Podcasts about hypothesizing

Dan Strauss is a Jiu Jitsu Black Belt under Roger Gracie. He has fought in ADCC, EBI, Polaris, and Quintet promotions, earning legendary status with his unique style and ape-like grip. SHOW SPONSORS:  Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors: 

How can some people recall random facts so easily? It may have to do with what else they remember about the moment they learned the information. Also, in Kenya, an invading ant species pushed out ants that protected acacia trees. That had cascading effects for elephants, zebras, lions, and buffalo.A ‘Jeopardy!' Winner Studied How Trivia Experts Recall FactsWhen contestants play “Jeopardy!,” it can be amazing to see how quickly they seem to recall even the most random, obscure facts. One multi-time “Jeopardy!” contestant, Dr. Monica Thieu, noticed something interesting about the way that she and her fellow contestants were recalling tidbits of information. They weren't just remembering the facts, but also the context of how they learned them: where they were, what they read, who they were with. Hypothesizing that for trivia superstars, information was strongly tied to the experience of learning it, she put that anecdotal evidence to the test. The results of her research were recently published in the journal Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.SciFri producer Kathleen Davis talks with Dr. Thieu, a psychology researcher at Emory University, and Dr. Mariam Aly, assistant professor of psychology at Columbia University, and a co-author of the new study. They discuss the psychology of trivia, how to get better at it, and why some people seem to be much more adept at recalling fun trivia facts than others.See if you can beat a "Jeopardy!" champ on our website!How One Invading Ant Species Sent Ripples Through A Food WebWhen people talk about the interconnectedness of nature, the usual example involves a little fish that eats a bug, a bigger fish that eats the little fish, and an even bigger fish at the top of the chain. But in reality, the interconnected relationships in an ecosystem can be a lot more complicated. That was certainly the case in a recent study, published in the journal Science, which describes how the arrival of an invasive ant species changed the number of zebras that get eaten by lions on the Kenyan savannah.The unwelcome ant is known as the big-headed ant. It's on a list of top 100 invasive species around the world. When it arrived on the African savannah, the ant newcomer muscled out a native ant species known as the acacia ant—which, though tiny, was able to help defend acacia trees from being grazed upon by elephants (picture getting a trunkful of angry ants while snacking).With the trees undefended, hungry elephants feasted, resulting in fewer trees on the savannah and more open space. That made the hunting environment less favorable to stealthy lions, and more favorable to fleet-footed zebras. But to the surprise of the researchers involved with the study, that didn't mean hungrier lions. Instead, the lions shifted their hunting from targeting zebras to targeting buffalo instead.Dr. Jacob Goheen and Douglas Kamaru of the University of Wyoming join guest host Sophie Bushwick to describe their research, and how a small ant can have a big effect on an ecosystem.Transcripts for each segment will be available after the show airs on sciencefriday.com. Subscribe to this podcast. Plus, to stay updated on all things science, sign up for Science Friday's newsletters.

The development and impact of artificial intelligence (AI) is a topic of great interest and concern. In this podcast episode, host Aaron Della Vedova and guest Charles Lew share their fascination with AI.  Charles, an attorney, AI advisor, and state coder for California, highlights the importance of addressing the intersection of AI and the law. He emphasizes the need for laws and regulatory frameworks to manage the negative aspects of AI, such as deepfakes and biased algorithms.  The conversation delves into the potential negative consequences of AI, including job displacement and the misuse of AI technology by dictators or terrorist organizations. However, the conversation also explores the positive aspects of AI. Charles highlights the potential for AI to revolutionize access to justice and provide better solutions than human judges.  Furthermore, the podcast mentions that these young individuals are more concerned about work-life balance and prioritize their mental well-being. They understand the importance of taking care of oneself and promoting a healthy work-life balance, which is a significant shift from previous generations that often prioritized work over personal well-being. This mindset of the younger generation is crucial in the context of AI.   Tune in to gain insights into the evolving world of AI and its implications for the future.   Chat Breakdown: [00:04:09] AI and sci-fi fascination. [00:05:23] Artificial intelligence's increasing prevalence. [00:09:18] Artificial Intelligence and the Law. [00:12:07] Robots and artificial intelligence. [00:16:35] Access to justice. [00:20:01] The impact of hungry judges. [00:24:16] Cooperation in a digital age. [00:29:33] Job displacement and autonomous vehicles. [00:31:08] Ominous cooperation and AI potential. [00:34:37] AI's capacity to address complexity. [00:40:01] Universal enlightenment and cooperation. [00:43:22] Work-life balance and younger communities. [00:46:58] AI in the Bible. [00:51:59] Profit-driven business and corruption. [00:55:02] Homelessness and data representation. [00:57:31] UFO phenomenon and hallucinogenics. [01:02:19] AGI and its implications. [01:06:08] Sentience and programming issues. [01:09:51] Hypothesizing the future of AI. [01:13:33] Unlawful detainer actions. [01:17:32] Unlawful detainer defense [01:21:38] Holistic health and treatment. [01:24:10] AI's potential positive impact. [01:30:01] Robotic Bill of Rights. [01:34:31] AI regulation and awareness. [01:36:56] New tool for homelessness. [01:41:11] Finding goodness in everyday life. Quotes: "We're on the precipice of godlike intelligence, an all-knowing, all-powerful, if you will, entity." "A dictator gets a hold of this thing, he builds whatever he wants to build, he exterminates the entire human race, then you go over here and you cure fucking leukemia." "We really don't have any mechanism to stop it. We don't really have the laws or the regulatory framework in place to do anything about it either." "Artificial intelligence as it sits right now, chat GPT, which is going to get fine-tuned, we're building a fine-tuned model built off a chat GPT engine, that will provide better access to justice than an army of lawyers ever could." "You already live in the metaverse. You're in virtual reality. You spend 50% of your day like this, you are digital. You're there, just accept it." "To hurt another is to hurt yourself." "We don't even know we're conscious, but I'm going to say that computer is now, that AI is now conscious." "Let's all visualize the future we want to see for ourselves." Stay Connected: Connect with Charles:  https://charleslew.com/ https://www.instagram.com/charleslew.eth/ Connect with Aaron:⁠   Website: http://www.chatsandtatts.com⁠ Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@chatsandtatts  IG: http://www.instagram.com/chatsandtatts Chats & Tatts YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/chatsandtatts Aaron IG:⁠ http://www.instagram.com/aarondellavedova⁠ Guru Tattoo: http://www.Gurutattoo.com  

Tom and Landon dive into the intricate world of advertising in restricted categories. They navigate through the challenges and innovative strategies essential for thriving in environments with stringent advertising limitations. They explore the importance of data-driven insights, the art of crafting compelling narratives, and the subtle nuances of targeting specific audiences. Landon shares his knowledge for anyone looking to excel in the complex landscape of restricted category advertising, offering a unique blend of creativity, strategy, and adaptability.Chapters:00:00 - Kickoff: Exploring Advertising in Restricted Categories02:00 - Delving into the Post-Click User Experience04:00 - Expanding the Conversation: Beyond Surface-Level Questions06:00 - The Comprehensive Approach to Advertising08:00 - Strategies for Consistent Marketing Solutions10:00 - Proactive Communication: Alerting Clients to Emerging Issues12:00 - Deep Dive: The Crucial Role of a Marketing Strategist14:00 - Real-World Problem-Solving in Advertising16:00 - Balancing Problem-Solving with Empathy in Client Relations18:00 - The Critical Need for Client Transparency and Openness20:00 - The Art of Hypothesizing and Testing in Marketing22:00 - 'Fire Bullets, Then Cannonballs': A Strategy for Scaling Campaigns24:00 - Navigating the Unpredictability of Marketing Experiments26:00 - Case Study Analysis: Reducing Client CPA28:00 - Maximizing the Power of Digital Marketing Tools30:00 - The Unexpected Impact of Beige Backgrounds in Ads32:00 - Understanding Why Some Marketing Successes Are Unique34:00 - Investigating the Factors Behind Successful Campaigns36:00 - Embracing Continuous Innovation for Enhanced Market VisibilityLinks and Resources:Tiereleven.comGet your queries answered here: hi@tiereleven.comThanks so much for joining us this week. Want to subscribe to The Customer Acquisition Show? Have some feedback you'd like to share? Connect with us on iTunes and leave us a review!

In episode 93 of The Gradient Podcast, Daniel Bashir speaks to Professor Tal Linzen.Professor Linzen is an Associate Professor of Linguistics and Data Science at New York University and a Research Scientist at Google. He directs the Computation and Psycholinguistics Lab, where he and his collaborators use behavioral experiments and computational methods to study how people learn and understand language. They also develop methods for evaluating, understanding, and improving computational systems for language processing.Have suggestions for future podcast guests (or other feedback)? Let us know here or reach us at editor@thegradient.pubSubscribe to The Gradient Podcast:  Apple Podcasts  | Spotify | Pocket Casts | RSSFollow The Gradient on TwitterOutline:* (00:00) Intro* (02:25) Prof. Linzen's background* (05:37) Back and forth between psycholinguistics and deep learning research, LM evaluation* (08:40) How can deep learning successes/failures help us understand human language use, methodological concerns, comparing human representations to LM representations* (14:22) Behavioral capacities and degrees of freedom in representations* (16:40) How LMs are becoming less and less like humans* (19:25) Assessing LSTMs' ability to learn syntax-sensitive dependencies* (22:48) Similarities between structure-sensitive dependencies, sophistication of syntactic representations* (25:30) RNNs implicitly implement tensor-product representations—vector representations of symbolic structures* (29:45) Representations required to solve certain tasks, difficulty of natural language* (33:25) Accelerating progress towards human-like linguistic generalization* (34:30) The pre-training agnostic identically distributed evaluation paradigm* (39:50) Ways to mitigate differences in evaluation* (44:20) Surprisal does not explain syntactic disambiguation difficulty* (45:00) How to measure processing difficulty, predictability and processing difficulty* (49:20) What other factors influence processing difficulty?* (53:10) How to plant trees in language models* (55:45) Architectural influences on generalizing knowledge of linguistic structure* (58:20) “Cognitively relevant regimes” and speed of generalization* (1:00:45) Acquisition of syntax and sampling simpler vs. more complex sentences* (1:04:03) Curriculum learning for progressively more complicated syntax* (1:05:35) Hypothesizing tree-structured representations* (1:08:00) Reflecting on a prediction from the past* (1:10:15) Goals and “the correct direction” in AI research* (1:14:04) OutroLinks:* Prof. Linzen's Twitter and homepage* Papers* Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependencies* RNNS Implicitly Implement Tensor-Product Representations* How Can We Accelerate Progress Towards Human-like Linguistic Generalization?* Surprisal does not explain syntactic disambiguation difficulty: evidence from a large-scale benchmark* How to Plant Trees in LMs: Data and Architectural Effects on the Emergence of Syntactic Inductive Biases Get full access to The Gradient at thegradientpub.substack.com/subscribe

