POPULARITY
16 episodes with homogeneous
2 episodes with homogeneous
2 episodes with homogeneous
3 episodes with homogeneous
5 episodes with homogeneous
2 episodes with homogeneous
4 episodes with homogeneous
2 episodes with homogeneous
2 episodes with homogeneous
Before my wife traveled to Zimbabwe recently, we sat at the dinner table one night chatting, and she said she felt some type of way about going home. Not dread exactly. Not simple excitement either. Something more tangled. Love and distance sitting next to each other, both equally true, both equally present.I understood exactly what she meant. That mix of longing and apprehension. Wanting to go and wanting to have already left. Missing home while wanting to keep the distance.We talked for a long time that evening, circling around something we both knew but struggled to name. The conversation kept returning to the same uncomfortable truth: home doesn't feel the same anymore. Not really. Not in the way we used to fit there, effortlessly, without thinking about it.We love the place we come from: Bulawayo. I miss it in ways that surprise me, in the middle of ordinary days when I'm doing something completely unrelated and suddenly the longing hits like a physical thing in my chest. But loving a place and fitting in it aren't the same thing. We're learning that the hard way.Maybe you know this feeling too. That pull toward home that sits alongside a quiet dread. The way you count down to a visit with genuine excitement and genuine anxiety living in the same breath. The strange guilt of missing a place while simultaneously knowing you can't stay there long. If you've felt this, if you've tried to explain it to someone and watched your words fail to capture the complexity, this is for you. Not to fix the tension but to name it. To give you language for what you already know inside but can't quite say out loud.I love reading fantasy. Right now I'm working through The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan. It's a long series. Fourteen books. Epic in every sense of the word. While on a walk yesterday, I finished Book Five (I was listening to the audiobook) and as I was reflecting on what I had just experienced, that conversation with my wife came back to me and wouldn't leave because I'd found something that explains the feelings we were having.The story of the Wheel of Time follows a group of young people from a farming region called the Two Rivers. Small, quiet place. Everyone knows everyone. But they're forced to leave the Two Rivers to go on an epic adventure. One of them, Rand, discovers he's the prophesied Dragon Reborn. By Book Five, he's learned to channel immense power that could level cities if he loses control. He's seen wonders and horrors that no one from the Two Rivers could imagine. He's made choices that ripple across nations, decisions that affect the lives of thousands of people he'll never meet. He carries the weight of the world now. Literally.As I reflected on the ending of book five, the thought that was stuck on my mind is that there's no way Rand could go back to the Two Rivers and fit in anymore. He's become too big for it. The shape of his life has changed so fundamentally that the old mould can't hold him anymore.While I haven't quite gone on an epic adventure of world-changing proportions, I know that feeling. I live in it.There's a saying in isiNdebele. ‘Ukuhamba kuzal' inkosi,' which translates to ‘Traveling gives birth to kings.' When I was a boy, I thought it meant wealth and status. Kings as men with big houses and German cars that never break down and people who never stand in line at the bank. Now I know it means something quieter and heavier and harder to explain to someone who hasn't felt it. Travel enlarges you. It stretches the borders of who you are and what you can see and how you understand the world. And once you expand like that, you can't shrink back to your old size. Not without incurring a cost, anyway. The box that used to hold you comfortably now feels too small.Bulawayo raised me well. The city gave me a lot I needed to become who I am. It was a good childhood. A happy one. I have many fond memories.During the week after school, I rode bikes with friends. We were a small gang of boys, and we ruled our little corner of the world with the absolute certainty of children who don't know yet how small their kingdom is. We wandered the suburbs exploring. Down streets we weren't supposed to go down. Into yards we weren't supposed to enter. We walked kilometers and kilometers without thinking about it, without getting tired, just moving for the sake of moving and seeing what was around the next corner. Then we had to rush back to be home by six. That was the rule. Six o'clock before parents returned from work. We came back with dust up to our knees. Thick white dust that got into everything. You had to wash your legs before getting into the house. Rinse off all that evidence of your adventures before you were allowed to sit on the sofas or walk on the clean floors.If I was hanging out at a friend's house around mealtime, I'd be counted in automatically. No one asked if you'd eaten or if you were hungry. You were there so you were fed. The same isitshwala and mbida at every table, part of the shared life.Back then, every adult was your parent. In theory and in practice. If you were doing something you shouldn't be doing, any adult could correct you, and you accepted it because that was just how things worked. You knew all your neighbors. Not just their names but their business, their struggles, their joys.It was a small world. Homogeneous in ways I didn't realise then. We were all black. Almost all Ndebele. We all went to the same types of schools and the same types of churches. Our parents were teachers or nurses or clerks or government workers. Solid middle class or aspiring to it. We had the same references, the same jokes, the same understanding of how the world worked. Everyone fit the same basic mold with only minor variations.But it was the whole world. It was all I knew, and all I needed to know. The edges of that world felt far away, theoretical, not something I'd ever actually reach.Then I left.School finished. I worked for a few years. Opportunities appeared. I went to South Africa first. Then eventually moved to London. Each move feeling necessary at the time, practical, the obvious next step.But those moves weren't just geographic. They weren't just about changing addresses or learning new streets. They changed something fundamental to how I saw the world and my place in it.South Africa was the first crack in the homogeneity. Suddenly I was surrounded by people who weren't like me. They spoke different languages, practiced different religions, came from different economic realities entirely. I met some who grew up so poor that my middle-class Bulawayo childhood looked like luxury to them. I met others who grew up so wealthy they genuinely didn't understand what it meant to worry about money.I remember the first time I met someone who'd never been to church, who hadn't grown up with any religion at all. It broke something in my brain in a necessary way. In Bulawayo, you could assume everyone was Christian. Even people who didn't go to church regularly, even people who weren't particularly devout, still operated within a Christian framework. They knew the stories, the references, the basic moral architecture. But here was someone who didn't. Who saw the world through a completely different lens. Who'd built their ethics and their understanding of meaning from completely different materials.And there were people. A whole community of people who became our people for that season. We found a group of friends in South Africa who felt like our tribe. Like the kind of connection that happens once in a lifetime and surely lasts forever. We took trips together. Long road trips filled with singing and food and getting lost, but it didn't matter because getting lost was part of the adventure. We sang together at different churches, our voices finding harmonies that felt like something bigger than any of us individually. Sunday afternoons that stretched into evenings, having a braai at someone's house, talking about everything and nothing.It felt permanent. That's something you come to discover about these seasons. They feel permanent while you're in them. You can't imagine a version of your life where these people aren't central to it. This is our community. These are our people. This beautiful thing we've built together, it's going to last.It didn't. When we visit South Africa now, we sometimes see them. The friends from that season. We meet for coffee or dinner, and the warmth is real. The love is still there. But something has shifted. They've moved on to new things, new communities, new versions of themselves. We have too. We talk about the old days with affection and nostalgia, but we can't recreate them. Those people still exist, but that community doesn't. It served its purpose for that time and then it dissolved, the way morning mist dissolves when the sun gets high enough.That dissolution used to hurt more than it does now. The first time I really felt a community come apart, I fought it. I thought if we just tried harder, stayed more connected, made more effort, we could keep it alive. But communities aren't just about effort. They're about season and proximity and shared purpose and a thousand other factors that shift whether you want them to or not. Some relationships endure beyond the community. Those ones you carry with you, fold into the next chapter, hold on to across distance and time. But the community itself, that specific configuration of people in that specific place at that specific time, it has a lifespan.Then London. London has been something else entirely. A city so large and so diverse that you could live here for years and still only scratch the surface of it. On the Tube, you could hear ten different languages from five different countries between Baker Street and Paddington. At work, I collaborate with people from every continent, every background you can imagine. People who pray five times a day. People who have never prayed in their lives. People whose parents own businesses that span countries. People whose childhoods included winters that got to -40 degrees Celsius.Each of these encounters did something to me. Stretched me. Challenged assumptions I didn't know I was making. Showed me that the way I grew up wasn't the only way, wasn't the default, was just one option among infinite possibilities.And once you see that, once you really internalize it, you can't go back to thinking your small corner is the whole world. The box expands. The borders move. You become larger than you were.And here too, in London, we found people. Different people. A new community. We're part of something now that feels good and right and like it might last forever. Except we've been here before. We know how this goes. We can feel it already, the subtle shift. Not everyone at the same pace. Some people moving toward different things. The community is still beautiful, still real, but we're not at the apex anymore. We're on the other side of the hill. The slow, inevitable drift has begun. Now I'm learning to hold these dissolutions with more grace. To honor what was without demanding it last forever. To let the community be beautiful for its season and then let it go when the season ends. To trust that the next place will have its own people, its own version of belonging, its own sweet spot before it too shifts into something else.When I visit Bulawayo now, I aim for a sweet spot. Two weeks maximum. Week one is pure delight. Landing at the airport and stepping out into that heat that hits you like a wall. The heat in London is never like that. It's never this specific, this thick, this full of dust and sun and something else I can't name but would