace carving. That would be a proposition first, before it's a capability, right. So that would have to. I think you'd have to say that it all, it has, has to start with a vision. But I think that a vision is a good. I mean capabilities are a good, you know a good catalyst for vision, thinking about these things, how to improve them, what else does this, all the questions that come with a new capability, are really vision. They're all sparked by vision, right? Yeah, because what would Gutenberg? The progress that Gutenberg have to make is a proposition of. I bet I could cast individual letters, set up a little template, arrange them and then duplicate another page, use it, have it reusable. So let's get to work on that. Dan: And then he proved. Dean: The first time he printed a page he proved that, yeah, that does work. And then he sets up the protocol for it. Here's how we'll do it. Here's how. Here's the way we make these. Here's the molds for all these letters. He's created the protocol to create this printing press, the, the press, the printing press, and has it now as a capability that's available yeah well, we don't know that at all. Dan: We don't know whether he first of all. We have no knowledge of gutenberg, except that he created the first movable type printing press. Dean: Somebody had to have that. It had to start with the vision of it, the idea. It didn't just come fully formed right. Somebody had to have the proposition. Dan: Yeah, yeah, we don't know. We don't know how it happened. He know he's a goldsmith, I mean, that was so. He was used to melding metals and putting them into forms and you know, probably somebody asked him can you make somebody's name? Can you print out? You know, can you print a, d, e, a and then N for me? And he did that and you know, at some point he said oh, oh, what if I do it with lead? What if? I do it with yeah, because gold is too soft, it won't stand up. But right, he did it with lead. Maybe he died of lead poisoning really fast, huh yeah, that's funny, we don't know, yeah, yeah, I think the steel, you know iron came in. You know they melted iron and everything like that, but we don't know much about it. But I'll tell you the jump that I would say is the vision is that Martin Luther discovers printing and he says you know, we can bypass all the you know, control of information that the Catholic Church has. Now that's a vision. That's a vision Okay. That's a vision, okay, but I don't think Gutenberg had that. I mean, he doesn't play? Dean: Definitely yeah, yeah, I know I think that any yeah, jumping off the platform of a capability. You know what my thought is in terms of the working genius model, that that's the distinction between wonder and invention. That wonder would be wonder what else we could do with this, or how we could improve this, or what this opens up for us. And invention might be the other side of creating something that doesn't exist. Dan: I mean, if you go back to our London, you know our London encounter, where we each committed ourselves to writing a book in a week. Dean: Yes. Dan: You did that, I did that. And then my pushing the idea was that I could do 100 books in 100 quarters. Dean: Yeah, exactly. Dan: Yeah, I mean, that's where it came from. I says, oh, you can create a book really fast to do that. And then I just put a bigger number and so I stayed within the capability. I just multiplied the number of times that I was going to do the capability. So is that a vision, or is that? What is that? Is that a vision? A hundred books, well, not just a capability right. Dean: I think that the fact that you, we both had a proposition write a book and we both then set up the protocols for that, you set up your team and your process and now you've got that formula. So you have a capability called a book, a quarter for 25 years you know that's definitely in the, that that's a capability. Now it's an asset your team, the way that you do it, the formatting, the everything about it. But the vision you have to apply a vision to that capability. Hamish isn't going to sit there and create cartoons out of nothing. Create cartoons out of nothing. You've got to give the idea. The vision is I bet I could write a book on casting, not hiring, how I'm planning on living to 156. So you've got your applying vision against that capability, yeah. Dan: It's interesting because I don't go too far out of the realm of my capabilities when I project into the future. Yeah, so, for example, we did the three books with Ben Hardy, you know and great success, great success. And then we were going further and Hay House, the publisher, started to call us, you know, after we had written our last book in 23, around the beginning of 20, usually six months after. They want to know is there another book coming? Because they're filling up their forward schedule and they do about 90 books and they do about 90 books a year. And so they want to know do we have another one from you? And we said no not really. But then when I did Casting Not Hiring as a small book, and I did Casting Not Hiring as a small book to write a small book, in other words, I'd committed myself to 100 books and this was number 38. I think this was in the 38th quarter. And then Jeff Madoff and I were talking and I said you know, I think this Hay House keeps asking us for another book. I think this is probably it and we sent it to them. I think it was on a Thursday. We had a meeting with them the next Wednesday, which is really fast. It's like six days later I get a meeting and they love it, and about two weeks later the go-ahead came from the publisher that we were going to go with that book. Two weeks later, the go-ahead came from the publisher that we were going to go with that book. And so I've developed another capability that if you write a small book, it's easy to get a big book. Yeah. So that's where the capabilities develop now. Now when I'm writing a new quarterly book, I'm saying is this a big book? Is this a