En el episodio de hoy, tenemos delante un tema muy desconocido en neurorrehabilitación aunque muy relevante como es el sistema nervioso autónomo. Todos los profesionales de la salud y especialmente los que nos dedicamos a los pacientes neurológicos, tenemos una cierta base teórica sobre el sistema nervioso autónomo, si bien peca mucho de lo periférico, cuando existe una representación central (la red autónoma central) que ejerce control sobre el sistema autónomo y tiene implicaciones en patología neurológica, incluso en el tratamiento. Hablamos de variabilidad de frecuencia cardíaca como variable autónoma fundamental y de algunos modelos vagales cardíacos que explican la conexión cerebro-corazón. Referencias del episodio: 1. Sposato, L. A., Hilz, M. J., Aspberg, S., Murthy, S. B., Bahit, M. C., Hsieh, C. Y., Sheppard, M. N., Scheitz, J. F., & World Stroke Organisation Brain & Heart Task Force (2020). Post-Stroke Cardiovascular Complications and Neurogenic Cardiac Injury: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 76(23), 2768–2785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.10.009 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33272372/). 2. Porges S. W. (2009). The polyvagal theory: new insights into adaptive reactions of the autonomic nervous system. Cleveland Clinic journal of medicine, 76 Suppl 2(Suppl 2), S86–S90. https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.76.s2.17 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3108032/). 3. Sletten, D. M., Suarez, G. A., Low, P. A., Mandrekar, J., & Singer, W. (2012). COMPASS 31: a refined and abbreviated Composite Autonomic Symptom Score. Mayo Clinic proceedings, 87(12), 1196–1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.10.013 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23218087/). 4. Nikolin, S., Boonstra, T. W., Loo, C. K., & Martin, D. (2017). Combined effect of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation and a working memory task on heart rate variability. PloS one, 12(8), e0181833. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181833 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28771509/). 5. Vistisen, S. T., Jensen, J., Fleischer, J., & Nielsen, J. F. (2015). Association between the sensory-motor nervous system and the autonomic nervous system in neurorehabilitation patients with severe acquired brain injury. Brain injury, 29(3), 374–379. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2014.969312 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25356639/). 6. Vistisen, S. T., Hansen, T. K., Jensen, J., Nielsen, J. F., & Fleischer, J. (2014). Heart rate variability in neurorehabilitation patients with severe acquired brain injury. Brain injury, 28(2), 196–202. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2013.860477 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24295072/). 7. Scheitz, J. F., Sposato, L. A., Schulz-Menger, J., Nolte, C. H., Backs, J., & Endres, M. (2022). Stroke-Heart Syndrome: Recent Advances and Challenges. Journal of the American Heart Association, 11(17), e026528. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.026528 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36056731/). 8. Lee, Y., Walsh, R. J., Fong, M. W. M., Sykora, M., Doering, M. M., & Wong, A. W. K. (2021). Heart rate variability as a biomarker of functional outcomes in persons with acquired brain injury: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 131, 737–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.10.004 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34626686/). 9. Arakaki, X., Arechavala, R. J., Choy, E. H., Bautista, J., Bliss, B., Molloy, C., Wu, D. A., Shimojo, S., Jiang, Y., Kleinman, M. T., & Kloner, R. A. (2023). The connection between heart rate variability (HRV), neurological health, and cognition: A literature review. Frontiers in neuroscience, 17, 1055445. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1055445 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36937689/). 10. Agorastos, A., Mansueto, A. C., Hager, T., Pappi, E., Gardikioti, A., & Stiedl, O. (2023). Heart Rate Variability as a Translational Dynamic Biomarker of Altered Autonomic Function in Health and Psychiatric Disease. Biomedicines, 11(6), 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11061591 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37371686/). 11. Buitrago-Ricaurte, N., Cintra, F., & Silva, G. S. (2020). Heart rate variability as an autonomic biomarker in ischemic stroke. Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria, 78(11), 724–732. https://doi.org/10.1590/0004-282X20200087 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33331466/). 12. Dawson, J., Liu, C. Y., Francisco, G. E., Cramer, S. C., Wolf, S. L., Dixit, A., Alexander, J., Ali, R., Brown, B. L., Feng, W., DeMark, L., Hochberg, L. R., Kautz, S. A., Majid, A., O'Dell, M. W., Pierce, D., Prudente, C. N., Redgrave, J., Turner, D. L., Engineer, N. D., … Kimberley, T. J. (2021). Vagus nerve stimulation paired with rehabilitation for upper limb motor function after ischaemic stroke (VNS-REHAB): a randomised, blinded, pivotal, device trial. Lancet (London, England), 397(10284), 1545–1553. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00475-X (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33894832/). 13. Lee, H., Lee, J. H., Hwang, M. H., & Kang, N. (2023). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation improves cardiovascular autonomic nervous system control: A meta-analysis. Journal of affective disorders, 339, 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2023.07.039 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37459970/). 14. Mankoo, A., Roy, S., Davies, A., Panerai, R. B., Robinson, T. G., Brassard, P., Beishon, L. C., & Minhas, J. S. (2023). The role of the autonomic nervous system in cerebral blood flow regulation in stroke: A review. Autonomic neuroscience : basic & clinical, 246, 103082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autneu.2023.103082 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36870192/). 15. Matusik, P. S., Zhong, C., Matusik, P. T., Alomar, O., & Stein, P. K. (2023). Neuroimaging Studies of the Neural Correlates of Heart Rate Variability: A Systematic Review. Journal of clinical medicine, 12(3), 1016. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12031016 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36769662/). 16. Ross, S. N., & Ware, K. (2013). Hypothesizing the body's genius to trigger and self-organize its healing: 25 years using a standardized neurophysics therapy. Frontiers in physiology, 4, 334. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00334 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24312056/). 17. Orgianelis, I., Merkouris, E., Kitmeridou, S., Tsiptsios, D., Karatzetzou, S., Sousanidou, A., Gkantzios, A., Christidi, F., Polatidou, E., Beliani, A., Tsiakiri, A., Kokkotis, C., Iliopoulos, S., Anagnostopoulos, K., Aggelousis, N., & Vadikolias, K. (2023). Exploring the Utility of Autonomic Nervous System Evaluation for Stroke Prognosis. Neurology international, 15(2), 661–696. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15020042 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37218981/). 18. Riganello, F., Larroque, S. K., Di Perri, C., Prada, V., Sannita, W. G., & Laureys, S. (2019). Measures of CNS-Autonomic Interaction and Responsiveness in Disorder of Consciousness. Frontiers in neuroscience, 13, 530. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00530 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31293365/). 19. Ruffle, J. K., Hyare, H., Howard, M. A., Farmer, A. D., Apkarian, A. V., Williams, S. C. R., Aziz, Q., & Nachev, P. (2021). The autonomic brain: Multi-dimensional generative hierarchical modelling of the autonomic connectome. Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 143, 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2021.06.012 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34438298/). 20. Siepmann, M., Weidner, K., Petrowski, K., & Siepmann, T. (2022). Heart Rate Variability: A Measure of Cardiovascular Health and Possible Therapeutic Target in Dysautonomic Mental and Neurological Disorders. Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback, 47(4), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-022-09572-0 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36417141/).

We are once again badly explaining science….. for centuries people have wondered “why does sun make Sleepy”. And we are here to tell you. We are also here to ponder why birthdays bring out a lonesome pit within you & catch up on the happenings in our little lives. Conspiracy theories are debated, marijuana is discussed, and goofiness abounds. ALSO have to add…. Ariana has been liberated of the cheating allegations. I was going to stick beside her regardless but my girl has been FREED! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lords: * Avery * Tyriq Topics: * Adam, Father of all humankind, was maybe a giant * Heathcliff is still going and it's weird * I've heard a million novelty metal covers but still nobody's done Truly Scrumptious / Doll on a Music Box from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang * "The Phone Call" by James Tate Microtopics: * Withholding all your best URLs until the end of the episode. * Using lowercase Ls in place of Is and seeing if anybody notices. * Leaving capitalizations to the whims of chaos. (Your fingers.) * Teachers explaining that if you can't write in cursive by junior high your teachers will throw things at you and call you stupid. * Adam and Eve growing to 18 feet tall. * Pre-flood humans and their towering heights/lifespans/IQs. * How to make your wisdom teeth fit again. * Conspiracy theories that have no bearing on anything. * Fighting wars over the estimated radius of the earth. * The Nephilim. * YHWH fanfiction. * How many Jesuses are alive today. * The friend you have with superhuman charisma and whether they ended up starting a cult. * Getcherself a nice cult, settle down, have a thousand babies. * The guy who was both a dwarf and a giant during his lifetime. * Every tall person having been short at one point. * Chain-smoking tweens drinking martinis and yelling at their secretaries. * A Topic Lords ouroboros. * Hypothesizing why the elderly people Heathcliff lives with have a child. * Having a child for some reason. * A humanoid robot with the word "meat" printed on its chest. * The kind of people who read comics every day. * Zippy the Pinhead. * A weird underground subculture comic that somehow made it into newspaper syndication. * Mustache Mondays vs. Mustache Lasagna. * A milk mustache but for lasagna. * A cartoon anvil that has its weight imprinted on it. * Two side characters explaining the situation to each other. * One of the birds says to the other, "Christ, what an asshole." * Historians a thousand years from now deciding whether Heathcliff should be included in the Bible. * After recorded media stops being a thing, episodes of The Simpsons being passed down as oral history. * Rhapsodes. * Contests for the best rhapsode. * Hector of the Shining Helmet vs. Hector the Booty Inspector. * Fillet episodes in the Odyssey and the Iliad. * The Flaming Lips album that comes on four CDs that your supposed to play simultaneously, but nobody's ever bothered. * How they handle hidden tracks on Spotify. * How to deal with skits when you're ripping rap albums to mp3. * The Meat Puppets playing a set in the middle of Nirvana'a MTV Unplugged set. * Writing a song about a shooting star who's been turned into a rat and has just fallen in love with someone named Tristran, and trying to figure out what rhymes with Tristran. * Working at the Brill Building. * Tin Pan Alley. * Nearly jumping out of your pants. * Taking a high-paying job as a murder victim. * The one where people wear horse skulls. * The Scrambler, from issue #12 where the panels were all out of order. * Working at the oil refinery until a giant spider comes and steals the Light of the Silmarils. * Whether there's a werewolf in the Silmarillion. * Biblical Exigesis. * Getting email saying that your art is improving someone's life. * A phone that can receive text messages but you have to pay extra to know who they're from.

Music theorist Dr. Lauren Crosby is here to help us take a closer look at the original Boba Fett theme. We compare the pitch material of John Williams's theme to Ludwig Göransson's Boba Fett theme (which debuted in The Book Of Boba Fett), theorize about the relationship between them, and discuss other things from this action-packed set of minutes too! Timestamps: 0:00 - Hello there! 10:53 - When did you become aware of Boba Fett having a theme? 14:02 - Characteristics of the Boba Fett theme. 16:57 - Side by side comparison of Frank Lehman's Boba Fett theme transcription (Bb octatonic) and Lauren Crosby's transcription (C# minor). Same theme, same notes, conceived in different ways. 25:26 - Foreshadowing all the Dies Iraes in these minutes. 31:14 - Comparing John Williams's theme to Ludwig Göransson's Boba Fett theme. 44:09 - Did Ludwig Göransson reference John Williams on purpose? 50:38 - Hypothesizing about the break point of the Dies Irae in Boba Fett's two themes. 58:53 - Attacking a Star Destroyer motif, which also appears in John Powell's SOLO score. 1:04:54 - Satisfying engine sound that melds with the music. 1:09:18 - Carmina Burana moment. 1:10:16 - Dies Irae moment (paging Alex Ludwig). 1:16:02 - Guessing a theme based on two notes. 1:20:04 - Remaining part of the action through the soundscape. 1:23:43 - Upward steps with lower decorations evoke Luke struggling to learn the lesson. 1:26:40 - Organic vs. non-organic sounds on Dagobah. Natural habitat punctuated by Artoo's vocalizations. 1:30:55 - Paging Ender Smith (re: Artoo beeps). 1:33:57 - Ascending scale with ascending ship. The scale is somewhat familiar but sounds unresolved. 1:41:05 - SWMM Questionnaire References: Ludwig Göransson's Book of Boba Fett theme - https://youtu.be/3a0tH0fkvW8 "O Fortuna" from Carmina Burana by Carl Orff - https://youtu.be/GXFSK0ogeg4 Complete Catalogue of the Musical Themes of Star Wars (by Frank Lehman): https://franklehman.com/starwars/. Cues: 6M5/7M1 "The Magic Tree" 7M2 "Attack Position" Beginning of 7M3 "Yoda Raises The Ship" Musical Themes: 1a. Main Theme (A Section) 12a. Yoda (A Section) 10a. Imperial March (Theme) 14. Boba Fett 29) Attacking A Star Destroyer 13) Dies Irae Where are we in the soundtrack? "The Training of a Jedi Knight/The Magic Tree" "Attacking a Star Destroyer" "Yoda And The Force" ------------ Star Wars Music Minute Questionnaire: 1. In exactly 3 words, what does Star Wars sound like? - Expansive. Romantic. Foreignly-familiar. 2. What's something related to Star Wars music or sound that you want to learn more about? - The process of coming up with character voices, sounds, or languages. 3. What's a score or soundtrack you're fond of besides anything Star Wars? - Frozen II (composed by Christophe Beck) --------- Guest: Lauren Crosby Lauren's presentation at the John Williams conference may be online soon. You can check on it here: https://johnwilliams.sciencesconf.org/ University of Clemson page: https://www.clemson.edu/caah/about/facultybio.html?id=5566 ------------------ Ways to Support & Follow SWMM: Join our Discord server by becoming a patron!  https://patreon.com/chrysanthetan Leave a voice message, and I might play it on the show...   https://starwarsmusicminute.com/comlink