recognize anywhere. The air smells different. Feels different on your skin.People light up when they see you. Literally, like you're returning from war. Someone will say you look darker or lighter depending on their mood and the light. Someone will inspect you closely and declare you've gained weight or lost weight, both said with the same mix of concern and approval.You greet everyone. That's important. You have to get it right, or the elders will talk about how you've lost your manners overseas.The first morning you wake up early. Not because you set an alarm but because your body hasn't adjusted to the time and also because the sounds are different. Birds are singing in the trees at five in the morning. A rooster somewhere in the distance, because even in the city people rear their own chickens. The neighborhood waking up with its own particular rhythm.You take the long way to buy bread. You don't need to, but you do it anyway because you want to pass that corner where you used to meet up. You want to see if the tree's still there, if the wall still has that crack in it, if the world has stayed the same in your absence. Mostly it has.Friends come by. Friends you haven't seen in years but who fall back into conversation with you like no time has passed. You laugh from the belly about stupid things you did as kids. Remember that time when. Remember when we. The stories get better each time you tell them, embellished with time and distance and affection.For those first few days, it's all warmth. All belonging. You fit into the spaces you left behind like a hand sliding into a familiar glove. You belong to this place, and this place belongs to you. You could live here again. Of course, you could. How did you ever leave?Week two rolls in. There's no clear boundary, no moment when you can point and say here, this is where it shifted. It creeps in at the edges.At first, it's just a small tug. A quiet discomfort you can't quite name. The streets feel narrower somehow. Conversations start to loop back on themselves. The government, and power cuts, and the same stories about the same old people making the same choices. You've heard these stories before. You'll hear them again tomorrow. You still love the food. The braai meat, isitshwala, the texture of it in your fingers, the way it fills you differently than anything you eat in London. Smoke in your eyes. It's perfect. It's home.But by midweek, something else is present too. You can feel the box. The box has walls. The walls are closer than they used to be. Topics you can't discuss because they're too far outside the shared frame of reference. Questions you don't ask because you know the answer will just confirm the gap. You start to notice all the ways you've changed and they haven't, or they've changed and you haven't, or you've both changed but in different directions and now you're standing on opposite sides of a distance that love can't fully bridge.You start counting days. Six more. Five more. By the weekend, the sweetness is gone entirely. If you stay longer, nostalgia curdles into something else. Ache. Then impatience. Then a version of yourself you don't like. Complaining about everything. Feeling trapped in a place you're choosing to be.I've learned to leave before I sour. Before I start resenting the place I love. Before the people who love me start to see that restless part of me that can't settle.This is the pattern we've learned. Most times when that longing for home hits us, we go as far as South Africa instead of all the way to Zimbabwe. Not to meet family necessarily. That's not the main driver. We go to satisfy the ache without fully committing. To dip our toes in the water of home without diving all the way in.Because South Africa occupies this interesting middle space for us. It was the first place that loosened the homogeneity we grew up with. The first place where difference sat next to you on the taxi without anyone making a scene about it. People from everywhere. Accents from all over the continent and beyond stacking on top of each other. The people at the mall looking like a map of the world. Languages switching mid-sentence. Different ways of being existing side by side.It's bigger than Bulawayo. It breathes. It has room for multiplicity, for variation, for people who don't fit the standard mold. We can taste home there, catch the flavor of it in the accents and the food and the mannerisms, without feeling the walls close in quite as fast. We can last longer. Three weeks. Sometimes a month. Before the sweet spot ends and the confinement begins again.This is the part I struggle to explain to people back home. From their perspective, it can look like pride. Like we think we're better because we live overseas now. You think you're too good for us. That's the unspoken accusation, sometimes the spoken one.But it's not that. I wish it were that simple because then I could just correct my attitude and everything would be fine. It's not about better or worse. It's about geometry. About shape and fit. The shape of my life has changed. The container that used to hold it comfortably can't hold it anymore. Not because the container is bad or small or insufficient. Because I'm different. I've been poured into a larger mold and set there, and now I've hardened into a new shape.How do you explain that to someone who hasn't experienced it? There's a song by Sara Groves called “Painting Pictures of Egypt.” She sings: “And the places I long for the most are the places where I've been. They are calling out to me like a long-lost friend.”I feel that deeply. The places I long for most are the places where I've been. Bulawayo calls to me. South Africa calls to me. Not as they are now but as they were when I fit in them, when I belonged without question. Not just the places but the people. The communities that formed and felt permanent and then dissolved like they were never supposed to last at all.The song goes on: “And I want to go back, but the places they used to fit me cannot hold the things I've learned.”And there it is. The whole ache in two lines. I want to go back. The longing is real and deep and constant. But the places that used to fit me can't hold the things I've learned. Can't contain what I've seen. Can't accommodate who I've become. And the communities that once held me can't reform because we've all become different shapes, traveling different roads, even if we still carry affection for what we once had together.And then this line, the one that really gets me: “I am caught between the promise and the things I know.”Between the past and what's coming. Between what was and what might be. Between the comfort of the known and the pull of the unknown. Between the place I came from and the person I'm becoming. Between the communities that were and the ones that might yet be.That's where I live now. In that caught-between space.London is not home. Not yet. Maybe not ever in the way Bulawayo was home when I was a boy, and home meant the place where you belonged without having to think about it.Some days it feels like it might become home. Days when the city reveals some new corner, some unexpected beauty. Other days, it feels completely foreign. Like you're an actor playing a role, always slightly outside yourself.I have small rituals that stitch a sense of belonging in it. A particular bench in a park where the light falls a certain way in the afternoon and I sit and listen to my book. The Turkish restaurant where I order the same thing every time. A church where the singing rises in a way that feels like worship, even if it's not the four-part harmony I'm used to.So, I pack Bulawayo into my pockets and carry it with me. A proverb that surfaces when I need it. A recipe I recreate in a kitchen thousands of miles away that never quite tastes right, but it's close enough. The cadence that returns to my voice when I'm tired, the way I spoke when I was young, slipping through. I carry South Africa in my stride. That wider breath, that willingness to occupy space without apologizing. And I carry the people from there who still reach across distance, who check in, who remember. Not the whole community, but the threads that endured.I'm learning to be in many places at once without being torn apart by it. To hold multiple identities without having them collapse. To accept that communities form and dissolve and that's not failure, that's just the rhythm of a life lived across many places. It's exhausting. The constant negotiation, the code-switching, always standing at the border between worlds. Always saying goodbye to communities that felt permanent, always starting over with new people, always carrying the grief of what dissolved and the hope that this next thing might last. But it's also rich. I see things people who've only lived in one place can't see. I understand multiplicity in a way that only comes from living it.Frodo saves the Shire in The Lord of the Rings. He endures everything to protect it, to make it possible for hobbits to keep living their simple comfortable lives. He succeeds. He returns. The Shire is saved.But he can't live there anymore. The hearth is warm, but he feels cold in a way that no fire can touch. His friends celebrate and feast and marry and settle into peace, and he can't join them. Not really. He can be physically present, but he's not there the way he used to be there. The journey has marked him too deeply. It has changed him in ways that can't be undone.So eventually he leaves. Gets on a ship and sails away to a place where the changed and the marked and the unbelonging go. It's not defeat exactly. It's just honesty. An acknowledgment that some transformations are irreversible.I think about that a lot. About irreversible transformations. About the ways we save the places we love by becoming people who can no longer fully inhabit them. About how we form communities that feel eternal and then watch them dissolve, not because anyone did anything wrong but because that's what communities do when the season changes.This hits especially close to home for so many people I know. My friends who left Zimbabwe. My friends here in London. Most of us didn't leave for adventure or curiosity. We left for survival. For opportunity. To earn enough to support families back home. To pay the black tax. The responsibility to send money home.But here's the cruel irony: the places that pay you enough to save home are the same places that change you so fundamentally you can't fit back home anymore. You see different ways of life, meet people with different values, and form new reference points. Your frame of reference expands. Your assumptions shift. The way you think about time, about work, about what's possible - it all changes. Until one day you go back and realise you can no longer inhabit the place you're saving.The tax isn't just the money you send back. It's the piece of belonging you trade away to earn that money. You can't have both. If traveling makes kings, it also makes exiles. That's the part the proverb doesn't say out loud, but it's there in the subtext if you know how to look.The crown is vision. The ability to see farther, to connect dots across greater distances, to understand complexity and multiplicity and nuance. That's the gift. That's what you gain.The exile is the cost. You belong less easily. Home becomes complicated. The borders that used to feel solid and protecting now feel like walls that are too close, too rigid, too confining. Communities that felt permanent reveal themselves to be temporary. Relationships that seemed unshakeable shift when distance enters the equation. You can't unknow what you know. You can't unsee what you've seen. You can't shrink back down to fit in the space that used to hold you perfectly.That's freedom in one sense. You're not limited to one way of being, one way of seeing. The world is larger for you than it is for people who never left. It's