big book? Is this the yeah? Dean: well, I would argue that you know that you've established a reach relationship with Hay House. Dan: Yeah, yeah, because they're a big multiplier. Dean: That's exactly right. So you've got the vision of I want to do a book on casting, not hiring. I have the capability already in place to do the little book and now you've established a reach partnership with Hay House that they're the multiplier in all of this right Vision plus capability, multiplied by reach. And so those relationships that you know, those relationships that you have, are definitely a reach asset that you have because you've established that you know and you're a known quantity to them. You know. Dan: Yeah, well, they are now with the. You know the success of the first three books, yeah, but it's really interesting because I I don't push my mind too much further than that which I can. Actually, you know, like now I'm working on the big book with jeff jeff nettoff and with the first draft, complete draft, to be in a 26, and we're on schedule. We're on schedule for that. You know. So you know. But I don't have any aspirations. You know you drop this as a sentence. You know you want to change things. I actually don't want to change things. I just want to continue doing what I'm doing but have it more productive and more profitable. Is that a vision? I guess that's a vision. Dean: Yeah, I mean that's certainly, certainly. I think that part of this is that staying in your unique ability right, you're not fretting about what the you've made this relationship with a house and that gives you that reach, but there's nothing you're and they were purchased. Dan: They were purchased by random house, so they have massive bar reach. Dean: Wow yeah. Dan: I don't know what the exact nature of their relationship is but things take a little bit slower backstage at their end now, I've noticed as we go through, because they're dealing with a monstrous big operation, but I suspect the reach is better. Yeah, once it happens, right. Dean: And resources. Yeah, yeah, cash as capability, that's a big, you know that was a really good. That's been a big. Distinction too is the value of cash as a capability. Cash for the c, yeah, a lot, as well as cash for the k. But cash for the c specifically is a wonderful capability because with cash you can buy it solves a lot of problems. You can buy all the vision, capability and reach. That was a lot of problems. It really does. Dan: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I was out at dinner last night with Ken and Nancy, harlan you know, you know Ken, and and we were talking. He was talking about he's. He's 30, 33rd year and coach and he started in 92. And coach, and he started in 92 and and he he was just talking about how he has totally a self-managing company and you know he has great free days, and you know he just focuses on his own unique ability. You know so a lot of strategic coach boxes to check off there and he was talking and he was saying that he's been going to some other 10 times workshops. You know where people are and he spoke about someone who's actually a performer musical performer and he just saw himself as back in 1996 or 1997 as the other person spoke, and and, and he asked me the question he says when is the crossover when you stop being a rugged individualist and then you actually have great teamwork around you? Dean: And I said it's a really interesting question. Dan: I said it's when it occurs to you, based on your experience, that trusting other people is a lot less expensive than not trusting them. Dean: Right, that's a good distinction, right. That people often feel like I think that's the big block is that nobody trusts anybody to do it the way they would do it or as good as they can do it or they don't have it. You know, I think, even on the vision side, they may have proof of things, but they're the only one that knows the recipe. They haven't protocol and package to, you know, and I think that's really, I think, a job description or a you know, being able to define what a role is, you know, I think it's just hiring people isn't the answer, unless you have that capability, that new person now equipped with a, with a vision of what they, what their role is. Dan: You know yeah, yeah, I said it's also been my experience that trust comes easier when the cash is good. I think that's true right? Dean: Yeah, but they're not. I think that's really. Dan: I think the reason is you have enough money to pay for your mistakes. Dean: Yes, exactly, cash confidence. Yeah, it goes a long way. Dan: Yeah, I was thinking about Trump's reach. First of all, I think the president of the United States, automatically, regardless of who it is, has a lot of reach. Yes, for sure. Excuse me, sir, it's the president of the United States phoning. Do you take the call or don't take the call? I think you're right, yeah, absolutely. Take the call or don't take the call. I think you're right, yeah, absolutely. He says he's just imposed a 25% tariff on all your products coming into the United States. Dean: Do you care about that or do you not care about it? I suspect you care about it. I suspect. Imagine if he had a, you know if yeah, there was a 25% tariff on all strategic coach enrollments or members. Dan: Yeah Well, that's an interesting thing. None of this affects services. Dean: Right. Dan: Yeah, Because it's hard to measure Well first of all, it's hard to detect and the other thing, it's hard to measure what actually happened. This is an interesting discussion. The invisibility of the service world. Dean: Yeah, it's true, right. And also the knowledge you know like coming into something, whatever you know, your brain and something going across borders is a very different. Dan: Yeah it's very interesting. The Globe and Mail had an article it was in January, I think it was and it showed the top 10 companies in Canada that had gotten patents and the number of patents for the past 12 months, and I think TD Bank was 240, 240. And that sounds impressive, until you realize that a company like Google or Apple would have had 10,000 new patents over the previous 12 months. Dean: Yeah, it's crazy right. Dan: Patent after patent. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And my sense is, if you measure the imbalance in trade let's say the United States versus Canada there's a trade deficit. Trade. Let's say the United States versus Canada there's a trade deficit. Canada sells more into the United States than the United States sells into Canada, but that's only talking about products. I bet the United States sells far more services into Canada than Canada does into the United States. I bet you're right. Yeah, and I bet the services are more profitable. Yeah so for example, apple Watches, the construction of Apple Watches, which happens outside of the United States. Nobody makes a profit. Nobody makes a profit. They can pay for a job, but they don't actually make a profit. All they can do is pay for jobs. China can only pay for jobs, thailand, all the other countries they can only pay. And when it gets back, you know you complete the complete loop. From the idea of the Apple Watch as it goes out into the world and it's constructed and brought back into the United States. All the profit is in the United States. All the profit is in the United States. The greatest profit is actually the design of the Apple Watch, which is all done in the United States. So I think this tariff thing is coming along at an interesting period. It's that products as such are less and less an important part of the economy. Dean: Yeah Well, I've often wondered that, like you know, we're certainly, we're definitely at a point where they were in the economy, where you could get something from. You know. You know I mean facebook and google and youtube. You know all of these companies there's. No, they wouldn't have anything that shows up on any balance sheet of physical goods. You know, it's all just ones and zeros. Dan: Yeah. I mean it doesn't happen anymore, but because we have. You know, nexus, when Babs and I crossed the border, we have trusted, trusted traveler coming this way which also requires us that we look into a camera and then go and check in to the official and he looks at us and all he wants to know is how many bags do you have that have? Dean: been in. Dan: And we tell him. That's all we tell him. He doesn't tell us anything we're bringing into the United States and he doesn't tell us anything we're bringing into the United States. And then, when we come back to Canada, we just have our Nexus card which goes into a machine, we look into a camera and a sheet of paper comes out. And the customs official or the immigration official, just you know, puts a red pen to it, which means that he saw it, and then you go out there. But you know, when we started, coach, we would have to go through a long line. We'd have our passport, and then the person would say what are you bringing? And then we'd have to fill in a card are you bringing this back into canada? Dean: exactly, yeah, you remember the remember and what's the total. Dan: You know the total price of everything that you purchased, everything. Dean: And I used to think. Dan: I said you know, I was in Chicago and I just came up with an idea. It's a million dollar idea. Do I declare that I had the good sense not to declare my million-dollar idea because then they would have taken me in the back room. You know, if I had said that, what are you? Why are you trying to screw around? Dean: with our mind. You'll have to undergo a cavity search to. Dan: So what I'm saying is that what's really valuable has become intangible more and more so just in the 30 years or so of so of coach you know that and it's like the patents. Dean: you know we've had all the patents appraised and there's an asset value, but yeah, because this is an interesting thing that in the or 30 years ago you had to in order to spread an idea. You had to print booklets and tape. I remember the first thing what year did you do how the Best Get Better? That was one of the first things that you did, right? Dan: Right around 2000 or so. In fact, you're catching me in a very vulnerable situation. That's okay. Dean: I mean it had to be. Dan: Okay. Dean: But I think that whole idea of the entrepreneurial time system and unique ability, those things, I remember it being in a little container with the booklet and the cassette. Dan: You know crazy, but that's but yeah, because I think it was. I think it was, was it a disc or a cassette, cassette? So yeah, well, that would have mid nineties. Dean: Yeah, that's what I mean. I think that was my introduction to coach, that I saw that. Dan: but amazing, right, but that just the distribution of stuff now that we have access yeah well, it just tells you that the how much the entire economy has changed in 30 years. From tangible to intangible, the value of things, the value of what do you? Value and where does it come from? Dean: And yeah. Dan: I think all of us in the thinking business. The forces are on our side, I agree. Dean: That's such a great talking with Chad. Earlier this morning I was on my way to Honeycomb and I was thinking, you know, we've come to a point where we really it's like everything that we physically have to do is being kind of taken away. You know that we don't have to actually do anything. You know, I got in my car and I literally said, take me to Honeycomb, and the car drives itself to Honeycomb. And then, you know, I get out and I know exactly what I want, but I just show them my phone and the phone automatically, you know, apple Pay takes the money right out of my account. I don't have to do anything. I just think, man, we're moving into that. The friction between idea and execution is really disappearing. I think so. So the thing to be able to keep up, it's just collecting capabilities. Collecting capabilities is a. That's the conduit. You