Support Topic Lords on Patreon and get episodes a week early! (https://www.patreon.com/topiclords) Lords: * Quil * Maxx Topics: * Maybe I just don't like apples * Opposite Costco * The Sweet Science * The Village and the Curious Hole * http://thesciencesalon.blogspot.com/p/village-and-curious-hole.html * BALLU the best robot * https://youtu.be/EdSoUbXirVI * https://www.strandbeest.com/ * https://youtube.com/shorts/lbxJlwQ6-U8 Microtopics: * Making robots and video games in Seattle. * Cohost dot org. * Tumblr without Tumblr's weird nesting. * Finding interesting people to follow in 2005. * Cohost's discovery apparatus. * Making bad music on the internet that's not very enjoyable. * The worst fruit. (Apples.) * The enormous gulf between the audiovisual experience of watching someone eat an apple and eating that apple yourself. * The world's most apple growing place. * "Extra honey" apples. * Upgrading your teeth so that you can eat stone fruit without pitting them. * Installing a machine in your mouth that you can pour wheat into and it extrudes noodles right into your throat. * What wheat becomes if you chew it. * Pasta-flavored gum. * Vaguely salty orange chewing gum. * Installing an app to play a "biting an apple" ringtone into whenever you bite any fruit. * Japan's canonical fruit ranking with melon at the top, as seen in Pac-Man. * The way in which the B-tier melons are substandard. * The most cherries per slot machine. * Pivoting to chewing gum after San Francisco bans your gambling machines. * Buying just one leaf of parsley from Opposite Costco. * Naming your company after the idea of charging for things. * Buying hundreds of jigsaw puzzle pieces in bulk. * Tito Beverage. * You win stun, you lose stun. * Doug Bowser's Heel Turn. * Inaptronyms. * Punching somebody and all their honey comes out. * Preferring to punch people who bruise extremely precisely. * Hypothesizing that you are about to be punched in the face and setting up a control group. * Using science in an interesting way in 1832. * Little Alchemy and other combine-'em-ups. * What to play if you like adventure game inventory puzzles but not the rest of the adventure game. * The phone number you could call as part of the Frog Fractions ARG. * Investigating where the wind knocked over the fox shrine. * Finding an infinitely deep hole and dumping all your garbage in it until you realize you can use it to solve the housing crisis. * The deepest man-made hole. * The town that is permanently on fire. * An extremely plausible hellmouth. * Thanks, Hellmouth! * Inventing Hell in the 1970s. * A video that you can silently play in the background. * A robot that is just a large helium balloon. * A robot that is neutrally buoyant. * Strandbeests. * Making the goofiest lil guy. * The exploded cell phone ghosts. * A traffic cone skateboarding with ska playing in the background. * The Topic Lords startup incubator. * Cony Hawk.

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2022.11.22.517574v1?rss=1 Authors: Kuhn, C. C., Basnet, N., Bodakuntla, S., Alvarez- Brecht, P., Nichols, S., Martinez-Sanchez, A., Agostini, L., Soh, Y.-M., Takagi, J., Biertumpfel, C., Mizuno, N. Abstract: SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. Its high pathogenicity is due to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S protein) contacting host-cell receptors. A critical hallmark of COVID-19 is the occurrence of coagulopathies. Here, we report the direct observation of the interactions between S protein and platelets. Live imaging showed that the S protein triggers platelets to deform dynamically, in some cases, leading to their irreversible activation. Strikingly, cellular cryo-electron tomography revealed dense decorations of S protein on the platelet surface, inducing filopodia formation. Hypothesizing that S protein binds to filopodia-inducing integrin receptors, we tested the binding to RGD motif-recognizing platelet integrins and found that S protein recognizes integrin v{beta}3. Our results infer that the stochastic activation of platelets is due to weak interactions of S protein with integrin, which can attribute to the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and the occurrence of rare but severe coagulopathies. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info Podcast created by Paper Player, LLC

The Power of Synergy September 3, 2022 The Power of Nature; Cooperating With It Introduction: Definition of Synergy There is no neutral energy 4 Dichotomies: *Social Energy: 1. Friends 2. Interruptions 3. Noise 4. Special Occasions *General Focus 1. Tangible is better, even if it's bad 2. Literal is better, for practical reasons 3. Directions are not confusing 4. Hypothesizing is a waste of time *Making Decisions 1. Making people happy is best 2. Making sense is good 3. Creating pain is bad 4. Self-neglect is habitual *Carrying out decisions 1. Knowing rules and following them 2. More excited at the beginning? Or the end? 3. Writing lists and keeping them handy 4. Planning? Or spontaneous? 4 Levels of Activity *Dominant 1. Like breathing 2. 8 hours/day: minimum 50% *Auxiliary 1. Like eating 2. 3-4 hours/day: 25-30% *Tertiary 1. Like walking 2. 2-3 hours/day: 15-20% *Inferior 1. Like running 2. 1-2 hours/day: 5-10% *What's worse? Not doing what is you? Or doing what isn't? 1. Making it habitual is harmful 2. Getting yourself back is a slow process: 5-10% at a time 3. The 21-day rule of a habit Quality over Quantity: Personal Care: for yourself first *People are willing to help and share *When the ROI is real, it's “worth it” for everyone Equipped: Prepared beforehand *Know what you will need *Have it “available” and “in stock” Milestones and Rewards: *Close enough to be achievable, but far apart enough to be challenging *1:4 ratio *4-week maximum distance *Weight example (break it down as many times as you need to) *Don't undermine your work Support System: Physical: SP Emotional: NF Mental: NT Moral: SJ *Have them available and aware; concession *Have 5 of each (so know who in your life is what) Affirmations: *Always in the positive *1:3 ratio *Simple and short *Say the whole list until they're all completely believed *Add one and remove one every 21 days Checklists for focus: *1:4 ratio (already do, occasionally do, rarely do, never do) *Just make it 8 things that you'll do in a 24-hour day *Change the list every 3 months Shot-in-the-arm for energy: *At least 33% improvement *Keep everything accessible *Not more than twice, daily Negative Emotions: *Anxiety *Fear *Anger Conclusion:

I am taking a break from social media!! Social media can be fun and energizing, a place to connect and experience joy and laughter.  At times, my relationship with social media feels draining and forced.  So, I am disconnecting from social media to reconnect with myself and my core values.  From July 1 through August 7, 2022 I will be going off-the-grid from the social media platforms. In this episode I share the WHAT, WHY, WHEN, and HOW about my decision to take a social media sabbatical. I talk about the different ways that we can stay connected! I encourage you to take inventory of the aspects of your life that affect your energy and to evaluate those places where you can make a shift to feel more balanced! Visit the episode website for resources, links, and more! - https://www.drlyz.com/blog/podcast-75  Empowered By Design Podcast with Dr. Lyz: Psychology, Love and Relationships, Mental Health and Wellness, Mindset, Self-care, Self-reflection and Personal Growth Dr. Lyz: Licensed Psychologist; Love + Relationship Specialist; Wellness Entrepreneur Subscribe to my email list to stay connected: https://www.DrLyz.com  https://www.VisionistasByDesign.com   https://www.drlyz.com/empowered-by-design-podcast  ------------------- Follow us on social media and check our website for event info and dates! https://www.VisionistasByDesign.com    FREE RESOURCE: The Self-LOVE Makeover. What is your Self-LOVE Style?

A possible new venue in downtown Milwaukee? After a venue near the Third Ward was nixed? Hypothesizing the possibilities ahead of the Deer District news conference at 10 am on MondaySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, we chat with Chuck Hazzard, who is the VP of Wearables and Integrationsat Heads Up Health, founder of The Human Optimization Project, and former VP of Sales at Oura. He brings his vast experience to this conversation all about wearable technology, and the benefits, downsides, and ethics around this tool for health optimization. We also discuss the future implications of this tech and how to apply and interpret the best and latest innovations to optimize your health. This conversation also examines the current use of such devices for fitness professionals as well as the average person, and delves into the ways using yourself for study will impact your life – but not always for the better if there isn't adequate knowledge around what the metrics actually mean. Finally, Chuck shares some interesting insights into nocturnal biometrics, how lasers really are the way of the future, and the favorite devices and tools that he uses in his own life! To join in this relevant and inspiring conversation, tune in today.Key Points From This Episode:Introducing our esteemed guest today, Chuck Hazzard!He takes us through his journey to becoming one of the forefathers of this movement. How the average person can use these devices to support clinical decisions for their health. How the pandemic has highlighted the value of home health monitoring and data systems.Chuck predicts a rise of wearables that provide coaching on top of the metrics. The ethics and downsides behind giving the consumer this type and amount of data.Diving into validation studies, marketing, and how to choose the right wearable.Being your own study and how it can impact your life for the better – and the worse.Discussing certification programs and the future of health coaches and wearables. Chuck gives some insight into the spectrum of cost of this kind of data interpretation.What he's most excited about in this space: lasers!Hear why so many top countries are focusing on nocturnal biometrics.Discussing the future, from embedded devices to diagnostic apartments and the metaverse.Chuck shares some of his favorite tools that have made a huge difference in his life.The efficacy behind recorded biometrics and how professionals can use this information safely. The potential for biometrics to save lives in everyday settings. Discussing gamification and wellbeing in the corporate space. Hypothesizing about the future risk of discrimination based on biometrics. Closing with the ways that Chuck makes different decisions based on his daily data.Links Mentioned in Today's Episode:BiOptimizersChuck Hazzard on TwitterChuck Hazzard on LinkedInHeads Up HealthThe Human Optimization ProjectWhoopOuraHeart Rate Variability During Strength and High-Intensity Training Overload MicrocyclesAndrés PreschelKnow Your Physio PodcastSupport the show