also grief. Deep and ongoing grief for the simpler version of yourself who fit so neatly, for the belonging you can never quite reclaim, for the communities that dissolved, leaving only the sweetness of memory.I'm learning to let the freedom expand me and let the grief soften me and somehow keep both happening at the same time. It's not easy. Some days I do it better than others.I don't aim to fit perfectly anywhere now. I think I'm done with that as a goal.Could I go back if I had to? Yes. Humans are adaptable. Some people I know found middle grounds I didn't - stayed closer to home while still expanding, or settled in nearer countries where the distance isn't quite so far. Given enough time and necessity, I could reform myself to fit the old mould. But I'd have to make myself smaller. I'd have to let go of all those other places I've seen, those other ways of being or carry them silently, never speaking about them, living in permanent longing. Before circumstances force me to shrink back down, I'm choosing to honor the new shape I've become. To carry multiple homes instead of fitting completely in one.Perfection was an illusion anyway. It only felt perfect because my world was small enough that I couldn't see beyond its edges.Now I want something different. I want to carry this expanded world faithfully. To let it make me kinder because I've met people unlike me and learned they're still deserving of dignity. To make me more curious because every person might have a completely different map of reality. To make me less certain that my way is the only road. I want to keep space at my table for someone whose map looks nothing like mine, whose journey led them to conclusions I don't understand. To listen more than I defend.I want to honor the communities that form without demanding they last forever. To leave before I sour and return before I forget. To know my limits and respect them.Home is not a single address for me anymore. It's not a dot on a map. It's a constellation. Multiple points spread across distance, all connected by invisible lines, all part of the same larger map.Bulawayo lives in me, the dust on my legs after a long walk, kombis rattling past with bass thumping from speakers bigger than they should have, that comfortable embrace of familiarity. South Africa taught me difference doesn't have to mean distance, that multiplicity is just reality when you zoom out far enough, that beautiful communities can form and then end and that's fine. London is teaching me to be many things at once without apologizing, to build home from scratch in a place that doesn't know my childhood and forces me to be myself in the present tense. To start over again, with new people in a new place, knowing it might not last but showing up anyway.The constellation moves when I move. I carry it with me. Every place where I've stopped long enough to become a slightly different version of myself. Every person who walked alongside me for a time. Places and people. Enduring connections rather than permanent communities. Many ways of belonging rather than one.The work is simple in concept, difficult in execution. One star at a time. One small ritual. One phone call. One visit before I sour. One return before I forget. One season with people who matter. One graceful goodbye when the season ends.That's the work I'm learning. And if you're reading this, maybe it's your work too. Find your sweet spot. Honor it. Respect it. Return before you forget. Leave before you sour.And know that you're not alone in this strange expanded world. Some of us are walking this too. Carrying constellations. Learning to belong partially in many places rather than completely in one. Building homes that move when we move.Thanks for reading Just Reflections! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit justreflections.bhekani.com
We trace why “bring your whole self to work” fell flat, how subtle detractor patterns (ignoring, courtesy code switching, email habits) silently erode trust, and why inclusion is less about demographics and more about everyday micro-behaviors. Kimberly makes it real: when team members only get replies if they CC the boss, people stop trying. When leaders say they value input but don't create safety, trust collapses.The surprise? Homogeneous teams with strong inclusion behaviors can outperform diverse ones without them. Inclusion isn't about who's at the table—it's whether voices matter once they're there.I push back on the myth of “leader angst”: making things better is the leader's job. Kimberly adds the missing truth: the biggest cost isn't money or time—it's the vulnerability of having real conversations with your team.This isn't theory. It's leadership on the line. And it's the difference between wasting hours in ignored emails versus amplifying effectiveness by 30% with no extra cost—just courage.TL;DR* Inclusion ≠ diversity quotas—it's behaviors that create belonging.* Five detractor patterns silently kill inclusion (ignoring, courtesy code switching, etc.).* Leaders can't outsource inclusion—HR can't carry this, only teams can.* Effectiveness jumps when small friction points (like ignored emails) get fixed.* The real cost: leaders must get vulnerable, confront team dynamics, and stay accountable.Memorable lines “No one wakes up in the morning saying, ‘I hope I'm excluded today.'” “Courtesy code switching sounds respectful—but it actually silences voices.” “Making things better is literally the leader's job. Otherwise, a bot could replace you.” “Inclusion isn't a social program—it's how you answer your team's emails.”Guest Kimberly Lewis Parsons — Founder & CEO of Bamboo Teaming; expert in inclusive teaming, executive team coaching, and shifting leaders from ineffective habits to productive collaboration.
In this episode of Progressively Incorrect, I'm honored to host Ronak Bhatt, the accomplished founder and school leader of TELRA Institute. Ronak will discuss how acceleration can open doors for learners, share his thoughts on the benefits and challenges of homogeneous grouping, and provide insights into experimental educational models that offer bold alternatives to traditional … Continue reading S4E30: Ronak Bhatt on Accelerated Learning and Homogeneous Grouping
My guest today is Kurt Gray, a social psychologist, researcher and teacher. He uses interdisciplinary methods to study our deepest held beliefs and how to bridge moral divides. Kurt is a Professor in Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he directs the Deepest Beliefs Lab and the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding. The topic is his book Outraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common Ground. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Political and cultural polarization in America Sources and perceptions of morality Finding common ground between ideological divides Influence of institutions (media, universities, religion) on shaping morality Homogeneous and pluralistic societies Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!
My guest today is Kurt Gray, a social psychologist, researcher and teacher. He uses interdisciplinary methods to study our deepest held beliefs and how to bridge moral divides. Kurt is a Professor in Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he directs the Deepest Beliefs Lab and the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding. The topic is his book Outraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common Ground. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Political and cultural polarization in America Sources and perceptions of morality Finding common ground between ideological divides Influence of institutions (media, universities, religion) on shaping morality Homogeneous and pluralistic societies Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!
What knowledge exists about medieval peasants and their lives? How do we know what we know?In this episode, Elías Carballido González explores various historical approaches to thinking about the peasantry, considers the state of the field in the present day, and discusses a handful of examples with a focus on northwest Iberia.For more information about Elías, medieval peasants, or this podcast, visit www.multiculturalmiddleages.com.
Most of us don't grow up across the street from a chemistry building or know from an early age that we want to be a scientist, but Alan Dyke, VP of Business Development for ProChem, Inc. (CTO of Boulder Scientific Company at the time of the interview) did and became a chemist. Dr. Alan Dyke, former colleague, and friend of Paolo's, shares his career path and discusses the history and current state of the field of catalysis. With a father that taught university-level chemistry, and a brother in the field, it may not be surprising that Alan Dyke became a chemist, but it is surprising is that he's considered to be the outcast of the family for choosing a commercial career instead of taking an academic route. But, as he'll passionately reveal, there are upsides to choosing a non-academic career. Join us for a wonderful conversation where Paolo and Alan recount their shared history and the evolution of the catalysis field over recent decades. They discuss the evolution of homogeneous cross-coupling, biocatalysis, metathesis, and metallocene chemistry. Application of catalysis to fields as varied as pharmaceuticals and polymers is discussed, along with sustainability and other trends and dynamics in the field. Overcome your activation energy and join us!Related episodes: Season 1, Ep.2: Reinventing plastics, one reaction at a time Season 2, Ep.1: Chemistry: a modern American dreamSeason 2, Ep.6: The charm of the forgotten elements Bonus content!Access bonus content curated by this episode's guest by visiting www.thermofisher.com/chemistry-podcast for links to recent publications, podcasts, books, videos and more.View the video of this episode on www.thermofisher.com/chemistry-podcast. A free thank you gift for our listeners! Visit the episode website and request your free Bringing Chemistry to Life t-shirt.Use Podcast Code: laBcheM in March or sc13nc3 in April We read every email so please share your questions and feedback with us! Email helloBCTL@thermofisher.com About Your HostPaolo Braiuca grew up in the North-East of Italy and holds a PhD in Pharmaceutical Sciences from nearby esteemed University of Trieste, Italy. He developed expertise in biocatalysis during his years of post-doctoral research in Italy and the UK, where he co-founded a startup company. With this new venture, Paolo's career shifted from R&D to business development, taking on roles in commercial, product management, and marketing. He has worked in the specialty chemicals, biotechnology, and pharmaceutical markets in Germany and the UK, where he presently resides. He is currently the Director of Global Market Development in the Laboratory Chemicals Division at Thermo Fisher Scientific™ which put him in the host chair of the Bringing Chemistry to Life podcast. A busy father of four, in what little free time he has, you'll find him inventing electronic devices with the help of his loyal 3D-printer and soldering iron. And if you ask him, he'll call himself a “maker” at heart.
On Down to Earth But Heavenly Minded Podcast. Writings by Donald Norbie, Links https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZlTAw2GgUjNnbnLC4ieQBKqMY0gCY9Zl https://www.hiawathabible.org/matthew-henrys-main-page You will find the text on my blog at: On Down to Earth But Heavenly Minded.com https://downtoearthbutheavenlyminded.com/ https://www.hiawathabible.org/matthew-henrys-main-page You will find the text on my blog at: On Down to Earth But Heavenly Minded.com https://downtoearthbutheavenlyminded.com/category/writings-of-donald-norbie/ https://downtoearthbutheavenlyminded.com/
Ben Edwards talks to David Doran about the homogeneous unit principle.