know, capabilities and tasks. Dan: Well, it's yeah and it's really interesting. But we're also into a world where there's two types of thinking world. There is there's kind of a creative thinking world, where you're thinking about new things, and there's another world thinking about things, but you're just thinking about the things that already already exist yeah, my feeling is and usually that requires higher education college education you know, and all my feel is that they're the number one targets of AI is everybody who does a lot of thinking, but it's not creative thinking. Ai will replace whatever they're doing. And my sense is that this is why the Doge thing is so devastating to government. I mean, I'll just test this out on you. Elon Musk and his team send every federal employee and at the start of the year there were 2.4 million federal government employees and that excludes the, the military. So the military is not part of that 2.4 million and the post office is not part of those are excluded from. Everybody else is included in there. And he sent out a letter he says could just return by return email. Tell us the five things that you did last week. And it was extraordinarily difficult for the federal employees to say what they did last. That would be understandable to someone who wasn't in their world. And I think the majority of them were meetings and reports, uh-huh. Yes, about what? About meetings and reports, uh-huh. Dean: Yes, about what? About meetings and reports yeah, we had the meeting about the report. Dan: Yeah, and then scheduled another meeting To discuss the further follow-up of the report. Dean: Yeah, At least in the entrepreneurial world the things are about you know, yeah. Dan: I mean if you said I sent the memo to you and said, dean Jackson, please tell me it would be interesting stuff that you wrote back. I mean the stuff that you wrote back and you say just five, just five. You know, I can tell you 15 things I did last week, you know, and each of them would be probably an interesting subject. It would be an interesting topic is the division between that bureaucratic world. The guess coming out of the Doge project is if we fired half of federal government employees, it wouldn't be noticed by the taxpayers. Dean: Right, it's like a big Jenga puzzle. Dan: How many can? Dean: we pull out before it all crumbles. Dan: Yeah, because there's been virtually no complaints, like all the pension checks came when they should. All the you know everything like that. The Medicare, everything came. Dean: But what? Dan: they found and this is the one, this is the end joke here that they just went to the Small Business Administration and they examined $600 million worth of loans last year and 300 million of them went to children 11 years or younger who had a Social Security number. Dean: Is that true? Dan: Yeah, and 300 million went to Americans older than 120 who had an active Social Security number. Dean: Wow, now, that's just. Dan: Yeah, but that $600 million went to somebody. 0:48:51 - Dean: Yeah, it went somewhere. Dan: right, they were checks and they went to individuals who had this name and they had Social Security number. We had this name and they had social security number and those individuals don't those individuals. The person receiving the check is not the individual who it was written to. So that's like 600 million. Yeah, and they're just finding this all over the place. These amazing amounts of money and the Treasury Department last year couldn't account for $1.2 trillion. Dean: They couldn't account for where it went.2 trillion, you know. Dan: You know, that seems dr evo's one trillion exactly. Yeah, well, it's going somewhere, and if they cut it off, I bet those people are noticed yeah, I bet you're right, I think there's. This is the great audit we're in the age of the great. We're in the age of the great audit. Anyway, I have daniel white waiting for me, okay this was a good one, daniel yeah, it was good, this was a good one. This tangibility thing is really an interesting subject and intangibility Absolutely. Dean: All right, thank you, dan. Say hi to Daniel for me Next week. Dan: I'm booked socially all day, so take a two-week break.

Birgit Pauli-Haack and JC Palmes talked about WordPress 6.8, Source of Truth, Field Guide, Gutenberg 20.5 and 20.6 Add a summary/excerpt here Show Notes / Transcript Show Notes JC Palmes Community Contributions WordPress 6.8 Zoom Out: Disabled when show template disabled #69777 Gutenberg plugin releases Transcript The transcript is in the works.

*Please be aware that this story was first published in 1902. We have made minor edits to remove obviously offensive language but parents may prefer to preview the story text which is available from project Gutenberg here. One morning over breakfast Patrick sees something he'd never noticed before - through the mist that clouds Lake Wanaka, an unfamiliar island. He could scarcely imagine the adventure that awaits him there.Enjoying Maked Up Stories? Please rate and review us and share your child's favorite episode on social media and in parenting and school groups. This is the best way for new listeners to find the podcast.Maked Up Stories is a daily children's bedtime stories podcast. Perfect for your bedtime routine, your commute, or for some high quality screen-free entertainment at home. Our interactive format will ignite your imagination. Rich vocabulary with plenty of context clues supports your child's language development.To submit an intro, outro or story request visit www.makedupstories.com.For questions, feedback or to submit your child's answer to a question we ask in the show email us at makedupstories@gmail.com.Check out our sister podcast Maked Up Clubhouse, where all the storytellers are kids! https://open.spotify.com/show/1DJIjGsPGXvUi4Qmcima0K?si=8cb76c3e21b248d0Love our intro and outro music? We do do! The song is Hishtadlus by Batya Levine and you can find more of her work on Spotify.