In this episode, we cover: 00:00:00 - Introduction 00:30:00 - Fastly Outage 00:04:05 - Salesforce Outage 00:07:25 - Hypothesizing  00:10:00 - Julie Joins the Team! 00:14:05 - Looking Forward/Outro TranscriptJason: There's a bunch of cruft that they'll cut from the beginning, and plenty of stupid things to cold-open with, so.Julie: I mean, I probably should have not said that I look forward to more incidents.[audio break 00:00:12]Jason: Hey, Julie. So, it's been quite a year, and we're going to do a year-end review episode here. As with everything, this feels like a year of a lot of incidents and outages. So, I'm curious, what is your favorite outage of the year?Julie: Well, Jason, it has been fun. There's been so many outages, it's really hard to pick a favorite. I will say that one that sticks out as my favorite, I guess, you could say was the Fastly outage, basically because of a lot of the headlines that we saw such as, “Fastly slows down and stops the internet.” You know, “What is Fastly and why did it cause an outage?” And then I think that people started realizing that there's a lot more that goes into operating the internet. So, I think from just a consumer side, that was kind of a fun one. I'm sure that the increases in Google searches for Fastly were quite large in the next couple of days following that.Jason: That's an interesting thing, right? Because I think for a lot of us in the industry, like, you know what Fastly is, I know what Fastly is; I've been friends with folks over there for quite a while and they've got a great service, but for everybody else out there in the general public, suddenly, this company, they never heard of that, you know, handles, like, 25% of the world's internet traffic, like, is suddenly on the front page news and they didn't realize how much of the internet runs through this service. And I feel it that way with a lot of the incidents that we're seeing lately, right? We're recording this in December, and a week ago, Amazon had a rather large outage, affecting us-east-1, which it seems like it's always us-east-1. But that took down a bunch of stuff and similar, they are people, like you know, my dad, who's just like, “I buy things from Amazon. How did this crash, like, the internet?”Julie: I will tell you that my mom generally calls me—and I hate to throw her under the bus—anytime there is an outage. So, Hulu had some issues earlier this year and I got texts from my mom actually asking me if I could call any of my friends over at Hulu and, like, help her get her Hulu working. She does this similarly for Facebook. So, when that Facebook outage happened, I always—almost—know about an outage first because of my mother. She is my alerting mechanism.Jason: I didn't realize Hulu had an outage, and now it makes me think we've had J. Paul Reed and some other folks from Netflix on the show. We definitely need to have an engineer from Hulu come on the show. So, if you're out there listening and you work for Hulu, and you'd like to be on the show and dish all the dirt on Hulu—actually don't do that, but we'd love to talk with you about reliability and what you're doing over there at Hulu. So, reach out to us at podcast@gremlin.com.Julie: I'm sure my mother would appreciate their email address and phone number just in case—Jason: [laugh].Julie: —for the future. [laugh].Jason: If you do reach out to us, we will connect you with Julie's mother to help solve her streaming issues. You had mentioned one thing though. You said the phrase about throwing your mother under the bus, and that reminds me of one of my favorite outages from this year, which I don't know if you remember, it's all about throwing people under the bus, or one person in particular, and that's the Salesforce outage. Do you remember that?Julie: Oh. Yes, I do. So, I was not here at the time of the Salesforce outage, but I do remember the impact that that had on multiple organizations. And then—Jason: Yes—Julie: —the retro.Jason: —the Salesforce outage was one where ,similarly ,Salesforce affects so much, and it is a major name. And so people like my dad or your mom probably knew like, “Oh, Salesforce. That's a big thing.” The retro on it, I think, was what really stood out. I think, you know, most people understand, like, “Oh, you're having DNS issues.” Like, obviously it's always DNS, right? That's the meme: It's always DNS that causes your issues.In this case it was, but their retro on this they publicly published was basically, “We had an engineer that went to update DNS, and this engineer decided to push things out using an EBF process, an Emergency Brake Fix process.” So, they sort of circumvented a lot of the slow rollout processes because they just wanted to get this change made and get it done without all the hassle. And turns out that they misconfigured it and it took everything down. And so the entire incident retro was basically throwing this one engineer under the bus. Not good.Julie: No, it wasn't. And I think that it's interesting because especially when I was over at PagerDuty, right, we talked a lot about blamelessness. That was very not blameless. It doesn't teach you to embrace failure, it doesn't show that we really just want to take that and learn better ways of doing things, or how we can make our systems more resilient. But going back to the Fastly outage, I mean, the NPR headline was, “Tuesday's Internet Outage was Caused by One Customer Changing a Setting, Fastly says.” So again, we could have better ways of communicating.Jason: Definitely don't throw your engineers on their bus, but even moreso, don't throw your customers under the bus. I think for both of these, we have to realize, like, for the engineer at Salesforce, like, the blameless lesson learned here is, what safeguards are you going to put in place? Or what safeguards were there? Like, obviously, this engineer thought, like, “The regular process is a hassle; we don't need to do that. What's the quickest, most expedient way to resolve the issue or get this job done?” And so they took that.And similarly with the customer at Fastly, they're just like, “How can I get my systems working the way I want them to? Let's roll out this configuration.” It's really up to all of us, and particularly within our companies, to think about how are people using our products. How are they working on our systems? And, what are the guardrails that we need to put in place? Because people are going to try to make the best decisions that they can, and that obviously means getting the job done as quickly as possible and then moving on to the next thing.Julie: Well, and I think you're really onto something there, too, because I think it's also about figuring out those unique ways that our customers can break our products, things that we didn't think through. And I mean, that goes back to what we do here at Gremlin, right? Then that goes back to Chaos Engineering. Let's think through a hypothesis. Let's see, you know, what if ABC Company, somebody there does something. How can we test for that?And I think that shouldn't get lost in the whole aspect of now we've got this postmortem. But how do we recreate that? How do we make sure that these things don't happen again? And then how do we get creative with trying to figure out, well, how can we break our stuff?Jason: I definitely love that. And that's something that we've done internally at Gremlin this year is, we've really started to build up a better practice around running Chaos Engineering internally on our own systems. We've done that for a long time, but a lot of times it was just specific teams, and so earlier this year, the advocacy team was partnering up with the various engineering teams and running Chaos Engineering experiments. And it was interesting to learn and think through some of those ideas of as we're doing this work, we're going to be trying to do things expediently with the least amount of hassle, but what if we decide to do something that's outside of the documented process, but for which there is no technical guardrails? So, some of the things that we ended up doing were testing dependencies, right, things that again, are outside of the normal process.Like, we use LaunchDarkly for feature flagging. What happens if we decide to circumvent that, just push things straight to production? What happens if we decide to just block LaunchDarkly all together? And we found some actual critical issues and we're able to resolve those without impacting our customers.Julie: That's the key element: Practice, play, think through the what ifs. And I love the what ifs part. You know, going back to my past, I have to tell you that the IT team used to always give me all of the new tech because if something was going to break for some reason—they used to call me the “AllSpark”  to be honest with everybody out there—for some reason, if something was going to break, with me it would break in the most unique possible way, so before anything got rolled out to the entire company, I was the one that got to test it.Jason: That's amazing. So, what you're saying is on my next project, I need to give that to you first?Julie: Oh, a hundred percent. Really, it was remarkable how things would break. I mean, I had keyboards that would randomly type letters. I definitely took down some internal things, but I'm just saying that you should leverage those people within your organization, as well. The thing was, it was never a, “Julie is awful; things break because of Julie.” It was, “You know what? Leverage Julie to learn about what we're using.” And it was kind of fun. I mean, granted, this was years ago, and that name has stuck, and sometimes they still definitely make fun of me for it, but really, they just used me to break things in unique ways. Because I did.Jason: That's actually a really good segue to some of the stuff that we've been doing because you joined Gremlin, now, a few months back—more than a few months—but late summer, and a lot of what we were doing early on was just, we had these processes that, internally for myself and other folks who'd been around for a while, it was just we knew what to do because we'd done it so much. And it was that nice thing of we're going to do this thing, but let's just have Julie do it. Also, we're not going to tell you anything; we're just going to point you at the docs. It became really evident as you went through that of, like, “Hey, this doc is missing this thing. It doesn't make sense.”And you really helped us improve some of those documentation points, or some of the flows that we had, you would execute, and it's like, “Why are we doing it this way?” And a lot of times, it was like, “Oh, that's a legacy thing. We do it because—oh, right, that thing we did it because of doesn't exist anymore. Like, we're doing it completely backwards because of some sort of legacy thing that doesn't exist. Let's update that.” And you were able to help us do that, which was fantastic.Julie: Oh, yeah. And it was really great on my end, too because I always felt like I could ask the questions. And that is a cultural trait that is really important in an organization, to make sure that folks can ask questions and feel comfortable doing so. I've definitely seen it the other way, and when folks don't know the right way to do something or they're afraid to ask those questions, that's also where you see the issues with the systems because they're like, “Okay, I'm just going to do this.” And even going back to my days of being a recruiter—which is when I started in tech, but don't worry, everybody, I was super cool; I was not a bad recruiter—that was something that I always looked for in the interview process. When I'd ask somebody how to do something, would they say, “I don't know, I would ask,” or, “I would do this,” or would they just fumble their way through it, I think that it's important that organizations really adopt that culture of again, failure, blamelessness, It's okay to ask questions.Jason: Absolutely. I think sort of the flip side of that, or the corollary of that is something that Alex Hidalgo brought up. So, one of our very first episodes of 2021 on this podcast, we had Alex Hidalgo who's now at Nobl9, and he brought up a thing from his time at Google called Hyrum's Law. And Hyrum's Law is this guy Hyrum who worked at Google basically said, “If you've got an API, that API will be used in every way possible. If you don't actually technically prevent it, somebody is going to use your API in a way it wasn't designed for. And that because it allows that, it becomes totally, like, a plausible or a valid use case for this.”And so as we think about this, and thinking about blamelessness, use the end-runaround to deploy this DNS change, like, that's a valid process now because you didn't put anything in place to validate against it, and to guarantee that people weren't using it in ways that were not intended.Julie: I think that that makes a lot of sense. Because I know I've definitely used things in ways that were not intended, which people can go back and look at my quest for Diet Cherry 7 Up during the pandemic, when I used tools in ways they weren't intended, but I would like to say that Diet Cherry 7 Up is back, from those tools. Thank you PagerDuty and some APIs that were open to me to be able to leverage in interesting ways.Jason: If you needed an alert for Diet Cherry 7 Up, PagerDuty, I guess it's a good enough tool for that.Julie: Well, the fact is, is I [laugh] was able to get very creative. I mean, what are terms of service, Jason?Jason: I don't know. Does anybody actually read those?Julie: Yeah. I would call them ‘light guardrails.'Jason: [laugh]. So Julie, we're getting towards the end of the year. I'm curious, what are you looking forward to in 2022?Julie: Well, aside from, ideally, the end to the pandemic, I would say that one of the things that I'm looking forward to in 2022, from joining Gremlin, I had a really great opportunity to work on certifications here, and I'm really excited because in 2022 we'll be launching some more certifications and I'm excited for what we're going to do with that and getting creative around that. But I'm also really interested to just see how everybody evolves or learns from this year and the outages that we had. I always love fun outages, so I'm kind of curious what's going to happen over the holiday season to see if we see anything new or interesting. But Jason, what about you? What are you looking forward to?Jason: You know I, similarly, am looking forward to the end of the pandemic. I don't know if there's really going to be an end, but I think we're starting to see a return to some normalcy. And so, we've already participated in some great events, went to KubeCon a couple months ago, went to Amazon re:Invent a few weeks ago, and both of those were fantastic just to see people getting out there, and learning, and building things again. So, I'm super excited for this next year. I think we're going to start seeing a lot more events back in person, and a lot of people really eager to get together to learn and build things together. So, that's what I'm excited about. Hopefully, less incidents, but as systems get more complex, I'm not sure that that's going to happen. So, at least if we don't have less incidents, more learning from incidents is really what I'm hoping for.Julie: I like how I'm looking forward to more incidents and you're looking forward to less. To be fair, from my perspective, every incident that we have is an opportunity to talk about something new and to teach folks things, and just sometimes it's fun going down the rabbit holes to find out, well, what was the cause of this? And what was the outcome? So, when I say more incidents, I don't mean that I don't want to be able to watch the Queen's Gambit on Netflix, okay, J. Paul? Just throwing that out there.Jason: Well, thanks, Julie, for being on. And for all of our listeners, whether you're seeing more incidents or less incidents, Julie and I both hope that you're learning from the incidents that you have, that you're working to become more reliable and building more reliable systems, and hopefully testing them out with some chaos engineering. If you'd like to hear more from the Break Things on Purpose podcast, we've got a bunch of episodes that we've published this year, so if you haven't heard some of them, go back into our catalog. You can see all of the episodes at gremlin.com/podcast. And we look forward to seeing you in our next podcast.Jason: For links to all the information mentioned, visit our website at gremlin.com/podcast. If you liked this episode, subscribe to the Break Things on Purpose podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform. Our theme song is called “Battle of Pogs” by Komiku, and it's available on loyaltyfreakmusic.com.