ABOUT JULIE DE AZEVEDO HANKSWEBSITE: https://www.drjuliehanks.com/INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/drjuliehanks Dr. Julie Hanks, PhD, LCSW. is a licensed therapist, coach, author, relationship expert, media contributor, blogger, speaker, and performing songwriter with 28 years experience counseling women, couples and families. In addition to owning Wasatch Family Therapy, LLC and serving as executive director, Dr. Hanks is an emotional health and relationship expert and top online mental health influencer with an extensive and engaged social media following. As sought after media personality Dr. Hanks' advice has been interviewed for The Wall Street Journal, Cosmopolitan, Women's Day, Parenting, Reader's Digest, Redbook, and numerous other publications, and has appeared on-camera on Fox News, Fox Business News, KSL TV's Studio 5, Discovery Health, TLC, and Reelz Channel. After speaking to large women's groups of Latter-day Saint women on preventing emotional burnout for a decade and working with hundreds of women in her clinical practice who were overwhelmed and felt “never good enough”, Dr. Hanks felt compelled to write her first book The Burnout Cure: An Emotional Survival Guide for Overwhelmed Women. Her latest book The Assertiveness Guide for Women: How to Communicate Your Needs, Set Healthy Boundaries, and Transform Your Relationships draws from her years of clinical practice helping women to find their authentic voice in their lives, their relationships, and in the world. Grounded in attachment theory, this self-help book takes a comprehensive view of assertiveness and is filled with exercises and practical advice. As an award-winning performing songwriter, “Julie de Azevedo” has written dozens of songs, contributed to numerous projects, and produced 10 solo CD's over the past 30 years. Her most recent CD “The Gravity of Love” is a digital EP of 6 new songs about relationships. Dr. Hanks' most valuable experience has been “in the trenches” of family life as a wife to Jeff Hanks and mother of 4 children, 1 daughter-in-law, and 2 grandchildren. MORE ABOUT THIS EPISODE:Paul begins by engaging in a conversation with Dr. Julie De Azevedo Hanks, who balanced her career as a recording artist with her pursuit of a Ph.D. in therapy. She specializes in working with clients who are Latter-day Saints or have connections to the LDS culture, assisting them in addressing social issues and ensuring their beliefs are applied in a healthy manner to avoid any harm caused by theology.Dr. Hanks responds to Paul's inquiry about why people from other faiths often perceive Mormons as exceptionally kind individuals with strong family values. They delve into the social dynamics within the predominantly homogeneous culture, particularly in Utah, where a substantial LDS population exists. Paul briefly touches upon the history of Mormons facing persecution, such as the extermination order issued by Missouri against the religious sect. He inquires about the possibility of a generational persecution complex. Dr. Hanks doesn't attribute it to a fear of persecution, but rather to a sense of familiarity. She notes that Latter-day Saints have demanding responsibilities and suggests that Mormons should openly communicate their values to friends and neighbors to establish mutual understanding of their boundaries and commitments.Paul highlights the unique aspect of the LDS Church, where individuals are actively assigned roles, integrated into small groups, and are actively involved in the community, unlike in most other churches where members need to initiate their participation. He emphasizes the absence of monetary compensation within the LDS Church and how this communal involvement provides a strong support system for every family. Dr. Hanks commends this support system and the sense of safety it fosters, with mentors guiding the youth in their service and teaching roles.The conversation shifts to the historical practice of polygamy within the Mormon community and its association with women's disenfranchisement and objectification during that era. They discuss the belief in eternal marriage, emphasizing that it lasts forever.Dr. Hanks and Paul delve into the declining church activity, which saw families conducting religious services at home during the COVID-19 pandemic. They also discuss the impact of scientific discoveries addressing questions that were traditionally considered mysteries of God in religious contexts. The internet is mentioned as a tool enabling individuals to research the controversial aspects of the Mormon faith's history. Paul queries Dr. Hanks about the possibility of people finding truth and happiness outside of the Mormon culture. She admits to being molded within the LDS faith but believes that truth can be found everywhere. Paul then questions whether Mormons are considered Christians, to which Dr. Hanks recalls being told she wasn't a Christian while attending a private evangelical school as a child. Lastly, Paul inquires about Dr. Hanks' perspective on the salvation of individuals who leave the Mormon faith or have family members who do so. She expresses her belief in the vastness of God's mercy and encourages avoiding placing limits on salvation for those whose experiences are different. ABOUT OUR HOST:ABOUT PAUL CARDALLWebsite - http://www.paulcardall.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/paulcardallFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/PaulCardallMusic/X - https://twitter.com/paulcardallTiktok - https://www.tiktok.com/@pianistpaulcardall LISTEN TO HIS MUSICSpotify - https://shorturl.at/PQUW3Apple Music - https://shorturl.at/jkqsLAmazon - https://shorturl.at/nxGHU
The regular season has begun! The Pacers get off to a great 2-0 start. There are no asterisks on wins! And, as this is our Halloween episode, we are getting episode 666 out of the way early. Go Pacers!Links1. Pacers vs Wizards2. Pacers at Cavs3. Patreon
Word Test for the following Episodes and Words. 91: Convoluted, Opprobrium, Incarnadine, Impious 92: Secrete, Plucky, Autonomous, Sanction 93: Credulous, Condone, Accretion, Hapless 94: Apocryphal, Oblique, Contention, Disparate 95: Wanton, Dichotomy, Aberrant, Blight 96: Inexorable, Seraphic, Dissemble, Vestige 97: Distend, Buttress, Repudiate,Waver 98: Profligate, Keen, Nettle, Soporific 99: Querulous, Zealot, Mendicant, Cosset 100: Exculpate, Homogeneous, Engender, Dither VictorPrep's vocab podcast is for improving for English vocabulary skills while helping you prepare for your standardized tests! This podcast isn't only intended for those studying for the GRE or SAT, but also for people who enjoy learning, and especially those who want to improve their English skills. I run the podcast for fun and because I want to help people out there studying for tests or simply learning English. The podcast covers a variety of words and sometimes additionally covers word roots. Using a podcast to prep for the verbal test lets you study while on the go, or even while working out! If you have comments or questions and suggestions, please send me an email at sam.fold@gmail.com
7 Day FREE CONVERSATION CLUB TRIAL - https://www.patreon.com/thinkinginenglish JOIN THE CONVERSATION CLUB -- https://www.patreon.com/thinkinginenglish Take a Class (Use code TRIAL50 for 50% off) - https://thinkinginenglish.link/ From the UK, to Japan, to the Caribbean, to the Pacific Islands, “curry” is one of the most popular and loved dishes around the world. For many people, it is synonymous with Indian food… but did you know that in India the term curry isn't used in the same way. Today, let's discuss what “curry” is, how it was invented, and how it has spread around the world! TRANSCRIPT - https://thinkinginenglish.blog/2023/06/28/246-the-history-of-curry-from-india-to-britain-and-the-world/ My Links ENGLISH CLASSES - https://thinkinginenglish.link/ Buy Me a Coffee - https://www.buymeacoffee.com/dashboard NEW YOUTUBE Channel!!! - https://www.youtube.com/@thinkinginenglishpodcast INSTAGRAM - thinkinginenglishpodcast (https://www.instagram.com/thinkinginenglishpodcast/) Blog - thinkinginenglish.blog Vocabulary Spice (n) - a substance made from a plant, used to give a special flavour to food. Aromatic (adj) - strong, pleasant smelling, usually from food or drink. Melting pot (n) - a place where many different people and ideas exist together, often mixing and producing something new. Culinary (adj) – connected with cooking or kitchens. Homogeneous (adj) - consisting of parts or people that are similar to each other or are of the same type. Adequately (adv) - in a way that is enough or satisfactory for a particular purpose. Flavour profile (phrase) - the specific combination and characteristics of flavours present in a particular dish or food. Subcontinent (n) - a large area of land that is part of a continent, often referring to South Asia. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thinking-english/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thinking-english/support
◇ Michael of Not-Sweden asks about the benefits of homogeneous gaming groups, Rabit in Indianapolis shares a gaming story and asks how to deal with a demanding player, Steve in SoCal asks what IPs we love and hate for TTRPS | Hosts: Kimi, Clara, Pooja, & Joey ◇ 00:33 - Welcome & Episode Summary | 02:13 - Indie Designer of the Month: Jessica Marcrum (angrynerdgirl.itch.io) ! 03:34 - Michael of Not-Sweden asks about the benefits of homogeneous gaming groups | 28:11 - Rabit in Indianapolis shares a gaming story and asks how to deal with a demanding player | 42:31 - Steve in SoCal asks what IPs we love and hate for TTRPS | 01:00:11 - Episode Closing | 01:02:26 - Song "Lord Randall" by The Netbuskers' Folkshoppe (https://netbusker.net/) ◇ Email happyjacksrpg@gmail.com to send in your own topic or question for the show! ◇ Find us on Youtube ◇ Twitch ◇ Twitter ◇ Instagram ◇ Facebook ◇ Discord or find all our podcast feeds on your favorite Podcast platform! happyjacksrpg.carrd.co ◇ Subscribe to our Actual Play Feed! We have a backlog of campaigns in over 20 RPG systems and new games running all the time. ◇ Become a Patreon! Our fantastic supporters keep us independent so we can play and say what we want instead of catering to companies for ad or sponsorship money. We are a not-for-profit entity, so all the money goes into maintaining and improving the quality of our shows. We do it because we love it! patreon.com/happyjacksrpg Ⓒ2023 Happy Jacks RPG Network www.happyjacks.org
◇ Michael of Not-Sweden asks about the benefits of homogeneous gaming groups, Rabit in Indianapolis shares a gaming story and asks how to deal with a demanding player, Steve in SoCal asks what IPs we love and hate for TTRPS | Hosts: Kimi, Clara, Pooja, & Joey ◇ 00:33 - Welcome & Episode Summary | 02:13 - Indie Designer of the Month: Jessica Marcrum (angrynerdgirl.itch.io) ! 03:34 - Michael of Not-Sweden asks about the benefits of homogeneous gaming groups | 28:11 - Rabit in Indianapolis shares a gaming story and asks how to deal with a demanding player | 42:31 - Steve in SoCal asks what IPs we love and hate for TTRPS | 01:00:11 - Episode Closing | 01:02:26 - Song "Lord Randall" by The Netbuskers' Folkshoppe (https://netbusker.net/) ◇ Email happyjacksrpg@gmail.com to send in your own topic or question for the show! ◇ Find us on Youtube ◇ Twitch ◇ Twitter ◇ Instagram ◇ Facebook ◇ Discord or find all our podcast feeds on your favorite Podcast platform! happyjacksrpg.carrd.co ◇ Subscribe to our Actual Play Feed! We have a backlog of campaigns in over 20 RPG systems and new games running all the time. ◇ Become a Patreon! Our fantastic supporters keep us independent so we can play and say what we want instead of catering to companies for ad or sponsorship money. We are a not-for-profit entity, so all the money goes into maintaining and improving the quality of our shows. We do it because we love it! patreon.com/happyjacksrpg Ⓒ2023 Happy Jacks RPG Network www.happyjacks.org
Ian Pocock is MD of Research & Service Design at Transform. In this wide-ranging discussion, Ian shares his views on how product teams should always maintain a diverse outlook to avoid falling into the trap of (re)creating homogenous products; we chat about the importance of maintaining an endlessly user-centred mindset; and he shares his experiences of using Lego within workshops as a way to powerfully unlock organisational hierarchies and democratise the design process. Finally, he plays my 3 card challenge to share his favourite UX tool, favourite technique and a trend he sees in the future. Thanks for listening, and I hope you enjoy the episode. Mike Green This podcast is brought to you by Researchable UX. My thanks again to our sponsor Oxford Insights. And if you have a moment I'd love to hear your feedback on the podcast, to help me improve it.