My guest today on the Online for Authors podcast is Michael Castleman, author of the book The Untold Story of Books. San Francisco freelance journalist Michael Castleman grew up in a suburb of New York City, graduated Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Michigan, and earned a Masters of Journalism from UC Berkeley.   During a 50-year career, he has written 3,000 magazine and web articles and 19 books. Fourteen of his books deal with health and sexuality. Two were named Health Books of the Year by the American Library Association. One was nominated for Sex Book of the Year by the American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors, and Therapists. Four of Castleman's books are mystery novels set in San Francisco that draw on the city's rich history. And one is his latest, The Untold Story of Books, which Library Journal called “concise, engrossing, and immensely readable.” After just eight weeks in print, it went into a second printing.   In my book review, I stated The Untold Story of Books is a look at publisher from the days before the Gutenberg press to present. And if you are afraid that this is going to be dry material, then you are mistaken! He does an amazing job of keeping readers glued to the pages.   He also debunks the myth that the "good ol' days" of publishing were good. In fact, he shows that publishing has always been difficult, has always dealt with piracy, and has always made it difficult for authors to make money writing.   I was most interested in publishing as it is today simply because I'm an author today. I love how he showed that having a book published is no longer the difficulty. Instead, because the gatekeepers to publishing have been removed, the struggle is now getting heard over all the noise. Anyone interested in books, publishing, writing, or history is sure to love this book.   Subscribe to Online for Authors to learn about more great books! https://www.youtube.com/@onlineforauthors?sub_confirmation=1   Join the Novels N Latte Book Club community to discuss this and other books with like-minded readers: https://www.facebook.com/groups/3576519880426290 You can follow Author Michael Castleman Website: www.mcastleman.com FB: @Michael Castleman LinkedIn: @Michael Castleman   Purchase The Untold Story of Books on Amazon: Paperback: https://amzn.to/3QlsHqL Ebook: https://amzn.to/42ZS0X4   Teri M Brown, Author and Podcast Host: https://www.terimbrown.com FB: @TeriMBrownAuthor IG: @terimbrown_author X: @terimbrown1   #michaelcastleman #theuntoldstoryofbooks #nonfiction #writerscraft #terimbrownauthor #authorpodcast #onlineforauthors #characterdriven #researchjunkie #awardwinningauthor #podcasthost #podcast #readerpodcast #bookpodcast #writerpodcast #author #books #goodreads #bookclub #fiction #writer #bookreview *As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Why are so many of our decisions based on what's best for Israel? How about what's best for the people of this country? America First, right? But before you start hating, we got something to say about that too!Show NotesOpening Segment (00:00:00 - 00:03:15)* Intro Theme: The hosts kick off with a provocative analogy comparing U.S. foreign policy to a man prioritizing his "side chick" over his family, hinting at Israel's influence. They note this could be labeled anti-Semitic but dive in regardless.* Podcast Introduction: The hosts introduce themselves as the "two kings of the Rube Empire," proudly embracing labels like "right-wing extremists," "supernaturalists," and "Christian bigots." They set the tone for an unfiltered, high-energy discussion.* Banter: Lighthearted joking about locking the doors and soliciting donations, showcasing their irreverent style.Val Kilmer Tribute (00:03:15 - 00:13:36)* Val Kilmer's Passing: The hosts mourn Val Kilmer's death, speculating on his faith and sharing favorite roles:* Philosopher King: Loves Doc Holliday in Tombstone ("I'm your Huckleberry").* Iron King: Picks Moses in The Prince of Egypt for its depth and music.* Dusty: Highlights Kilmer's comedic role in Real Genius and his versatility in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.* Film Discussion: They explore Kilmer's range (Heat, The Doors, Willow, Top Gun), praising his ability to disappear into characters. Tangents include Tom Cruise's Oscar snubs and Scientology.* Aging Actors: The conversation shifts to other aging icons (Clint Eastwood, Chuck Norris, Dick Van Dyke), marveling at their longevity.Political Speculation (00:13:36 - 00:27:10)* Biden's Absence: The hosts question Biden's whereabouts, joking about a Weekend at Bernie's scenario with Kamala Harris.* Democratic Party: They identify Bernie Sanders and AOC as the current faces of the Democrats, predicting AOC might run for president in 2028 due to her age eligibility.* Trump's Coalition: Discussion on how Trump maintains his MAGA base amidst actions like Yemen bombings, which contradict his "no forever wars" stance. They critique the "they touched our boats" justification.* Future of the Right: Concerns about keeping principled conservatives (like themselves) in the coalition, suggesting figures like J.D. Vance or Thomas Massie as potential successors, though Massie's independence might alienate MAGA loyalists.* Immigration: Strong support for deporting violent illegal immigrants (e.g., MS-13), rejecting libertarian "slippery slope" arguments. They frame it as a principled stance on law and order.Lies, Trust, and Truth (00:27:10 - 01:45:05)* World War II Revisionism: The hosts challenge the narrative of WWII, arguing the U.S. didn't "win" but rather exploited Germany's defeat for its own gain, eroding trust in historical accounts.* Climate Change Skepticism: They note the fading climate change rhetoric, tying it to anti-Elon Musk sentiment and pointing out inconsistencies (e.g., Obama's oceanfront mansion).