In this episode, we cover: 00:00:00 - Introduction  00:03:30 - An Engineering Anecdote  00:08:10 - Lessons Learned from Putting Out Fires 00:11:00 - Building “Guardrails” 00:18:10 - Pushing the Chaos Envelope  00:23:35 - OpenGitOps Project 00:30:37 - Where to Find Leo/Costa Rica CNCF Links: Weaveworks: https://www.weave.works GitOps Working Group: https://github.com/gitops-working-group/gitops-working-group OpenGitOps Project: https://opengitops.dev Github.com/open-gitops: https://github.com/open-gitops Twitter: https://twitter.com/murillodigital LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/leonardomurillo/ Costa Rica CNCF: https://community.cncf.io/costa-rica/ Cloudnative.tv: http://cloudnative.tv Gremlin-certified chaos engineering practitioner: https://www.gremlin.com/certification TranscriptJason: Welcome to the Break Things on Purpose podcast, a show about our often self-inflicted failures and what we learn from them. In this episode, Leonardo Murillo, a principal partner solutions architect at Weaveworks. He joins us to talk about GitOps, Automating reliability, and Pura Vida.Ana: I like letting our guests kind of say, like, “Who are you? What do you do? What got you into the world of DevOps, and cloud, and all this fun stuff that we all get to do?”Leo: Well, I guess I'll do a little intro of myself. I'm Leonardo Murillo; everybody calls me Leo, which is fine because I realize that not everybody chooses to call me Leo, depending on where they're from. Like, Ticos and Latinos, they're like, “Oh, Leo,” like they already know me; I'm Leo already. But people in Europe and in other places, they're, kind of like, more formal out there. Leonardo everybody calls me Leo.I'm based off Costa Rica, and my current professional role is principal solutions architect—principal partner solutions architect at Weaveworks. How I got started in DevOps. A lot of people have gotten started in DevOps, which is not realizing that they just got started in DevOps, you know what I'm saying? Like, they did DevOps before it was a buzzword and it was, kind of like, cool. That was back—so I worked probably, like, three roles back, so I was CTO for a Colorado-based company before Weaveworks, and before that, I worked with a San Francisco-based startup called High Fidelity.And High Fidelity did virtual reality. So, it was actually founded by Philip Rosedale, the founder of Linden Lab, the builders of Second Life. And the whole idea was, let's build—with the advent of the Oculus Rift and all this cool tech—build the new metaverse concept. We're using the cloud because, I mean, when we're talking about this distributed system, like a distributed system where you're trying to, with very low latency, transmit positional audio, and a bunch of different degrees of freedom of your avatars and whatnot; that's very massive scale, lots of traffic. So, the cloud was, kind of like, fit for purpose.And so we started using the cloud, and I started using Jenkins, as a—and figure it out, like, Jenkins is a cron sort of thing; [unintelligible 00:02:48] oh, you can actually do a scheduled thing here. So, started using it almost to run just scheduled jobs. And then I realized its power, and all of a sudden, I started hearing this whole DevOps word, and I'm like, “What this? That's kind of like what we're doing, right?” Like, we're doing DevOps. And that's how it all got started, back in San Francisco.Ana: That actually segues to one of the first questions that we love asking all of our guests. We know that working in DevOps and engineering, sometimes it's a lot of firefighting, sometimes we get to teach a lot of other engineers how to have better processes. But we know that those horror stories exist. So, what is one of those horrible incidents that you've encountered in your career? What happened?Leo: This is before the cloud and this is way before DevOps was even something. I used to be a DJ in my 20s. I used to mix drum and bass and jungle with vinyl. I never did the digital move. I used DJ, and I was director for a colocation facility here in Costa Rica, one of the first few colocation facilities that existed in the [unintelligible 00:04:00].I partied a lot, like every night, [laugh] [unintelligible 00:04:05] party night and DJ night. One night, they had 24/7 support because we were collocations [unintelligible 00:04:12], so I had people doing support all the time. I was mixing in some bar someplace one night, and I don't want to go into absolute detail of my state of consciousness, but it wasn't, kind of like… accurate in its execution. So, I got a call, and they're like, “We're having some problem here with our network.” This is, like, back in Cisco PIX times for firewalls and you know, like… back then.I wasn't fully there, so I [laugh], just drove back to the office in the middle of night and had this assistant, Miguel was his name, and he looks at me and he's like, “Are you okay? Are you really capable of solving this problem at [laugh] this very point in time?” And I'm like, “Yeah. Sure, sure. I can do this.”We had a rack full of networking hardware and there was, like, a big incident; we actually—one of the primary connections that we had was completely offline. And I went in and I started working on a device, and I spent about half an hour, like, “Well, this device is fine. There's nothing wrong with the device.” I had been working for half an hour on the wrong device. They're like, “Come on. You really got to focus.”And long story short, I eventually got to the right device and I was able to fix the problem, but that was like a bad incident, which wasn't bad in the context of technicality, right? It was a relatively quick fix that I figured it out. It was just at the wrong time. [laugh]. You know what I'm saying?It wasn't the best thing to occur that particular night. So, when you're talking about firefighting, there's a huge burden in terms of the on-call person, and I think that's something that we had experienced, and that I think we should give out a lot of shout-outs and provide a lot of support for those that are on call. Because this is the exact price they pay for that responsibility. So, just as a side note that comes to mind. Here's a lot of, like, shout-outs to all the people on-call that are listening to this right now, and I'm sorry you cannot go party. [laugh].So yeah, that's telling one story of one incident way back. You want to hear another one because there's a—this is back in High Fidelity times. I was—I don't remember exactly what it was building, but it had to do with emailing users, basically, I had to do something, I can't recall actually what it was. They was supposed to email all the users that were using the platform. For whatever reason—I really can't recall why—I did not mock data on my development environment.What I did was just use—I didn't mock the data, I actually used just to a copy of the production [unintelligible 00:07:02] the users. I basically just emailed everybody, like, multiple times. And that was very embarrassing. And another embarrassing scenario was, one day, I was working on a firewall that was local to my office, and I got the terminals mixed up, and I shut down not my local office firewall, but the one that was at the colocation facility. And that was another embarrassing moment. So yeah, those are three, kind of, self-caused fires that required fighting afterwards.Ana: The mock data one definitely resonates, especially when you're starting out in engineering career where you're just like, “Hey, I need to get this working. I'm trying to connect to pull this data from a production service,” or, “I'm trying to publish a new email, I want to see how it all goes out. Yeah, why not grab a copy of what actually usually is being used by my company and, like, press buttons here? Oh, wait, no, that actually is hitting a live endpoint? I did not know that.”Which brings me to that main question; what do you end up learning when you go through these fires? After you went through this incident that you emailed all of your customers, what is something that you learn that you got to take back.Leo: I learned how you have to pay attention. It's hard to learn without having gone through this experiences because you start picking up on cues that you didn't pick up in the past. You start seeing things that you didn't pay attention to before, particularly because you didn't know. And I'm pretty sure, even if somebody would have told me, “Don't do this,” or, “Don't do that. Be careful,” you still make those mistakes.There is certain things that you only achieve through experience. And I think that's one of the most important things that I realized. And I've actually see the analogy of that with my children. There's certain things that I, no matter how well I articulate, they will not learn until they go through those experiences of themselves. But I think that's one of the things that I'd argue, you ha—you will go through this, and it's—it's not okay, but it's okay.Everybody makes mistakes. You'll also identify whether—like, how supporting your team is and how supportive your—the organization you're working with is when you see the reaction to those errors. Hopefully, it wasn't something too bad, and ideally there's going to be guiderails that prevent that really, really bad scenario, but it's okay to make mistakes. You learn to focus through those mistakes and you really should be paying attention; you should never take anything for granted. There is no safety net. Period.So, you should never assume that there is, or that you're not going to make a mistake. So, be very careful. Another thing that I learned, how I can I work in my development environment. How different patterns that I apply in my development environment, how I now I'm very careful to never have, kind of like, production [x 00:10:11] readily available within my development environment. And also to build those guiderails.I think part of what you learn is all the things that could go wrong, might go wrong, so take time to build those guiderails. I think that's important. Like anything else that comes with seniority, when you have a task to accomplish, the task itself is merely a margin, only a percentage of what you really should consider to reach that objective. And a lot of the times, that means building protection around what you're asked, or thinking beyond that scope. And then leverage the team, you know? If you have people around you that know more, which is kind of great about community and collaboration. Like, being—don't—you're not alone.Ana: I love that you mentioned guardrails and guardrails being a way that you're able to prevent some of these things. Do you think something like chaos engineering could help you find those guardrails when you don't know that you don't have a guardrail?Leo: I think it definitely. The more complex your job, the more complex your architecture, the more complex of the solution you're building—and we've gotten in an increase in complexity over time. We went from monoliths to microservices to fully distributed architectures of services. We went from synchronous to asynchronous to event-driven to—like, there's this increase in complexity that is basically there for a reason because of an increase in scale as well. And the number of possible failure conditions that could arise from this hugely diverse and complex set of variables means that we've gotten to a point that likely always was the way, but now it's reached, again, and because of targets aligned with this complexity, new levels of scale, that there is currently more unknown unknowns than we've ever had.The conditions that you can run into because of different problem states of each individual component in your distributed architecture, brings up an orders-of-magnitude increase in the possible issues that you might run into, basically a point where you really have to understand that you have no idea what could fail, and the exercise of identifying what can fail. Or what are the margins of stability of your solution because that's, kind of like, the whole point, the boundaries? There's going to be a set of conditions, there's going to be a combination of conditions that will trigger your—kind of, will tip your solution beyond that edge. And finding those edges of stability can no longer be something that just happens by accident; it has to be premeditated, it has to be planned for. This is basically chaos engineering.Hypothesizing, given a set of conditions, what is the expected outcome? And through the execution of this hypothesis of increasing or varying scope and complexity, starting to identify that perimeter of stability of their solution. So, I guess to answer your question, yes. I mean, chaos engineering allows you to ide—if you think about that perimeter of stability as the guardrails around your solution within which have to remain for your solution to be stable, for instance, there goes—[unintelligible 00:13:48] chaos engineering. I was actually talking to somebody the other day, so I'm the organizer for the Costa Rica Cloud-Native Community, the chapter for [unintelligible 00:14:00], and I have this fellow from [unintelligible 00:14:04] who, he works doing chaos engineering.And he was talking to me about this concept that I had not thought about and considered, how chaos engineering can also be, kind of like, applied at a social level. What happens if a person xyz is not available? What happens if a person other has access to a system that they shouldn't have? All these types of scenarios can be used to discover where more guiderails should be applied.Jason: You know, you start to learn where the on-call person that's completely sober, maybe, is unavailable for some reason, and Leo comes and [crosstalk 00:14:45]—Leo: Right. [laugh]. Exactly. Exactly. That's what you have to incorporate in your experiment, kind of like, the DJ variable and the party parameter.Jason: It's a good thing to underscore as well, right? Back to your idea of we can tell our children all sorts of things and they're not going to learn the lesson until they experience it. And similarly with, as you explore your systems and how they can fail, we can imagine and architecture systems to maybe be resilient or robust enough to withstand certain failures, but we don't actually learn those lessons or actually know if they're going to work until we really do that, until we really stress them and try to explore those boundaries.Leo: Wouldn't it be fantastic if we could do that with our lives? You know, like, I want to bungee jump or I want to skydive, and there's a percentage of probability that I'm going to hit the ground and die, and I can just introduce a hypothesis in my life, jump, and then just revert to my previous state if it went wrong. It would be fantastic. I would try many, many things. [laugh].But you can't. And it's kind of like the same thing with my kids. I would love to be able to say, “You know what? Execute the following process, get the experience, and then revert to before it happened.” You cannot do that in real life, but that's, kind of like, the scenario that's brought up by chaos engineering, you don't have to wait for that production incident to learn; you can actually, “Emulate” quote-unquote, those occurrences.You can emulate it, you can experience without the damage, though, if you do it well because I think