Thank you for supporting Scholastic Answers Development of Doctrine 1.1: Homogeneous vs. Transformistic Evolution In this second video on my series on the development of doctrine, I cover the difference between Homogeneous and Transformistic Evolution in natural things and dogmas; especially focusing on the thoughts of St. Thomas and Bonaventure. Click the join button above to get all your livestream questions answered. FURTHER RESOURCES To get Tutoring: https://www.christianbwagner.com/book-online Annotated Thomist: https://www.christianbwagner.com/annotated-thomist SPONSOR Use the code “Militant” for 20% off to learn Greek here: https://fluentgreeknt.com/ MUSIC https://youtu.be/ePYe3lqsu-g https://youtu.be/Hi5YgbiNB1U SUPPORT Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ5DQ8zCOmeAqOcKTbSb7fg Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/MilitantThomist Donate: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?business=9XM8FACTLFDW2&no_recurring=0&item_name=Support+my+Apostolate¤cy_code=USD SusbscribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/militant-thomist FOLLOW Discord: https://discord.gg/3pP6r6Mxdg Website: https://www.christianbwagner.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MilitantThomist Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/543689120339579 Twitter: https://twitter.com/MilitantThomist Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/militantthomist/ WATCH https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ5DQ8zCOmeAqOcKTbSb7fg LISTEN Podcast: https://www.christianbwagner.com/podcast Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0exZN1vHDyLuRjnUI3sHXt?si=XHs8risyS1ebLCkWwKLblQ Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/militant-thomist/id1603094572 Anchor: https://anchor.fm/militantthomist SHOP Book Store: https://www.christianbwagner.com/shop Mug: https://www.redbubble.com/i/mug/Militant-Thomist-Radical-Newmanite-by-MilitantThomist/102625027.9Q0AD?fbclid=IwAR0_1zGYYynNl2gGpMWX6-goToVQ-TAb2gktO5g8LbxczFTR0xRvcz3q-oQ
How can brands differentiate themselves while remaining intuitive and familiar to consumers? Are your car, phone, or shoes an outward sign of your personality? What is leading to the trend of odd-ball, zany web designs? Different but FamiliarWhen it comes to experiencing a brand, the desire for something more than utilitarian varies from person to person“You're expecting certain types of content to be delivered in a specific way. And that's part of the attraction is for it to be this really intuitive, familiar experience. So I sort of put that to the side and think about DTC sites and retailer sites as having a lot more scope for variation and a different experience.” - Kiri Masters“There needs to be a balance between solving the homogenization issue and solving the problem of differentiation or distinction, and still being able to be intuitive, still being able to get your consumer to do the flow {from discory to checkout}.” - Roger Figeuiredo“It's really tough to stand out but not stand out so far that you're doing something unintuitive.” - Ben Marks“That discovery and awareness stage of the funnel is where there's a real opportunity to be different. And after that, you kind of want to bring it back to what's normal.” - Kiri MastersMaybe visual design inspiration coming from some of the same places contributes to such boredom online because too many brands are overusing trends rather than being original“You build your mood board, and you're going to go to other brands and you build your mood board off of other brands, and naturally is just going to lead to more of the same.” - Roger Figeuiredo“When you're building your mood board for the look and feel, maybe don't go look at other brands. Look for analogies in design. Then build your mood board off of things that are maybe real life stuff instead of other websites.” - Roger Figeuiredo“Don't do what your competitors, people in your category are doing, do things differently from the start. And you will be more likely to have a less boring, homogenized experience.” - Ben MarksHas Shopify both helped and harmed the growth of eCommerce? Helped by democritizing, removing the barrier of entry, but also harmed by too many template based sites, and also flooding the market with more competitorsGuestsKiri Masters, Head of Retail Marketplace Strategy at AcadiaRoger Figueiredo, VP of Marketing at #paidBen Marks, Director of Global Market Development at ShopwareAssociated Links:The Visions Report is a 100-page report with deep insights, created by Future Commerce.Have any questions or comments about the show? Let us know on futurecommerce.fm, or reach out to us on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn. We love hearing from our listeners!Have any questions or comments about the show? You can reach out to us at hello@futurecommerce.fm or any of our social channels; we love hearing from our listeners.
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Voting Theory Introduction, published by Scott Garrabrant on October 17, 2022 on LessWrong. Sequence Introduction This is the first post in a sequence in which I will propose a new voting system! In this post, I introduce the framework and notation, and give some background on voting theory. In the next post, I will show you the best voting system you've probably never heard of, maximal lotteries. (Seriously, it's really good.) After that, I will make it even better, and propose a new system: maximal lottery-lotteries. Then comes the bad news: I can't prove that maximal lottery-lotteries exist! (Or alternatively, good news: You can try to solve a cool new open problem in voting theory!) Thanks to Jessica Taylor for first introducing me to maximal lotteries, and Sam Eisenstat for spending many hours with me trying to prove the existence of maximal lottery-lotteries. Generalizing Voting Theory A voting system is a function that takes in a distribution on utility functions on a set of candidates, and produces a distribution on that set of candidates. This is not what a voting theorist will tell you a voting system is. That is because they like to make a bunch of extra assumptions: The set of candidates is finite. The function only uses the preorders on candidates implied by the utility functions. The output distribution assigns probability 1 to a single candidate. The input distribution is the uniform distribution on some finite set. I am going to play along with some of these assumptions, but I want my types and notation to treat them as explicit assumptions, so I will use notation that will make it easy to remove these assumptions as needed. Technically, I also make one assumption that voting theorists usually don't make. That is that the voting system is homogeneous. Homogeneous voting systems are only a function of what proportion of voters have each preference, not on the absolute number of voters that have each preference. Thus, when I said the input was a distribution on utility functions, rather than a multi-set of utility functions, I threw out the information that would have allowed for non-homogeneous voting systems. I don't know of any seriously proposed voting systems that are non-homogeneous, so this is not a significant extra assumption. Throughout the sequence, I will take for granted that all voting systems are homogeneous. Assumption 2 is most likely to be violated by voting theorists, as in approval voting and range voting. Next is 3, and there is a small subset of voting theorists who think about non-determinism. Assumption 4 is not very important, and while it is usually made, it also usually does not matter. Assumption 1 is almost never violated, or at least when it is, the field is called something other than voting theory. A utility function on a set S is just a function from S[0,1]. I will write Δ(S) for the set of distributions on the set S. (I'm not going to worry about the sigma algebras; usually it will be obvious/not matter.) If f is a voting system, C is a set of candidates, and V∈Δ(C[0,1]) is a distribution on utility functions on C, I will write fC(V) for the output of the voting system on V, so fC(V)∈Δ(C). Some Important Criteria To get more comfortable with this formalism, we will translate three important voting criteria. Condorcet Criterion If a candidate would defeat all others in one-on-one elections, that candidate should win. Translated to our formalism, f satisfies the Condorcet criterion if whenever there exists a c∈C such that for all d∈C, we have Pv∼V(v(c)>v(d))>12, we havefC(V)(c)=1. We can think of Pv∼V(v(c)>v(d)) as saying when we randomly choose a voter v, what is the probability that v prefers c to d. If this probability is greater than 12, then a majority of voters prefer c to d. Consistency Criterion If two disjoint el...
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Voting Theory Introduction, published by Scott Garrabrant on October 17, 2022 on LessWrong. Sequence Introduction This is the first post in a sequence in which I will propose a new voting system! In this post, I introduce the framework and notation, and give some background on voting theory. In the next post, I will show you the best voting system you've probably never heard of, maximal lotteries. (Seriously, it's really good.) After that, I will make it even better, and propose a new system: maximal lottery-lotteries. Then comes the bad news: I can't prove that maximal lottery-lotteries exist! (Or alternatively, good news: You can try to solve a cool new open problem in voting theory!) Thanks to Jessica Taylor for first introducing me to maximal lotteries, and Sam Eisenstat for spending many hours with me trying to prove the existence of maximal lottery-lotteries. Generalizing Voting Theory A voting system is a function that takes in a distribution on utility functions on a set of candidates, and produces a distribution on that set of candidates. This is not what a voting theorist will tell you a voting system is. That is because they like to make a bunch of extra assumptions: The set of candidates is finite. The function only uses the preorders on candidates implied by the utility functions. The output distribution assigns probability 1 to a single candidate. The input distribution is the uniform distribution on some finite set. I am going to play along with some of these assumptions, but I want my types and notation to treat them as explicit assumptions, so I will use notation that will make it easy to remove these assumptions as needed. Technically, I also make one assumption that voting theorists usually don't make. That is that the voting system is homogeneous. Homogeneous voting systems are only a function of what proportion of voters have each preference, not on the absolute number of voters that have each preference. Thus, when I said the input was a distribution on utility functions, rather than a multi-set of utility functions, I threw out the information that would have allowed for non-homogeneous voting systems. I don't know of any seriously proposed voting systems that are non-homogeneous, so this is not a significant extra assumption. Throughout the sequence, I will take for granted that all voting systems are homogeneous. Assumption 2 is most likely to be violated by voting theorists, as in approval voting and range voting. Next is 3, and there is a small subset of voting theorists who think about non-determinism. Assumption 4 is not very important, and while it is usually made, it also usually does not matter. Assumption 1 is almost never violated, or at least when it is, the field is called something other than voting theory. A utility function on a set S is just a function from S[0,1]. I will write Δ(S) for the set of distributions on the set S. (I'm not going to worry about the sigma algebras; usually it will be obvious/not matter.) If f is a voting system, C is a set of candidates, and V∈Δ(C[0,1]) is a distribution on utility functions on C, I will write fC(V) for the output of the voting system on V, so fC(V)∈Δ(C). Some Important Criteria To get more comfortable with this formalism, we will translate three important voting criteria. Condorcet Criterion If a candidate would defeat all others in one-on-one elections, that candidate should win. Translated to our formalism, f satisfies the Condorcet criterion if whenever there exists a c∈C such that for all d∈C, we have Pv∼V(v(c)>v(d))>12, we havefC(V)(c)=1. We can think of Pv∼V(v(c)>v(d)) as saying when we randomly choose a voter v, what is the probability that v prefers c to d. If this probability is greater than 12, then a majority of voters prefer c to d. Consistency Criterion If two disjoint el...