* Government Distrust: A recurring theme: Boomers trusted the government blindly due to limited information access, while modern generations, armed with the internet, see through the lies (e.g., oil abundance, not scarcity).* The Bible as Truth: They passionately argue the Bible is the only reliable truth amidst pervasive lies, citing evidence like mitochondrial DNA (Adam and Eve), flood fossils, and Red Sea chariots. This drives their mission to "wake people up."Reformation and Faith (01:41:31 - 02:02:00)* Printing Press Parallel: The hosts compare the internet to Gutenberg's printing press, both exposing lies and driving people to Jesus by making truth accessible.* Catholic Critique: They challenge Catholic practices (praying to Mary, saints, purgatory) as unbiblical, urging Catholics and Orthodox believers to read the Bible themselves. They predict this leads to Protestantism.* Protestant Issues: Acknowledge flaws like dispensationalism (a "red herring" discouraging long-term investment) and seeker-sensitive churches, but emphasize sola scriptura.* Unity in Christ: Despite denominational differences, they affirm Jesus as the sole focus of faith, not traditions or institutions.Final Thoughts (01:53:26 - 02:02:11)* Dusty: Debunks the "Trump third term" rumor as Democratic fearmongering, citing his age and constitutional barriers. Ties it to the assassination attempt, calling it miraculous and suspicious.* Philosopher King: Laments the lack of reasonable discourse, advocating for truth paired with love and hate for sin, rooted in trust in Jesus over failing institutions.* Closing Prayer (Dusty): A heartfelt prayer thanking God for truth and the chance to glorify Him.* Outro: The hosts sign off, encouraging listeners to engage and spread the word, reaffirming their service to "the King of Kings, Christ Jesus."Key Themes* Skepticism of Authority: Distrust in government, media, and historical narratives.* Biblical Truth: The Bible as the ultimate anchor amidst lies.* Political Critique: Balancing support for Trump with principled objections to his actions.* Cultural Commentary: Reflections on faith, masculinity, and societal shifts.Notable Quotes* "The Bible is the only thing that's true. Wake up." (Iron King)* "If you read that Bible... magically, you're going to become a Protestant." (Iron King)* "There's only one person who should rule you, and that is the King of Kings." (Philosopher King)Next Episode: Tune in next week for more unfiltered takes from the Rube Empire! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit kingsplaining.substack.com/subscribe

A two-part meditation on the history of journalism and the fate of investigative journalism under tech fascism begins with the model of Ida Tarbell, the epochal Wall Street Journal reporting on Facebook in 2021 [6:00], the professionalization of journalism during the Gilded Age and interbellum periods [38:00], the relationship between Silicon Valley and news organizations in the 21st century [54:00], the legacy of newspapers [63:00], and a periodization of print media [71:00]. Cast (in order of appearance): Gil Duran, Matt Seybold, Jeff Horwitz, Andie Tucher, Jacob Silverman, Jeff Jarvis Soundtrack: DownRiver Collective Narration: Nathan Osgood & SNR Audio For more about this episode, including a complete bibliography, please visit MarkTwainStudies.com/Gutenberg, or subscribe to Matt Seybold's newsletter at TheAmericanVandal.substack.com

This podcast is now well into its fourth year and I have established my process for research, script writing and recording. As for research, that usually means going to the London Library and bend down to the lowest shelf to dig up some age-old copy of a German language book that happens to be the one and only works that goes into the kind of detail on the topic at hand you guys have gotten used to. Imagine my confusion when I started looking into Johannes Gutenberg and found not just a few books, but whole shelves of books in English, German, French, Italian and dozens more talking about even the most intricate details of the life and works of the inventor of the printing press.Drowning in this avalanche of material, I realized that at a minimum this story requires two episodes, one about how Gutenberg came to achieve this breakthrough and then the impact his invention had on the world and on the Germans in particular. Hence today's episode is about the man and his invention, though about the man we know so very little….And here is a video that helps understnding how the machine works: How a Gutenberg Printing Press WorksAnd a book recommendation: The Gutenberg revolution : the story of a genius and an invention that changed the world : Man, John, 1941- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet ArchiveThe music for the show is Flute Sonata in E-flat major, H.545 by Carl Phillip Emmanuel Bach (or some claim it as BWV 1031 Johann Sebastian Bach) performed and arranged by Michel Rondeau under Common Creative Licence 3.0.As always:Homepage with maps, photos, transcripts and blog: www.historyofthegermans.comIf you wish to support the show go to: Support • History of the Germans PodcastFacebook: @HOTGPod Threads: @history_of_the_germans_podcastBluesky: @hotgpod.bsky.socialInstagram: history_of_the_germansTwitter: @germanshistoryTo make it easier for you to share the podcast, I have created separate playlists for some of the seasons that are set up as individual podcasts. they have the exact same episodes as in the History of the Germans, but they may be a helpful device for those who want to concentrate on only one season. So far I have:The Ottonians Salian Emperors and Investiture ControversyFredrick Barbarossa and Early HohenstaufenFrederick...