that's also part of, kind of like, there's a lot to learn about chaos engineering and there's a lot of progress in terms of how the practice of chaos engineering is evolving, and I think there's likely still a percentage of the population or of the industry that still doesn't quite see chaos engineering beyond just introducing chaos, period. They know chaos engineering from calling the Chaos Monkeys kill instances at random, and fix things and, you know, not in the more scientific context that it's evolved into. But yeah, I think the ability to have a controlled experience where you can actually live through failure states, and incidents, and issues, and stuff that you really don't want to happen in real life, but you can actually simulate those, accelerates learning in a way that only experience provides. Which is the beauty of it because you're actually living through it, and I don't think anything can teach us as effectively as living through [unintelligible 00:17:43], through suffering.Ana: I do also very much love that point where it's true, chaos engineering does expedite your learning. Not only are you just building and releasing and waiting for failure to happen, you're actually injecting that failure and you get to just be like, “Oh, wait, if this failure was to occur, I know that I'm resilient to it.” But I also love pushing that envelope forward, that it really allows folks to battle-test solutions together of, “I think this architecture diagram is going to be more resilient because I'm running it on three regions, and they're all in just certain zones. But if I was to deploy to a different provider, that only gives me one region, but they say they have a higher uptime, I would love to battle, test that together and really see, I'm throwing both scenarios at you: you're losing your access to the database. What's going to happen? Go, fight.” [laugh].Leo: You know, one thing that I've been mentioning to people, this is my hypothesis as to the future of chaos engineering as a component of solutions architecture. My hypothesis is that just as nowadays, if you look at any application, any service, for that application or service to be production-ready, you have a certain percentage of unit test coverage and you have a certain percentage of end-to-end coverage of testing and whatnot, and you cannot ignore and say I'm going to give you a production-ready application or production-ready system without solid testing coverage. My hypothesis is that [unintelligible 00:19:21]. And as a side note, we are now living in a world of infrastructure as code, and manifested infrastructure, and declarative infrastructure, and all sorts of cool new ways to deploy and deliver that infrastructure and workloads on top of it. My theory is that just as unit testing coverage is a requirement for any production-ready solution or application nowadays, a certain percentage of, “Chaos coverage,” quote-unquote.In other words, what percentage of the surface of your infrastructure had been exercised by chaos experiments, is going to also become a requirement for any production-ready architecture. That's is where my mind is at. I think you'll start seeing that happen in CI/CD pipelines, you're going to start seeing labels of 90% chaos coverage on Terraform repos. That's kind of the future. That I hope because I think it's going to help tremendously with reliability, and allow people to party without concern for being called back to the office in the middle of the night. It's just going to have a positive impact overall.Ana: I definitely love where that vision is going because that's definitely very much of what I've seen in the industry and the community. And with a lot of the open-source projects that we see out there, like, I got to sit in on a project called Keptn, which gets a chance to bring in a little bit more of those SRE-driven operations and try to close that loop, and auto-remediate, and all these other nice things of DevOps and cloud, but a big portion of what we're doing with Keptn is that you also get a chance to inject chaos and validate against service-level objectives, so you get to just really bring to the front, “Oh, we're looking at this metric for business-level and service-level objectives that allow for us to know that we're actually up and running and our customers are able to use us because they are the right indicators that matter to our business.” But you get to do that within CI/CD so that you throw chaos at it, you check that SLO, that gets rolled out to production, or to your next stage and then you throw more chaos at it, and it continues being completely repetitive.Leo: That's really awesome. And I think, for example, SLOs, I think that's very valuable as well. And prioritize what you want to improve based on the output of your experiments against that error budget, for example. There's limited time, there's limited engineering capacity, there's limited everything, so this is also something that you—the output, the results, the insights that you get from executing experiments throughout your delivery lifecycle as you promote, as you progress your solution through its multiple stages, also help you identify what should be prioritized because of the impact that it may have in your area budgets. Because I mean, sometimes you just need to burn budget, you know what I'm saying?So, you can actually, clearly and quantifiably understand where to focus engineering efforts towards site reliability as you introduce changes. So yeah, I think it's—and no wonder it's such a booming concept. Everybody's talking about it. I saw Gremlin just released this new certification thing. What is it, certified chaos engineer?Jason: Gremlin-certified chaos engineering practitioner.Leo: Ah, pretty cool.Jason: Yeah.Leo: I got to get me one of those. [laugh].Jason: Yeah, you should—we'll put the link in the [show notes 00:23:19], for everybody that wants to go and take that. One of the things that you've mentioned a bunch is as we talk about automation, and automating and getting chaos engineering coverage in the same way that test coverage happens, one of the things that you're involved in—and I think why you've got so much knowledge around automation—is you've been involved in the OpenGitOps Project, right?Leo: Mm-hm. Correct.Jason: Can you tell us more about that? And what does that look like now? Because I know GitOps has become this, sort of, buzzword, and I think a lot of people are starting to look into that and maybe wondering what that is.Leo: I'm co-chair of the GitOps Working Group by the CNCF, which is the working group that effectively shepherds the OpenGitOps Project. The whole idea behind the OpenGitOps Project is to come to a consensus definition of what GitOps is. And this is along the lines of—like, we were talking about DevOps, right?Like DevOps is—everybody is doing DevOps and everybody does something different. So, there is some commonality but there is not necessarily a community-agreed-upon single perspective as to what DevOps is. So, the idea behind the OpenGitOps Project and the GitOps Working Group is to basically rally the community and rally the industry towards a common opinion as to what GitOps is, eventually work towards ways to conformance and certification—so it's like you guys are doing with chaos engineering—and in an open-source community fashion. GitOps is basically a operating model for cloud-native infrastructure and applications. So, idea is that you can use the same patterns and you can use the same model to deploy and operate the underlying infrastructure as well as the workloads that are running on top of it.It's defined by four principles that might resonate as known in common for some with some caveats. So, the first principle is that your desired state, how you want your infrastructure and your workloads to look like is declarative. No, it's—you're not—there's a fundamental difference between the declarative and imperative. Imperative is you're giving instructions to reach a certain state. The current industry is just… defining the characteristics of that state, not the process by which you reached it.The current state should be immutable and should be versioned, and this is very much aligned with the whole idea of containers, which are immutable and are versioned, and the whole idea of the Gits, that if used… [unintelligible 00:26:05] if used following best practices is also immutable and versioned. So, your declared state should be versioned and immutable.it should be continuously reconciled through agents. In other words, it eliminates the human component; you are no longer executing manual jobs and you're no longer running imperative pipelines for the deployment component of your operation. You are allowing your [letting 00:26:41] agents do that for you, continuously and programmatically.And the fourth principle is, this is the only way by which you interact with the system. In other words it completely eliminates the human component from the operating model. So, for example, when I think about GitOps as a deployment mechanism, and for example, progressive delivery within the context of GitOps, I see a lot of… what's the word I'm looking for? Like, symbiosis.Jason: Yeah. Symbiosis?Leo: Yeah. Between chaos engineering, and this model of deployment. Because I think chaos engineering is also eliminating a human component; you're no longer letting humans exercise your system to find problems, you are executing those by agents, you are doing so with a declarative model, where you're declaring the attributes of the experiment and the expected outcome of that experiment, and you're defining the criteria by which you're going to abort that experiment. So, if you incorporate that model of automated, continuous validation of your solution through premeditated chaos, in a process of continuous reconciliation of your desired state, through automated deployment agents, then you have a really, really solid, reliable mechanism for the operation of cloud-native solutions.Ana: I was like, I think a lot what we've seen, I mean, especially as I sit in more CNCF stuff, is really trying to get a lot of our systems to be able to know what to do next before we need to interfere, so we don't have to wake up. So, between chaos engineering, between GitOps, between Keptn, [unintelligible 00:28:32] how is it that you can make the load of SRE and the DevOps engineer be more about making sure that things get better versus, something just broke and I need to go fix it, or I need to go talk to an engineer to go do a best practice because now those things are built into the system as a guardrail, or there's better mental models and things that are more accurate to real conditions that can happen to a system?Leo: Actually, I sidetracked. I never ended up talking more about the OpenGitOps Project and the GitOps Working Group. So, it's a community effort by the CNCF. So, it's open for contribution by everybody. You're all in the CNCF Slack, there is an OpenGitOps Slack channel there.And if you go to github.com/open-gitops, you'll be able to find ways to contribute. We are always looking to get more involvement from the community. This is also an evolving paradigm, which I think also resonates with chaos engineering.And a lot of its evolution is being driven by the use cases that are being discovered by the end-users of these technologies and the different patterns. Community involvement is very important. Industry involvement is very important. It would be fantastic and we're an open community, and I'd love to get to know more about what you're all doing with GitOps and what it means for you and how these principles apply to the challenges that your teams are running into, and the use cases that and problems spaces that you're having to deal with.Jason: I think that's a fantastic thing for our listeners to get involved in, especially as a new project that's really looking for the insight and the contribution from new members as it gets founded. As we wrap up, Leo, do you have any other projects that you want to share? How can people find you on the internet? Anything else that you want to plug?Leo: I love to meet people on these subjects that I'm very passionate about. So yes, you can find me on Twitter. I guess, it's easier to just type it, it's @murillodigital, but you'll find that in the show notes, I imagine. As well as my LinkedIn.I have to admit, I'm more of a LinkedIn person. I don't, I hope that doesn't age me or made me uncool, but I never figured out how to really work with Twitter. I'm more of a LinkedIn person, so you can find me there. I'm an organizer in the community in Costa Rica CNCF, and I run.So, for those that are Spanish speakers, I'm very much for promoting the involvement and openness of the cloud-native ecosystem to the Hispanic and Latin community. Because I think language is a barrier and I think we're coming from countries where a lot of us have struggled to basically get our head above water from lesser resources and difficult access to technology and information. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a huge amount of talent in the region. There is. And so, I run a—there's a recent initiative by the CNCF called cloud-native TV, which is we're ten shows that are streaming on Twitch.You go to cloudnative.tv, you'll see them. I run a show called Cloud Native LatinX, which is in Spanish. I invite people to talk about cloud-native technologies that are more cloud-native communities in the region.And my objective is twofold: I want to demonstrate to all Hispanics and all Latin people that they can do it, that we're all the same, doesn't matter if you don't speak the language. There is a whole bunch of people, and I am one of them that speak the language that are there, and we're there to help you learn, and support and help you push through into this community. Basically, anybody that's listening to come out and say these are actionable steps that I can take to move my career forward. So, it's every other Tuesday on cloudnative.tv, Cloud Native LatinX, if you want to hear and see more of me talking in Spanish. It's on cloudnative.tv. And the OpenGitOps Project, join in; it's open to the community. And that's me.Ana: Yes I love that shout-out to getting more folks, especially Hispanics and Latinx, be more involved in cloud and CNCF projects itself. Representation matters and folks like me and Leo come in from countries like Costa Rica, Nicaragua, we get to speak English and Spanish, we want to create more content in Spanish and let you know that you can learn chaos engineering in English and you can learn about chaos engineering in Spanish, Ingeniería de Caos. So, come on and join us. Well, thank you Leo. Muchisimas gracias por estar en el show de hoy, y gracias por estar llamando hoy desde Costa Rica, y para todos los que están oyendo hoy que también hablen español...pura vida y que se encuentren bien. Nos vemos en el próximo episodio.Leo: Muchas gracias, Ana, and thanks everybody, y pura vida para todo el mundo y ¡hagamos caos!Jason: For links to all the information mentioned, visit our website at gremlin.com/podcast. If you liked this episode, subscribe to the Break Things on Purpose podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform. Our theme song is called, “Battle of Pogs” by Komiku, and it's available on loyaltyfreakmusic.com.