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Voting Theory Introduction, published by Scott Garrabrant on October 17, 2022 on LessWrong. Sequence Introduction This is the first post in a sequence in which I will propose a new voting system! In this post, I introduce the framework and notation, and give some background on voting theory. In the next post, I will show you the best voting system you've probably never heard of, maximal lotteries. (Seriously, it's really good.) After that, I will make it even better, and propose a new system: maximal lottery-lotteries. Then comes the bad news: I can't prove that maximal lottery-lotteries exist! (Or alternatively, good news: You can try to solve a cool new open problem in voting theory!) Thanks to Jessica Taylor for first introducing me to maximal lotteries, and Sam Eisenstat for spending many hours with me trying to prove the existence of maximal lottery-lotteries. Generalizing Voting Theory A voting system is a function that takes in a distribution on utility functions on a set of candidates, and produces a distribution on that set of candidates. This is not what a voting theorist will tell you a voting system is. That is because they like to make a bunch of extra assumptions: The set of candidates is finite. The function only uses the preorders on candidates implied by the utility functions. The output distribution assigns probability 1 to a single candidate. The input distribution is the uniform distribution on some finite set. I am going to play along with some of these assumptions, but I want my types and notation to treat them as explicit assumptions, so I will use notation that will make it easy to remove these assumptions as needed. Technically, I also make one assumption that voting theorists usually don't make. That is that the voting system is homogeneous. Homogeneous voting systems are only a function of what proportion of voters have each preference, not on the absolute number of voters that have each preference. Thus, when I said the input was a distribution on utility functions, rather than a multi-set of utility functions, I threw out the information that would have allowed for non-homogeneous voting systems. I don't know of any seriously proposed voting systems that are non-homogeneous, so this is not a significant extra assumption. Throughout the sequence, I will take for granted that all voting systems are homogeneous. Assumption 2 is most likely to be violated by voting theorists, as in approval voting and range voting. Next is 3, and there is a small subset of voting theorists who think about non-determinism. Assumption 4 is not very important, and while it is usually made, it also usually does not matter. Assumption 1 is almost never violated, or at least when it is, the field is called something other than voting theory. A utility function on a set S is just a function from S[0,1]. I will write Δ(S) for the set of distributions on the set S. (I'm not going to worry about the sigma algebras; usually it will be obvious/not matter.) If f is a voting system, C is a set of candidates, and V∈Δ(C[0,1]) is a distribution on utility functions on C, I will write fC(V) for the output of the voting system on V, so fC(V)∈Δ(C). Some Important Criteria To get more comfortable with this formalism, we will translate three important voting criteria. Condorcet Criterion If a candidate would defeat all others in one-on-one elections, that candidate should win. Translated to our formalism, f satisfies the Condorcet criterion if whenever there exists a c∈C such that for all d∈C, we have Pv∼V(v(c)>v(d))>12, we havefC(V)(c)=1. We can think of Pv∼V(v(c)>v(d)) as saying when we randomly choose a voter v, what is the probability that v prefers c to d. If this probability is greater than 12, then a majority of voters prefer c to d. Consistency Criterion If two disjoint el...
All links and images for this episode can be found on CISO Series If you want to build a successful cybersecurity team, you need to be diverse, mostly in thought. But that diversity in thought usually is the result of people with diverse backgrounds who have had different experiences and have solved problems differently. It's actually really hard to hire a diverse team because what you want to do is simply hire people who look, talk, and sound like you. People who come from the same background as you. While that may work for building friends, it's not necessarily the best solution when building a team to secure your company. This week's episode is hosted by me, David Spark (@dspark), producer of CISO Series and Andy Ellis (@csoandy), operating partner, YL Ventures. Our guest is George Finney (@wellawaresecure), CISO, Southern Methodist University and author of “Well Aware: The Nine Cybersecurity Habits to Protect Your Future” and "Project Zero Trust." Thanks to our podcast sponsor, Feroot Feroot secures client-side web applications so that businesses can deliver a flawless and safe digital user experience to their customers. Our automated, client-side, data protection capabilities increase web application visibility, facilitate threat analysis, and detect and protect from client-side attacks, such as Magecart, XSS, e-skimming, and other threats focused on front-end web applications. In this episode: What are the personality types you need on your staff? Can you be a vCISO if you're not a CISO first. And if you're a vCISO without ever being a CISO, are you just a cybersecurity consultant? Also, what are some creative uses of honeypots most users don't consider?
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Abstracting The Hardness of Alignment: Unbounded Atomic Optimization, published by Adam Shimi on July 29, 2022 on The AI Alignment Forum. This work has been done while at Conjecture Disagree to Agree (Practically-A-Book Review: Yudkowsky Contra Ngo On Agents, Scott Alexander, 2022) This is a weird dialogue to start with. It grants so many assumptions about the risk of future AI that most of you probably think both participants are crazy. (Personal Communication about a conversation with Evan Hubinger, John Wentworth, 2022) We'd definitely rank proposals very differently, within the "good" ones, but we both thought we'd basically agree on the divide between "any hope at all" and "no hope at all". The question dividing the "any hope at all" proposals from the "no hope at all" is something like... does this proposal have any theory of change? Any actual model of how it will stop humanity from being wiped out by AI? Or is it just sort of... vaguely mood-affiliating with alignment? If there's one thing alignment researchers excel at, it's disagreeing with each other. I dislike the term pre paradigmatic, but even I must admit that it captures one obvious feature of the alignment field: the constant debates about the what and the how and the value of different attempts. Recently, we even had a whole sequence of debates, and since I first wrote this post Nate shared his take on why he can't see any current work in the field actually tackling the problem. More generally, the culture of disagreement and debate and criticism is obvious to anyone reading the AF. Yet Scott Alexander has a point: behind all these disagreements lies so much agreement! Not only in discriminating the "any hope at all" proposals from the "no hope at all", as in John's quote above; agreement also manifests itself in the common components of the different research traditions, for example in their favorite scenarios. When I look at Eliezer's FOOM, at Paul's What failure looks like, at Critch's RAAPs, and at Evan's Homogeneous takeoffs, the differences and incompatibilities jump to me — yet they still all point in the same general direction. So much so that one can wonder if a significant part of the problem lies outside of the fine details of these debates. In this post, I start from this hunch — deep commonalities — and craft an abstraction that highlights it: unbounded atomic optimization (abbreviated UAO and pronounced wow). That is, alignment as the problem of dealing with impact on the world (optimization) that is both of unknown magnitude (unbounded) and non-interruptible (atomic). As any model, it is necessarily mistaken in some way; I nonetheless believe it to be a productive mistake, because it reveals both what we can do without the details and what these details give us when they're filled in. As such, UAO strikes me as a great tool for epistemological vigilance. I first present UAO in more details; then I show its use as a mental tool by giving four applications: (Convergence of AI Risk) UAO makes clear that the worries about AI Risk don't come from one particular form of technology or scenario, but from a general principle which we're pushing towards in a myriad of convergent ways. (Exploration of Conditions for AI Risk) UAO is only a mechanism; but it's abstraction makes it helpful to study what conditions about the world and how we apply optimization lead to AI Risk (Operationalization Pluralism) UAO, as an abstraction of the problem, admits many distinct operationalizations. It's thus a great basis on which to build operationalization pluralism. (Distinguishing AI Alignment) Last but not least, UAO answers Alex Flint's question about the difference between aligning AIs and aligning other entities (like a society). Thanks to TJ, Alex Flint, John Wentworth, Connor Leahy, Kyle McDonell, Lari...
In this episode of the Competition Authority's CompCast - Competition Talks, Hans Zenger, Head of Unit at the Chief Economist Team of the European Commission's DG Competition, addresses the topic “Mergers with homogeneous markets”.