Michael Visontay thought he knew everything about his family's past, but there was one shadowy character he was aching to know more about: his grandfather's second wife, Olga. As Michael went through old papers, he uncovered a trail to the world's most coveted book, the Gutenberg Bible – a rare antique printed in the 1450s – and the scandalous scheme to break it up.Presenter: Asya Fouks Producer: Maryam MarufGet in touch: liveslessordinary@bbc.co.uk or WhatsApp: 0044 330 678 2784

Before Johannes Gutenberg's revolutionary invention, knowledge was a privilege accessible only to the wealthy, the powerful, or the devout. In this world, ideas travelled slowly, and were constrained by the limits of human hand.  So when, in the mid-15th century, Gutenberg invented the printing press, it became so much more than a machine. Ideas could be replicated by the thousands, making it the first great equaliser of information. But how did this seemingly humble invention fuel the fires of the Renaissance? How did it change Europe's relationship with the church, and give rise to the Reformation? And how did it help to shape the reputations of historical figures, from Vlad the Impaler, to Joan of Arc? This is a Short History Of The Printing Press. A Noiser Production. Written by Sean Coleman. With thanks to John Man, historian, travel writer, and author of The Gutenberg Revolution, The Story of a Genius and an Invention that Changed the World.   Get every episode of Short History Of a week early with Noiser+. You'll also get ad-free listening, bonus material, and early access to shows across the Noiser network. Click the Noiser+ banner to get started. Or, if you're on Spotify or Android, go to noiser.com/subscriptions. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On the podcast today we have Rahul Bansal, CEO of rtCamp. He's here to talk about his journey from a blogger to running a large enterprise WordPress agency. Rahul discusses the nuances of working with enterprise clients, emphasising scalability and security. We get into rtCamp's growth, client acquisition strategies, and their unique training initiative attracting talent from colleges, focused on contributing to WordPress and fostering open-source advocacy. Rahul also highlights WordPress's adaptability, particularly with Gutenberg, in crafting robust, enterprise-level solutions while actively supporting the WordPress community. If you've ever considered what it takes to work with WordPress at the enterprise level, this episode is for you.

Add a summary/excerpt here Show Notes / Transcript Show Notes Special guest: Jessica Lyschik Community Contributions What’s released What's in active development or discussed Transcript The transcript is in the works.

One hundred years ago, Gabriel Wells, a New York bookseller, committed a crime against history. He broke up the world's greatest book, the Gutenberg Bible, and sold it off in individual pages. In 1921, Wells' audacity scandalized the rare-book world. The Gutenberg was the first substantial book in Europe to have been printed on a printing press. It represented the democratization of knowledge and was the Holy Grail of rare books. In Noble Fragments: The Gripping Story of the Antiquarian Bookseller Who Broke Up a Gutenberg Bible (Scribe, 2024), Michael Visontay describes how Wells's gamble set off a chain of events that changed his family's destiny. Interviewee: Michael Visontay is the Commissioning Editor of The Jewish Independent, and has worked as a journalist and senior editor at The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism (Temple University Press). Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

One hundred years ago, Gabriel Wells, a New York bookseller, committed a crime against history. He broke up the world's greatest book, the Gutenberg Bible, and sold it off in individual pages. In 1921, Wells' audacity scandalized the rare-book world. The Gutenberg was the first substantial book in Europe to have been printed on a printing press. It represented the democratization of knowledge and was the Holy Grail of rare books. In Noble Fragments: The Gripping Story of the Antiquarian Bookseller Who Broke Up a Gutenberg Bible (Scribe, 2024), Michael Visontay describes how Wells's gamble set off a chain of events that changed his family's destiny. Interviewee: Michael Visontay is the Commissioning Editor of The Jewish Independent, and has worked as a journalist and senior editor at The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian. Host: Schneur Zalman Newfield is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Jewish Studies at Hunter College, City University of New York, and the author of Degrees of Separation: Identity Formation While Leaving Ultra-Orthodox Judaism (Temple University Press). Visit him online at ZalmanNewfield.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Matt Mullenweg is the co-founder of WordPress, the open source platform powering a staggering 43% of the internet. He also serves as CEO of Automattic—the parent company of brands like WordPress.com, WooCommerce, and Tumblr—which is worth over $7 billion, with over 1,700 employees across 90 countries. In this episode, he discusses some of the most controversial topics surrounding WordPress, Automattic, and the broader open source community.