The ABCs of behavior is an important tool to analyze whether a certain behavior is likely to happen again or not. The key here is that consequence matters. For OTs, it is possible to measure the effectiveness of interventions by hypothesizing and data-taking. Discussed today is the case of Johnny's rocking and some antecedent (environmental) interventions that could usher in permanent change and affect the consequences of this action. Also discussed today are ways to get assent from clients to help ensure that interventions will have favorable outcomes.  HIGHLIGHTS 02:18 Shoutout to the World Health Organization for developing Self-Help + 04:55 The ABCs: Is it reflexive behavior or is it sensory? 15:02 The consequence matters on whether a behavior will happen again 22:28 Hypothesizing can help OTs measure the effectiveness of interventions 29:20 Case study: Johnny's rocking and implementing antecedent interventions 36:02 Modifying ABCs to improve client progress 40:30 How to get assent from clients  GLOSSARY Operant behavior - This refers to behavior that can be modeled by its consequences. It often corresponds closely to behavior colloquially called voluntary or purposive. As this behavior is related to its consequences, it is said to be emitted rather than elicited. Antecedent intervention - A strategy to manipulate an environment prior to the occurrence of a behavior. This is utilized to increase the likelihood of the desired behavior to occur and to decrease the occurrence of maladaptive behavior. RESOURCES Join our The ABA and OT Podcast Facebook Group to get access to the following resources: Facebook group link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/397478901376425 EXTERNAL RESOURCES Scalable Psychological Interventions for People in Communities Affected by Adversity by the WHO Dr. Aditi the OT Website The Databased OT Facebook Group QUOTES 15:00 "The consequence matters. So when you're trying to determine why is a student doing this thing? Why is this occurring? The first question to look at is what is the consequence? It's the consequence that matters." 15:25 "If the behavior is something we want less of or there is a behavior we want more of, we need to look at what is occurring after behavior to either strengthen or weaken it." 18:01 "If you're going to put interventions in place and look at their effectiveness, don't do it immediately in the presence of behavior you don't want more of if it's potentially a pleasant consequence to that student. Do it prior to the behavior." 29:03 "Are they deprived of something or are they satiated on something? This motivating variable before the behavior, looking at the environment is very important to determine why the student is engaging." 41:54 "Ensuring that you are strengthening and reinforcing behavior that has a student engaged, that it's a pleasant task that's involved, and that great things happen when the student is engaged and involved in the activity."

Cognitively speaking since philosophy belongs in the lives of everyone and it helps us solve our problems whether mundane or abstract, it also helps us make better decisions by developing our critical thinking. It is because of this ethos that truth matters both to us as individuals and to society as a whole and as individuals, being truthful connotes that we can grow and mature, learning from our mistakes. For society, truthfulness makes social bonds, and lying and hypocrisy break them. Given the logistics of truth and critical thinking as an Author, Student of Film, Media Arts Specialist, License Cultural Practitioner and Publisher hypothesizing Whether A Camera Lens Behaves Like The Human Eye Vol.1 ISBN978-1-63877-848-6 is laid out for the purpose of thinking through its values and consequences which can be interpreted as a viral causality since there is no pre-determined outcome.HYPOTHESIZING WHETHER A CAMERA LENS BEHAVES LIKE THE HUMAN EYE © 2021 VOL.1 ISBN 978-1-63877-848-6WORKS CITED“masquerade, n. and adj.”, in OED Online , Oxford: Oxford University Press, December 2000; “masquerade, n.”, in Lexico, Dictionary.com; Oxford University Press, 2019–present.Gittens,William Anderson, Author, Cinematographer, Dip., Com., Arts. B.A. Media Arts Specialists’  Editor in Chief , License Cultural Practitioner, Publisher, Student of Film, CEO Devgro Media Arts Services®2015http://umich.edu/~umfandsf/symbolismproject/symbolism.html/E/eyes.html#:~:text=Eyes%20are%20probably%20the%20most,a%20western%20custom%20of%20honesty.http://www.projectlearnet.org/tutorials/concrete_vs_abstract_thinking.htmlhttps://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-physics/chapter/the-human-eye/#:~:text=The%20human%20eye%20is%20an%20organ%20that%20reacts%20to%20light,and%20the%20perception%20of%20depth.https://diffsense.com/diff/animate/inanimate#:~:text=When%20used%20as%20adjectives%2C%20animate,something%20that%20is%20not%20alive.https://digital-photography-school.com/12-myths-about-photography-and-photographers/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_photographyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimicryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimicryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroringhttps://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/why_imitation_is_at_the_heart_of_being_humanhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193743https://letstalkscience.ca/educational-resources/stem-in-context/eye-vs-camerahttps://letstalkscience.ca/educational-resources/stem-in-context/eye-vs-camera#:~:text=Because%20a%20camera%20has%20photoreceptors,has%20no%20photoreceptors%20at%20all.https://letstalkscience.ca/educational-resources/stem-in-context/eye-vs-camera#:~:text=In%20many%20ways%2C%20it%20is,of%20the%20world%3A%20a%20camera.https://medium.com/photography-secrets/whats-the-difference-between-a-camera-and-a-human-eye-a006a795b09fhttps://medium.com/the-mission/the-surprising-truth-about-why-we-tend-to-imitate-others-b15831070cd9#:~:text=A%20common%20human%20behavior%20classified,and%20we%20do%20it%20subconsciously.&text=As%20a%20rule%2C%20mirroring%20means,level%20of%20agreement%20between%20them.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30416392/https://web.cocc.edu/cagatucci/classes/hum211/CoursePack/culture.htm#:~:text=All%20cultures%20create%20and%20tell,and%20think%20about%20their%20world.  https://www.brides.com/story/what-is-mirroring-and-what-does-it-mean-for-your-marriage  https://www.britannica.com/science/photoreception/Structure-and-function-of-photoreceptors#:~:text=Photoreceptors%20are%20the%20cells%20in,rhodopsin%20or%20a%20related%20molecule.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/nickhobson/2017/12/11/3-nonverbal-behaviors-from-others-thSupport the show (http://www.buzzsprout.com/429292)