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Why you might expect homogeneous take-off: evidence from ML research, published by Andrei Alexandru on July 17, 2022 on The AI Alignment Forum. This write-up was produced as part of the SERI MATS programme under Evan Hubinger's mentorship. It is also my first post on LW, so feedback is very welcome! Introduction This article aims to draw a connection between recent ML research and the claim that future advanced AI systems may be homogenous. First, I briefly review this article, where the idea of homogenous take-off is introduced. Then, I outline two different arguments why you might update in the direction of homogenous take-off. For each of the arguments I mention key uncertainties that I have about the argument itself, as well as broader open questions. TL; DR I present two reasons to believe that as models become larger they also become more homogenous, i.e. they behave more similarly to each other: Variance between models behaves unimodally in the overparameterised regime: it peaks around the interpolation threshold, then decreases monotonically. Decreased variance means that models make similar predictions across different training runs (captured as variance from initialisation) and different sampling of the training data (variance from sampling); Neural networks have a strong simplicity bias even before training, which might mean that multiple training runs with different hyperparameters, initialisation schemes etc. result in essentially the same model. I've somewhat updated in the direction of homogenous take-off as a result of these arguments, though I think that there are still ways in which it's unclear if e.g. decreasing variance with size rules out heterogeneity. What's homogeneous take-off? There are several axes along which different AI takeoff scenarios could differ: speed, continuity, and number of main actors. Homogeneity vs. heterogeneity in AI takeoff scenarios introduces a new way to look at a potential take-off, through the lens of model homogeneity. Homogeneity intuitively refers to how similar models are at any given time given some definition of similarity. We might specifically refer to homogeneity with regards to alignment, which, again intuitively, means “models are more or less aligned to the same degree” (or: “aligned models will not coexist with unaligned models”). More formally we mean something like models having similar properties, e.g. alignment properties. In my mind, an alignment property might be something like “corrigibility” or “truthfulness”, though it's unclear to me to what extent two models which are, say, truthful, are also homogenous. I think working toward a clearer, more precise definition of homogeneity is probably useful in determining what actually counts as evidence for homogenous systems being more likely, though I don't try to do so in this write-up. The article sets out a list of arguments supporting the idea of homogenous take-off, which I parse as “evidence from the economics of large scale machine learning”. Without going into too much detail – I recommend reading the original article for the full arguments –, these are: Training a model is more expensive than running it. This is a relatively straightforward claim which extrapolates from the landscape we have today, where some large language models reportedly have had training budgets in the millions of US dollars, with comparatively little cost to run inference/serve the models themselves once trained. Training models from scratch is not competitive once the first advanced system is released. To me this follows from 1., in the sense that if it is economically useful to deploy more than one model simultaneously, it's likely that the additional models will be copies of the original (perhaps fine-tuned on different tasks) rather than new models trained from scrat...
Ana Marinkovic is privileged to lead Australia's largest Small Business Bank and look after the needs of 500,000 businesses nationally. She is a lifelong learner, global citizen and passionate advocate for diversity, inclusion and equality of opportunity and has been volunteering and mentoring women from disadvantaged backgrounds for over a decade. Everyone has a story and often it takes a long time for people to feel comfortable sharing theirs. Ana's story is a true gift to us.
Matt Botvinick from Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks joins us to talk about largemouth bass. They consumptive fishery management, how to manage for largemouth bass and more.
Modern humans evolved in Africa and successfully colonised the globe only in the last 100,000 years or so, a feat made possible by cultural and genetic adaptation. Human habitats differ dramatically in climate, available foods or pathogens, and genetic adaptation was mediated both by mutation and by interbreeding with archaic humans such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. Besides representing a mark of our past, these adaptations contribute to diversity in living people in traits such as skin colour and immune function.A lecture by Dr Aida AndrésThe transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:https://www.gresham.ac.uk/whats-on/human-adaptation-archiveGresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website. There are currently over 2,000 lectures free to access or download from the website.Website: http://www.gresham.ac.ukTwitter: http://twitter.com/GreshamCollegeFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/greshamcollege
傀儡花/斯卡羅原著，斜槓作家陳耀昌醫師，精研台灣族群溯源，從基因定序交叉研究疾病人類學。台灣人從隋唐百越族開始混血，經過通婚融合，大致分五族群，因此族群相對有高異質性，而且台灣文化飄洋過海，遠在馬達加斯加也可以溯源。獨家資料請看完整訪談，陳醫師親曝鼻咽癌人口分布的玄機，以及大約45%的台灣人有酒精不耐症，地中海型貧血，蠶豆症也與族群遷徙有關，原因究竟何在? 另外，史蒂芬強森症候群，有兩個特定基因的人需要特別注意！精彩訪談內容，請鎖定@華視三國演議！ 本集來賓：#陳耀昌 #矢板明夫 主持人：#汪浩 #斯卡羅 #百越 #鼻咽癌 #族群溯源 電視播出時間
Do all the people in your shul look the same? Talk the same? Vote the same?
What's cancer got to do with crabs, artist Jackson Pollock, and artificial intelligence? It's not a riddle; these are some of the things we'll explore with surgeon Grant Stewart, computer scientist Mateja Jamnik and radiologist Evis Sala from the Mark Foundation Institute for Integrated Cancer Medicine.In this episode, we'll discover how artificial intelligence is making it easier for doctors to diagnose and treat cancer and we'll share some cancer facts that are both amazing and disturbing. We also learn about the WIRE clinical trial for kidney cancer. WIRE evaluates the effectiveness of giving a short course of drug treatment to patients in the one-month “window of opportunity” between diagnosis and surgery. Patients on the WIRE trial also undergo a suite of new imaging techniques that have been brought together for the first time globally in this clinical trial.This episode was produced by Nick Saffell, James Dolan, Naomi Clements-Brod and Annie Thwaite. Please take our survey!How did you find us? What do you like about Mind Over Chatter? We want to know. So we put together this survey https://forms.gle/r9CfHpJVUEWrxoyx9. If you could please take a few minutes to fill it out, it would be a big help. Timestamps: [00:00] - Introductions[01:15] - A bit about the guests' research[02:45] - The origins of cancer. Why Hippocrates is known as the father of medicine. [04:00] - How cancer starts [05:05] - How many types of cancer are there? What are the most common types of cancer? [06:10] - How do cancers develop? The lifecycle of cancer. [09:00] - How early in the lifecycle can we see or detect cancer? What size does the cancer cell need to be for us to see it?[10:15] - What improved machines and AI help with detection and characterisation? [11:00] - Can we turn imaging into a virtual biopsy?[12:20] - Defining Artificial Integiilence (AI) [14:20] - AI and machine learning and how they interlink. [15:10] - Deep learning and statistical learning. [16:10] - Origins of AI in medicine and healthcare. [17:15] - Intro to AI and cancer imagery [18:30] - How the AI algorithm assists the radiologist[20:10] - AI and prepared models. How the data is trained to understand what cancer looks like. [21:20] - The importance of sharing the data set. [22:00] - Time for a recap![28:40] - Ai and surgical robots[29:30] - AI and screening kidney cancer. Grant's and Evis's work using models, imagery, automation to screen for kidney cancer [31:50] - Explaining the types of imaging in oncology [33:10] - How Evis uses AI in her imagery [34:10] - How to scan for ovarian cancer [35:20] - Comparing images of tumours to paintings. Comparing Jackson to a Mark Rothko painting. Homogeneous or heterogeneous [37:40] - Describing what the images actually look like from a non-radiologist perspective. Grades of grey. What CT scans and MRI scans look like. [41:10] - How AI is used throughout the imagery process, not just for clarification. [42:30] - Comparing the AI in oncology imagery to an Instagram filter. Do we lose any information when we use AI?[43:15] - Time for another recap! [48:15] - How do we create and ensure a high quality of data in a...
Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for January 31, 2022 is: homogeneous • hoh-muh-JEEN-yus • adjective Homogeneous means "of the same or a similar kind or nature." // The downtown area has a homogeneous population, which makes implementing programs that target needs easier. See the entry > Examples: "A lot has changed for the better for the LGBTQ+ community since the 2015 Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges…. LGBTQ+ individuals who live in rural or more homogeneous populations can more easily see and connect with people who understand them." — Carrie Vittitoe, Today's Woman, October 2021 Did you know? Homogeneous comes from the Greek roots hom-, meaning "same," and genos, meaning "kind." The similar word homogenous is a synonym of the same origin.
I'm being asked more frequently for simple exercises that help with embodying Unity / Oneness. The main part of this challenge is distilling it into relatable ELI5 'normie' speak which has greater efficacy with landing into the hearts of the masses and catalyzing Global Awakening. This specific exercise involves dissolving the artificial boundary between all of God / The Creator's Points of View. The most important & practical reason for doing this exercise is because abiding in the God-View more regularly is the ROOT upstream solution to catalyzing the most downstream harmony & flourishing as a collective. Getting a little more technical, you could call this "The Diamond Fractal View." Diamond because each Point of View is Always Already Perfect and Fractal because Points of View are Self-Similar, the Pattern Clearly Repeats. I'll keep working on refining this skill & passing along exercises. Please let me know how this exercise goes for you in the comments below. Infinite Love!
In this episode we continue to glean what imagery in poetry entails by focusing on Olfactory and Tactile imagery. The poem is The thin grey line and the word of the is Homogeneous. I hope you enjoy or have enjoyed this episode. You are welcome to leave a message at duhfflow@gmail.com/a voice message at https://anchor.fm/duhfflow/message, and in season six the podcast will be renamed to duh fflow. Remember, Live to inspire! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/duhfflow/message
On Kyle's weekly calls with Kirsten we finally get to the bottom of Ariana Dumbledore and the true story of what happened. Also Peter Pettigrew's pervy proclivities are publicized and Kyle is not a fighty boy, he just plays one on DnD!
Should church planters target a specific people group (the homogeneous unit principle) or begin a multiethnic congregation from day one? The answer isn't always simple. This week, BJ, a church planter working with diaspora Muslim peoples, weighs in as Scott and Alex have an honest conversation. Learn more about EveryEthne. Love the show? Want to help more people think and go? Support this podcast. Want to ask a question or suggest a topic? Email us. The Missions Podcast is sponsored by ABWE's Global Gospel Fund.