—What you'll learn:• Matt's response to public criticism• Why products like Meta's Llama are “fake open source”• How his team is turning around Tumblr after acquiring it for just $3 million (after Yahoo bought it for $1.1 billion)• Why he mortgaged his home to fund San Francisco's iconic Bay Lights project• Matt's philosophy: “Don't just build a product; build a movement”• Why open source matters: “If the Founding Fathers were around today, they'd be open source advocates”—Brought to you by:• WorkOS—Modern identity platform for B2B SaaS, free up to 1 million MAUs• Vanta—Automate compliance. Simplify security.• Loom—The easiest screen recorder you'll ever use—Find the transcript at: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/the-creator-of-wordpress-opens-up-matt-mullenweg—Where to find Matt Mullenweg:• X: https://x.com/photomatt• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mattm/• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/photomatt/• Website: https://ma.tt/—Where to find Lenny:• Newsletter: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com• X: https://twitter.com/lennysan• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lennyrachitsky/—In this episode, we cover:(00:00) Introduction to Matt Mullenweg(05:10) Matt's career journey(11:15) Bay Lights project and philanthropy(17:28) How Matt got involved with open source(23:25) Why products like Meta's Llama are “fake open source”(27:14) The future of open source and how to get involved(35:25) Building a successful online community(39:12) The WP Engine controversy(50:24) Facing criticism and controversy(55:29) Addressing community concerns(01:08:29) Forking Advanced Custom Fields(01:11:15) The role of social media and public perception(01:16:43) Acquiring and reviving Tumblr(01:24:25) Automattic's acquisition strategy(01:28:51) Final thoughts and future plans—Referenced:• WordPress: https://wordpress.com/• Automattic: https://automattic.com/• CNET: https://www.cnet.com/• Akismet: https://akismet.com/wordpress/• Jetpack: https://jetpack.com/• Toni Schneider on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tonischneider/• WooCommerce: https://woocommerce.com/• Beeper: https://www.beeper.com/• Day One: https://dayoneapp.com/• Simplenote: https://simplenote.com/• Pocket Casts: https://pocketcasts.com/• Creative Commons: https://creativecommons.org/• Audrey Capital: https://audrey.co/• Stripe: https://stripe.com/• SpaceX: https://www.spacex.com/• Calm: https://www.calm.com/• August: https://august.com/• Daylight Computer: https://daylightcomputer.com/• Keys Jazz Bistro: https://keysjazzbistro.com/• Joomla: https://www.joomla.org/• Drupal: https://new.drupal.org/• Shopify: https://www.shopify.com/• Wix: https://www.wix.com/• Squarespace: https://www.squarespace.com/• Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/• Gravatar: https://gravatar.com/• The Bay Lights: https://illuminate.org/projects/thebaylights/• The Bay Lights 360: https://illuminate.org/the-bay-lights-360/• Ben Davis on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ben-davis-sf/• Kinder High School for the Performing and Visual Arts: https://www.houstonisd.org/hspva• Jack Dorsey: We're Losing our Free Will to Algorithms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_8NganZSFI• Marc Andreessen: https://a16z.com/author/marc-andreessen/• Bill Gurley on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/billgurley/• An inside look at X's Community Notes | Keith Coleman (VP of Product) and Jay Baxter (ML Lead): https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/how-x-built-the-best-fact-checking-system-on-the-internet• Llama: https://www.llama.com/• WordCamp US & Ecosystem Thinking: https://ma.tt/2024/09/ecosystem-thinking/• As Wall Street Chases Profits, Fire Departments Have Paid the Price: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/17/us/fire-engines-shortage-private-equity.html• WordCamp Asia: https://asia.wordcamp.org/2025/• Justin Baldoni Hit with Defamation Suit as PR Teams Turn on Each Other over Blake Lively's ‘It Ends with Us' Smear Campaign Allegations: https://deadline.com/2024/12/justin-baldoni-defamation-lawsuit-publicist-blake-lively-1236241784/• How WordPress Hot Nacho Scandal Shapes WP Engine Dispute: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/how-wordpress-hot-nacho-scandal-shapes-wp-engine-dispute/539069/• Gutenberg: https://wordpress.org/gutenberg/• ClassicPress: https://www.classicpress.net/• Behind the founder: Marc Benioff: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/behind-the-founder-marc-benioff• Mary Hubbard on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryfhubbard/• Brian Chesky's new playbook: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/brian-cheskys-contrarian-approach• Founder mode: https://paulgraham.com/foundermode.html• Cow.com: https://www.cow.com/• David Karp on X: https://x.com/davidkarp• Marissa Mayer on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marissamayer/• Alibaba: https://www.alibaba.com/• WP Engine Tracker: https://wordpressenginetracker.com/• Kumbh Mela: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbh_Mela—Recommended book:• Maintenance: Of Everything (in progress): https://books.worksinprogress.co/book/maintenance-of-everything/addenda/page/introduction—Production and marketing by https://penname.co/. For inquiries about sponsoring the podcast, email podcast@lennyrachitsky.com.—Lenny may be an investor in the companies discussed. Get full access to Lenny's Newsletter at www.lennysnewsletter.com/subscribe

Episode: 1327 Electricity in Everyday Life in 1904.  Today, let's look for parallels.

Gutenberg changed the literary world, but are we messing it up?   __________ Claim your copy of Full-Time: Work and the Meaning of Life by David L. Bahnsen with your gift of any amount to the Colson Center in the month of February at colsoncenter.org/february.