Acts 2:14-39 - - July 10, 2016
In this episode, we talk about has Agile become too homogeneous. We also explore ways to coach development leads and managers about their responsibilities in an Agile environment. Join Hendrik Esser, Shawna Cullinan, Jörg Pietruszka, Diana Larsen, Ray Arell, and all the callers to the monthly live event as we explore the topics. If you would like to join us for the next live recording, please visit AgileCoachingNetwork.org.(00:00) Introduction(02:09) Has Agile become too homogeneous(37:27) Ways to coach development leads and managers(42:15) Wrap upThis podcast is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. If you want more information about the Agile Coaching Network. Please go to AgileCoachingNetwork.org. Also, become a member of our nonprofit! It supports our show and helps to build a great Agile community, and supports this podcast.Support the show (https://www.agilealliance.org/membership-pricing/)
The 10-year plan we make might be irrelevant in a year. It's time to stand up and choose the best for ourselves. We don't need to listen to the criticism and societal expectations of those trying to dim the success of what we're capable of doing. Emily K. Graham is Chief Equity & Impact Officer at Omnicom (NYSE: OMC) one of the largest advertising, communications, and media conglomerates in the world. In her role, she leads global diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I) strategy across the holding company's network which spans more than 1,500 agencies and 70,000 employees. She is responsible for accelerating OPEN 2.0., Omnicom's plan for achieving systemic equity for professionals across its agencies. As part of her role, she also leads the OPEN Leadership team, a group of 30 dedicated DE&I professionals and champions responsible for driving DE&I strategy Omnicom-wide. In addition, Emily serves as Senior Vice President, Diversity & Inclusion Communications at Omnicom, advising as a senior counselor on DE&I matters. In this episode of the UNprofessional Podcast: Breaking free of homogeneous thinking Dealing the criticism around young success Staying away from career brokers How to turn fear into fuel Having it all together is what you make it Connect with Emily: Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/emgraham/ (Emily K Graham) Connect with Hilary: Website: http://hilarycorna.com/ (hilarycorna.com) IG: https://www.instagram.com/hilarycorna/?hl=en (@hilarycorna) Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSysJ_sppqm8IZSt452Ra6A (Hilary Corna) This show is produced by http://soulfireproductionsco.com/ (Soulfire Productions)
Season 3 Pandemics and Beyond Episode 1 Dense but homogeneous populations"... The spread of infectious diseases requires densely inhabited conditions, which is tantamount to requiring civilization itself. Civilization has the innate concept of a dense population... One byproduct of civilization is that it allows its certain beneficiary groups, such as those that first invented agriculture, to breed in large numbers with relatively homogeneous genotypes, and as a result create a susceptible population in an epidemiological sense..."
Ben corrects Abe's pronunciation of "homogeneous", we talk about fashion, and answer a question about love hotels abroad. International Love Videos on YouTube Twitter! Instagram! Follow and send us questions or topics that you would like to hear us talk about. Teacher Talk Transcripts! Read and listen at the same time! Free Bird English Online Lessons, Goods, Events, & More! GoGoエイブ会話Podcast (Apple) GoGo Project Send us your questions about international dating and romance, or any topic: Email: fbeteachertalk@gmail.com (anonymous OK)
The Hake Report, Monday, April 19, 2021: Music: Furthermore. Hake describes a horrifying cop killing in NM by a violent drug dealer. GREAT CALLS, some criticizing cops, some about homogenous culture. Canada lets cops stop people for being outside their residence. Ridiculous Pocket headlines (including Wash. Compost). Pig's blood smeared on former residence of a sensible former cop and use of force expert. Also check out Hake News from today. CALLERS Rick from Maine comments on the George Floyd fallout, and cases of police shootings. Donning Armour from California believes homogeneity, not conservative Christianity, is the solution. Richard from North Carolina anticipates more riots and a "not guilty" verdict for Chauvin. Art from Ohio speaks on the New Mexico cop shot to death and more. Latin Patriot from chat likes American culture of food and games, and not Mexico! Thomas from Oklahoma has had experiences with cops, and worries they're betas. Zach from Columbus, OH tells about a 7-year-old daughter killed in a Chicago McDonald's drive-thru. Misty from San Diego, CA says we should want JLP rather than Biden in the nation, not so ethno-centric. TIME STAMPS 0:00 Mon, Apr 19, 2021 0:54 Fluorescent Jellyfish, Furthermore 4:35 Hey, guys! 5:54 Tease NM cop dashcam story 7:08 Rick in Maine 11:28 Donning Armour in CA 30:09 NM cop killed! 40:14 Super Chats 41:19 Richard in NC 49:33 Latin Patriot from chat 55:55 American culture 59:17 Deliriously Cold, Furthermore 1:02:24 Feedback on music 1:03:58 Pocket liberal headlines 1:10:44 Canada against freedom 1:15:05 Art in OH 1:24:47 Other cop incidents 1:28:24 Thomas in OK 1:37:53 Zach, Columbus, OH 1:44:52 TheSkimm on shootings 1:50:52 Pig Blood on house 1:54:51 Misty in SD, CA 2:00:30 Females 2:00:59 Thanks, all! HAKE LINKS VIDEO ARCHIVE: Facebook | Periscope/Twitter | YouTube | Audio podcast links below LIVE VIDEO: Trovo | DLive | Periscope | Facebook | YouTube* | Twitch* PODCAST: Apple | Podcast Addict | Castbox | Stitcher | Spotify | Amazon | PodBean | Google SUPPORT: SubscribeStar | Patreon | Teespring | SUPER CHAT: Streamlabs | Trovo Call in! 888-775-3773, live Monday through Friday 9 AM (Los Angeles) https://thehakereport.com/show Also see Hake News from JLP's show today. *NOTE: YouTube and Twitch have both censored James's content on their platforms lately, over fake "Community Guidelines" violations. BLOG POST: https://www.thehakereport.com/blog/2021/4/19/041921-mon-attack-on-cops-homogeneous-state
Homogeneous teams don't function very well - because, everyone has the same point of view, all the time! If you cannot change your point of view, depending on the needs of the situation, it will become very problematic to understand what the correct approach to a task would be. And that is precisely why you need at least "six hats"! All this and more in this episode based on an excerpt from The Decision Book, by Mikael Krogerus and Roman Tschäppeler. Please rate & review this podcast here: https://podcasts.apple.com/in/podcast/the-31-5-guy-podcast/id1528897344 You can find me at https://rounakbose.in Links: https://www.instagram.com/the31point5guy/ https://twitter.com/The31point5Guy https://medium.com/the-31-5-guy https://www.linkedin.com/in/rounakbose1997/ ~ The 31.5 Guy
Is Hudson too white to realize its full potential? Jenn Scheeser, Chante Jones, Sara Viar, Doston Jones, and Sherif Mansour take a deep dive on diversity - how far the city as come, where work needs to be done, the challenges in our schools, experiences as minorities, and how to best overcome our biases!
Its been a while, but we are back!! In this episode Debbie and Josh discuss the recent developments of social media and how the ramifications of it look. Whether you are on MeWe of Parler. what is that saying? In this dark world, what are we doing to bring the light?
2:00 Where the term bundling comes from.5:00 Telecoms: Triple play and quad play6:05 Being bundle blind11:00 Is bundling just an enforced cross sell?15:00 Homogeneous vs heterogeneous bundling20:00 Is it up to startups to unbundle?24:00 Apple One30:00 Cultures created via bundles33:00 Unbundling and D2C37:00 .. and back to culture.42:00 Not everyone is the same - the benefit of not bundling48:00 Rome with no coffee51:00 What does bundle thinking do to help you for PMF, exiting, etc.
This is just one of the many great poems by House of Public Discourse[Forum] member and Author James L. Walker III BUY HERE
M.L.K. Jr. famously stated in 1963, "It is appalling that the most segregated hour of Christian America is 11 o’clock on Sunday morning". 57 years later, not much has changed. Why? In this episode, Pastor Chris Kipp teaches from Galatians 2:11-16 on our identity in Christ in a message entitled "Drawing the Lines Differently." This recording is from the Renaissance Church livestream that aired on Oct. 25th, 2020. www.ren-church.org #alloflifealltheearth
M.L.K. Jr. famously stated in 1963, "It is appalling that the most segregated hour of Christian America is 11 o’clock on Sunday morning". 57 years later, not much has changed. Why? In this episode, Pastor Chris Kipp teaches from Galatians 2:11-16 on our identity in Christ in a message entitled "Drawing the Lines Differently." This recording is from the Renaissance Church livestream that aired on Oct. 25th, 2020. www.ren-church.org #alloflifealltheearth
Should churches aim to be multiethnic, or should we stick to the homogenous unit principle inherited from missiologists? In today's episode, Brian (last name withheld), a former IMB missionary to the Middle East and current missions pastor focusing on diaspora ministries, shares why the answer isn't as simple as it seems—and how globalism is making cultural boundaries fuzzier than ever. The church world is ablaze with conversation about multiethnic churches, racial reconciliation, and the social implications of believers' fundamental unity in Christ. Meanwhile, expats and refugees from across the world are moving into North American cities in droves, but linguistic and cultural barriers prevent most churches from effectively engaging migrants. Brian is a missions pastor for Wilcrest Baptist Church, a dynamic church in Houston—one of the U.S.'s most diverse cities. In our interview, he also shares how in the process of trying to engage expats in Houston, their church “accidentally” became an effective missions sending church in the process. If you have been stumped by recent debates over the ethnic makeup of our churches, this episode will help you think in biblical categories—both in terms of our gospel unity, and the imperative to take the gospel into subgroups that wouldn't otherwise hear the good news. Don't forget to share this episode, rate the show, and leave a review in your favorite listening platform. Want to ask a question for a future episode? Email alex@missionspodcast.com. Powered by ABWE International.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