In gut health space, we will always hear and encounter stomach acid. But What is Stomach Acid? Is it even important? How will I know if I have a low Stomach acid? Should you be concerned on having a Low stomach acid?Join us as we discuss some of your burning questions about Low stomach acid such as:1. Low stomach Acid Self-testing2. Heidelberg test3.Hypothesizing using Symptoms and stool test4. Low stomach acid and nutrient digestion5. Symptoms of Low Stomach Acid6. Causes of Low Stomach Acid7.Supplementation of Betaine HCl8. Sharing the stories of their clientsSend us your questions through ibsfreedompod@gmail.com orConnect with us in Instagram @ibs.freedom.podcastFollow us on our different social media platforms-Instagram @amy_hollenkamp_rd@triangleguts-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TriangleGUTS/-Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWLC...-Website : https://www.infinityholistichealth.com

Where does creativity live in the brain, and why does it matter? We talk to Rex Jung, a clinical professor of neurosurgery at the University of New Mexico, a research scientist at the Mind Research Network, and a practicing clinical neuropsychologist in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Jung talks about how standard measurements of creativity correlate with the structure of the brain, and how the brain can “rewire” itself to take on challenging or unfamiliar tasks. This is especially important in our early years, but still effective as we grow older. TRANSCRIPT: Intro: 0:02 Inventors and their inventions. Welcome to Radio Cade the podcast from the Cade Museum for Creativity and Invention in Gainesville, Florida, the museum is named after James Robert Cade, who invented Gatorade in 1965. My name is Richard Miles. We’ll introduce you to inventors and the things that motivate them, we’ll learn about their personal stories, how their inventions work and how their ideas get from the laboratory to the marketplace. Richard Miles: 0:40 Where does creativity live in the brain and why does it matter? Welcome to Radio Cade. I’m your host Richard Miles today, I’m talking to Rex Jung, a clinical professor of neurosurgery at the University of New Mexico, a research scientist at the Mind Research Network and a practicing clinical neuropsychologist in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Dr. Jung studies, both brain disease and what the brain does well, a field of research known as positive neuroscience. Welcome to Radio Cade , Rex . Rex Jung: 1:09 Thanks for having me. Richard Miles: 1:10 So you have done a lot of fascinating research and a lot of very interesting areas, including traumatic brain injury, lupus, schizophrenia, intelligence, and creativity. So Rex, we can either make this the first of 18 episodes on your work, or we can pick one. So I say, let’s talk about creativity if that’s okay with you. Rex Jung: 1:27 Sounds good. Richard Miles: 1:29 So I took a look at some of your recent research on creativity. And one thing that jumped out to me as a layman, I don’t have any special expertise in the background was your use of tests to determine baseline levels of creativity. I noticed that you mentioned something called the creative achievement questionnaire, and you also use something called a musical creativity questionnaire. So we can start with what your working definition of creativity is, which I assume these things measure these tests measure, and then tell us, how were those tests developed? How do you know they’re accurate? And then how do they differ from other tests that have been around for instance, to test on divergent thinking? Rex Jung: 2:07 So at the onset, I should say that as a neuropsychologist, I’m very keenly aware of test reliability and validity. And the tests in creative cognition are universally somewhat crappy. That’s not a technical term, but it is a term that kind of captures the fact that we’ve only been trying to capture this construct in the last 50, 70 years, and only really aggressively trying to study this in the last 10 or 15. So we inherited measures that came to us from the past and the creative achievement questionnaire, as you mentioned, first is perhaps one of the better of these that it just measures your achievements in 10 different domains. It was a test created by Dr. Carson at Harvard, I believe and it really quantifies or attempts to quantify creative cognition across things from most generally in the sciences and the arts more specifically in things like inventions versus culinary arts. So it really quantifies things across those domains to answer a different part of your question. The definition is not one of mine of creativity, but one inherited from Dr. Stein in the 1950s who defined creativity as the production of something novel and useful. And that dichotomy is really interesting looking at novelty on the one hand utility on the other. And there arises from that brain mechanisms that could tap novelty versus utility. And finally you’re mentioned of divergent thinking is one of the measures of novelty generation that has been used since the 1950s. And that is okay, but not the only measure I’m hopeful as we move forward in this field, that we can develop better metrics and measures of creative cognition. Richard Miles: 4:06 Well, that helps a lot Rex and creativity on one hand, it’s very popular in that people like to talk about creativity in terms of musicians and artists and what makes them tick. But it seems like there are also a lot of fairly common misconceptions about how creativity actually works in the brain like, Oh, well, creative people, they’re using their right brain and it’s uncreative people using their left brain and that sort of stuff. How definitively does the research show that those conceptions misconceptions are either serious or inaccurate or flat out wrong? The way it works in the brain for most people sort of a black box, right? They just think something happens in there . Some of us are creative, some are not. What does the research show in terms of how it actually is working neurologically? Rex Jung: 4:49 I’ll correct a misconception that just arose in your description of that. Some of us are creative and some of us are not. I think, in my research and did my hypothesizing about creativity. It is clear to me and research our research and other research supports this, that creativity is a type of problem solving. And so everyone has to have that at some level. It’s either more or less of it. And if creativity is a type of problem solving for very low incident problems, it is valuable in the fact that we are able to think outside the box and come up with something novel and useful, that would address problem. That is less prevalent in our day-to-day life. I like to think about creativity as being somewhat dichotomous, but overlapping with a construct of intelligence where it’s also a type of problem solving, but it’s problem solving for things that happen on a more regular basis, as opposed to once in a hundred years with a hundred year flood, for example, what am I going to do? My house is going to be underwater. I need to figure out something really novel and useful to get out of this particular. So there are a number of what we call neuro mythologies about creativity. And you mentioned one of them that creativity resides in the right brain or right hemisphere. This arises from work with neurosurgeon theory, I believe, and a neuroscientist who looked at patients that had epilepsy and they separate the corpus callosum, which is the central connecting structures between the left and right hemisphere. And they discovered that the left and right brains function somewhat differently. The left is more logical and linear and reading and math tend to be localized in that have a hemisphere. And then the right hemisphere is more synthetic and adaptive and some artistic capabilities might reside more over there. So that is where this neural mythology of left brain right brain or right brain locus of creativity emerged from our research has found that, and others have found that it takes nearly your whole brain to be effectively creative. And it doesn’t reside in one hemisphere or one lobe of the brain, but it’s an integration of different parts of the brain that are critical to creative success. Another myth is that you have to be extremely intelligent to be creative. A genius, Einstein and Newton, Picasso, and Michael Jordan are particular examples of genius in their particular domains. But as I tried to dispel the myth that you somewhat articulated earlier, everyone has creative capacity. It’s, it’s a matter of more or less than how you use it, what domain you use it, but creativity in my conceptualization is a critical problem solving capacity. Another myth is that you have to be kind of crazy to be creative, that there has to be some sort of neuro pathology in order to express creativity. And , and we have every number of examples of the mad genius from Vincent van Gogh to John Nash, who won the Nobel prize in economics. The movie A Beautiful Mind was formed after there is an equal number and greater number of the averse that no hint of neuropathology is associated with the creativity of Michelangelo or Edison. So these neuro myths prevail because we continue to view creativity as somehow elusive and a capacity that is given to us from the gods when actually it is a critical component of everyday thinking. Richard Miles: 8:26 So a lot of progress has been made generally in the field of neuroscience, particularly since the development of the functional MRI. What in particular strikes you say from the last couple of years in the field of creativity in neuroscience, that you’re excited about, that points to deeper or higher levels of understanding of how creativity operates in the brain, this sort of stuff that hasn’t made it yet into the popularized science articles. Rex Jung: 8:49 I’m most excited, perhaps about this studies of interplay between intelligence and creativity. There have been issues in neuro-psychology and one coming out in the journal of intelligence, which explore the interplay or overlap between intelligence and creativity, because my hypothesis is centered around these both being problem solving capacities. It’s important to understand where there’s overlap and where there is different . So I’m most excited about neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies, which look at brain networks that underlie intelligent problem solving as opposed to, or in addition to brain networks that are involved in creative problem solving. And I think that will really give us some insight into whether these problem solving capacities are rather similar. If one is hierarchically located above the other, like intelligence is very important and creativity comes from intelligence, or if they’re rather disparate or different from each other. I think that is exciting research. Richard Miles: 9:52 I’m guessing that a lot of people are looking at research or your type of research that you’re doing and seeing, does this have useful implication for, for instance, educators in particular at the preschool and primary school levels, or what are your preliminary conclusions or findings in terms of, are there ways that kids learn that perhaps should be changed with an eye towards enhancing their ability to learn more creatively or be more creative? Rex Jung: 10:17 I do have some preliminary ideas about this. It is very hard to translate neuroscientific research to actual life, but I think that there are some preliminary indications that there are things that we might consider doing differently. One thing that I usually recommend is adequate time for downtime that lets your brain meander or cogitate or think about ideas in a very non-linear way. And so the best example I have for this is for my own life where I think one of the most valuable classes for me in elementary school was recess. And so recess, what is it just play or is there something else going on? And I think there’s something very important going on where people are taking the knowledge that they’ve learned in the classroom in their life and being more playful with it and more nonlinear with it. And so that downtime, I think is incredibly important. I know caring stories from the students and teachers, our pre COVID educational paradigm was centered around a lot of homework and a lot of knowledge acquisition, which is an important aspect of creativity and intelligence and learning, but not the only one. There has to be time to put ideas together in novel and useful ways that requires a different approach and requires a more relaxed approach than is provided by just drilling towards knowledge, acquisition and testing. Richard Miles: 11:52 So may be an example of actually where popular consumption gets it , right. When you think about these stories of the Eureka, you know, Archimedes in the bathtub where after a period of relaxation, or like you said, the mind wandering and meandering, they hit upon, or the circuits come together and they have this insight, but obviously based on knowledge, they already possessed, right? Most of the people have these insights are happen to be experts in the field. Rex Jung: 12:13 Yeah, you have to have some thing in your brain to put together in a novel and useful way. So there is a knowledge acquisition part that is critically important to gather the raw materials necessary to be creative. But then Archimedes is perhaps the best example of sitting in the bathtub and figuring out how you would measure the amount of gold and a crown and water dispersion and Eureka. I have it where you have figured out a way to measure something in a very non-intuitive way. And so that downtime, and oftentimes people describe this arising from taking a bath or a long walk or run or doing something that is very non-cognitive where ideas are jumbling around and merging in unique ways and even sleep where they can come up with an idea that otherwise would have been elusive. Richard Miles: 13:02 So one problem I face is that my wife has all of her creative ideas, right I’m about to go to sleep. And she wants to tell me about them. And then we’ve learned how to solve that problem. I say, no, tell me in the morning, because I can’t deal with your creative idea right now. Rex Jung: 13:15 It’s interesting because she is telling you those ideas right before she falls asleep. When her mind is in a very relaxed state, when the day’s tasks are behind her, frankly, a perfect time to explore those. But perhaps she should explore those on her own because there’s no one size fits all. Richard Miles: 13:35 Yeah. The unfair thing is she can tell me the idea and fall asleep and I solved the problem in my head and I can’t fall asleep. Rex Jung: 13:40 Yeah. You’ll take up that idea and really start working it and then not be able to go to sleep. So, and that’s an important thing to consider too, is that there are different creative styles and some people really want to offload if you will, those creative ideas before she falls asleep, but then other people really want to work them and form them and look at them from different angles. And that’s a creative process too, is to really be deliberative about that creative process. And there’s a major theories that talk about spontaneous versus more deliberate creativity. And it sounds like you and your wife are matched well and that you have complimentary styles, but she should perhaps write those down and then you can start working on them in the morning. Richard Miles: 14:26 Well , I was going to say that most of my creative thoughts used to happen when I’d go running and an idea would pop in my head, but it just occurred to me that for the last year or so, I listened to podcasts instead while I run and I actually don’t have as many creative ideas. Right. Cause my mind is distracted listening to the story or two people talk. Rex Jung: 14:42 It’s working on information. Yeah. And on your internal process. Richard Miles: 14:47 So Rex , one thing I think you can probably say about Americans in general is that there’s this tremendous thirst for anything related to self-improvement and self-health so in the realm of creativity, sometimes h ere versions of this, particularly people my age mid to late fifties, I know you can rewire your brain. You can teach yourself new things, you stave off dementia and so on. And again, I’m not asking you to speculate too much, but is there anything in your findings that provide ammunition for those who say, Hey, we can all rewire our brains, become Picasso, or is it more i n the direction of, sorry about a year or two old and s et i n your age. So just keep playing golf and watching reruns. Is there any way for those later in life, let’s say m iddle-aged and beyond, do they still have a significant ability to increase their level of creativity? Rex Jung: 15:32 Yeah. So I think neither of those things are true in their extreme. You can neither massively rewire your brain to be something that it has not developed to be over decades, nor is it hopeless on the other side of the spectrum. But I think some middle ground is probably appropriate. I mean, we know that the brain is incredibly plastic when we are infants and learning things and acquiring new information and forming neural networks that underlie language, visual process as motor processing that decreases over the lifespan and it decreases in known way is the capacity to change your brain by changing your mind. And while you can modulate your brain function through concerted effort, that becomes harder over time. So if you are making a decision to make a major change in your life in your fifties and you and I sound like we’re the same age, although you’re quite a bit less gray than I, I would say it’s going to take a bit more effort and a concerted effort to do that. And that while the fantasy or hype about neuro-plasticity would imply that we can completely change our brain by doing this different thing. That’s probably more a factor of one to 3% change in terms of cognitive capacity. So I would encourage people at any age. And I think as our brains change in our fifties and up there is more of an opportunity to make more disparate connections than we would when we were younger. And we had many more tasks in front of us. You were talking about listening to podcasts on your runs and yeah, that changes your run from a free-wheeling kind of associative process to a knowledge acquisition process. And it’s going to be significantly harder to do that creative thing when you are consuming the creative product of other people and learning. So it’s important to do both learning and creative expression simultaneously, but that has to be balanced. And in older people like you and me , I think that’s really critical to set aside time to do nothing or do less or not acquire knowledge anymore . But extrapolate that be my best advice. Richard Miles: 17:50 I’ve read a couple of good articles in the popular press . I’m sure you’ve probably seen them too. Hypothesizing the connection between boredom and creativity and particularly in young kids, right? When your bored is where you think of perhaps a fantasy game, or you tell a story to yourself or make up a story because you just want occupy your mind. But if your mind is occupied, as you said, with a TV show or a video game or whatnot, you’re probably less likely to find the need to create something in your own head . Rex Jung: 18:16 Yeah. Boredom is kind of the bane of our modern existence. People talk about it as a bad thing, but it actually is an important aspect of our lives that force us, or invite us to use our brains in ways that can transcend our current experience. We can imagine. I mean, I can go anywhere in my mind’s eye from countries that I visited in the past to traveling to different planets in the galaxy. I can imagine just about anything and boredom invites us to use our imaginative ability to create different realities and create different ideas that might not have existed before. Richard Miles: 18:57 So I guess I have to be careful how far I take this example because then of course people go, well, I’m not gonna listen to your podcast because then you’re going to distract me from thinking great thoughts . So we’ve got to keep this within reason. Rex Jung: 19:08 Well, it’s a both thing. Like I said, I listened to the podcast to acquire knowledge, but then find some recess time to do your own thing and to put those ideas that you’ve acquired together in novel and useful ways. And I think that is the correct balance as far as the literature would suggest. Richard Miles: 19:25 So Rex, I like to ask all my guests a little bit about themselves and their background. And you’re originally from Boulder, Colorado, your mother was a technical writer. Your dad was a hospital administrator. So first question, what was it like to grow up in Boulder? I’ve only been once or maybe twice. And what was your first clue that you’d be spending your career studying the brain? Rex Jung: 19:43 Well, that’s a big question, but I loved growing up in Boulder. Boulder was a fantastic rich environment of very diverse kind of experiences from Buddhism and the Naropa Institute high-tech centers of engineering and NCAR is their National Center for Atmospheric Research. I mean just a real smorgasbord, if you will, of opportunities to see different ways that one might want to spend one’s intellectual life. Unfortunately, I chose as my undergraduate degree. Well , I don’t know if it’s unfortunate. It’s hard to say I’d studied finance business and got a degree and went into the business world and was not super happy about the intellectual opportunities for me in the world that I had chosen. So I quit that job started volunteering for Special Olympics with friends of mine, and really became interested in bringing structure and function in brains that work well and brains that work differently and really started to pursue the path of, well , you know, what’s going on in these brains and what is happening to create an individual who is intellectually disabled, but has incredible artistic capabilities. And I’m not talking about the art that your children produce that you put up on the refrigerator, but Alonzo Clemons, who is an autistic savant, creating just massively, technically detailed representations of animals that will sell for thousands and thousands of dollars. These brains are fascinating in their variability. And I wanted to go into studies and a career that looked at that. And that’s kind of what brought me here all these many years later, Richard Miles: 21:29 Growing up in Colorado, where you outdoorsy, were you a ski bum? Did you do a lot of hiking or how has that sort of influenced you? Rex Jung: 21:35 I wasn’t in anything bum, but I really enjoy camping and going out on my own and camping on the continental divide in Colorado and did a lot of that. So a lot of time to think I would bring, I have this somewhat embarrassing book , uh , memory of bringing Dante’s Inferno to read while I was camping on the continental divide. And then this lightning storm almost killed me and I thought I was going to go straight to hell. So , uh , I mean really a lot of time to be by myself, to look at the stars to revel in natural beauty of Colorado. I skied, I hiked, I ran , I did all of the things, but I wasn’t a bum of any of those. I wasn’t an expert in really any of those, but I just really loved growing up in Colorado and a very fun memories. Now that I’ve brought to New Mexico, a lot of natural beauty here, fewer people, I’m an outdoors guy, I guess, at my root . Richard Miles: 22:31 Yeah. One thing we always tell foreign friends for visitors, you really have not experienced the United States unless you’ve had a chance to drive out West long distances for long periods of time. And then you really appreciate the profound nature of our country in terms of physical beauty and so on. Rex Jung: 22:46 I totally agree. And most people who visit us from foreign countries spend time in LA or New York, or maybe Florida at Disney World, but there’s a vast opportunity to explore something on a more meandering route through the middle parts of the country. And the West is certainly got a big place in my heart. Richard Miles: 23:04 So Rex final question that will allow you to be a little bit philosophical here, a lot philosophical if you’d like, but being a pioneer researcher sounds really cool to most people, but by definition people in your field or people like you are studying things that haven’t been studied very much and reaching conclusions that may seriously undermine conventional wisdom. So you’re at the age, as you said, where you start getting asked for advice by younger researchers or students or so on, and who may be in the process of picking a career or picking a field, what do you say about that subject or that potential obstacle? That there are a lot of fields now, which they’re going to probably encounter particularly research fields and kind of resistance or criticism of some sort. How do you prepare them for that? That it’s not just all pulling down awards and citations and accolades. Some of it can be serious resistance or criticism. Rex Jung: 23:53 It’s a very good point. And I can’t say that my journey has been peaches and cream throughout the way. I mean, I was told by my graduate advisor, I was studying intelligence at the time that that would destroy my career. I should stop that immediately and pick something more conventional. Otherwise I would not be a successful researcher. I’m glad I didn’t take that advice. It’s good advice. There’s two paths that I’ve seen in being a successful researcher. One is a very deliberate and somewhat obsessive path of just hammering out the details of a concept that has been discovered previously. This is called normal science. And I think a lot of good work comes out of that. And it depends on your personality style. If you’re a very conscientious and somewhat agreeable person, you will do very well in writing grant. After grant, after grant, that gets rejected until the one gets accepted and you can do very good work in that area, but you have to be extremely conscientious and extremely agreeable because it is a field that rewards conformity. There’s another path. And I think it’s the path that I’ve chosen. I may be deluding myself, but it is a path where you really identify what you feel passionate about and what you feel excited about studying. And these are more paradigm shifting ideas or revolutionary ideas from the Thomas Kuhn nomenclature. And it can be very rewarding, but it’s a less successful path. You will always have to fight against opposition and granting and funding agencies that are not willing to take risks. But if you have excitement and passionate about your work and less conscientiousness and agreeable is frankly, you can succeed. And I think I’ve had some measure of success in my career that has been rather unconventional. You should always have in your back pocket studying something conventionally . And you talked about my studies in traumatic brain injury and lupus and schizophrenia, but there should be some passionate involvement with these issues that allow you to go back and forth between your true passion and something that keeps you funded. So I think those are the two major paths for researchers. Neither of them are right or wrong. Both of them involve incredible amounts of work, but one involves something that you really get excited to wake up every day and do. And the other involves being extremely persistent over long periods of time. Richard Miles: 26:29 So your secret is to be unpleasant and annoying. Rex Jung: 26:34 I’m sticking with that. Your words, not mine. Richard Miles: 26:37 I’m sorry. I , I, that was a cheap shot. No, I was going to say Rex. So the way you described it, we interview a lot inventors and entrepreneurs on the show. And when we ask them, like, why did you stick with this idea or this business? And a lot of times they say a version of, you know, if I didn’t believe in it, it would be too hard at a certain point in their journey. They could objectively say or have said to them, this isn’t worth it. And so the number of said across different types of fields that, you know, it’s just resilience. It’s the ability to just hang in there and keep going is what explains my success. Now they’re all a bunch of other factors, obviously that contribute, but at that’s refusal to give up, but not be delusional about it, right? Rex Jung: 27:16 I started to have a trickle of success. And then I had a stream of success. And then I had a flood of success by identifying this area that hadn’t been explored before creative neuroscience and really starting to work the problem. And I felt really passionate about it and no NIH funding out there for that. There’s very little NSF funding. I found the Templeton Foundation, which was willing to fund this crazy idea that I had, and it yielded dozens of publications and other grants. And now a new generation is taking the mantle and really starting to explore the limits of creativity, neuroscience. And I couldn’t be more pleased with my stubbornness. Richard Miles: 27:57 Well, and it really points to the importance of seed funding, right? Again, you see similar parallels in the business world. If one person can manage to make significant progress, then they themselves might not reap all the rewards or the riches, but they have taken the knowledge or taken the research to another level so that other people can then capitalize on that. We had one of our inventors say, you know, the most important thing about a patent is not that you’re going to be able to cash in the patent and get rich, but you have added to the body of knowledge. So you’ve made things in a sense, easier for people coming after you because you’ve solved a piece of the puzzle and they can now use your research to maybe go on and carry that down the road. And once they put it like that, I go, yeah , that makes total sense. Because most researchers who get patents, don’t get rich. Rex Jung: 28:44 I have a patent, I’m not rich. Richard Miles: 28:46 There you go. But yet they know that they have solidly advanced their field of knowledge and that other people can use this in a constructive way, may use in a constructive way. Rex Jung: 28:54 It couldn’t be better said you really are carving out an idea space that you know, that you can’t solve yourself. And that will rely on others to take up the mantle . And I’m very happy in this field and both intelligence and creativity, that a number of people will become excited about this area of research and find it to be productive in terms of their grant applications and scholarly activity. And it’s enormously rewarding to know that I and other people was a part in starting this process. Richard Miles: 29:27 Well, Rex , it’s a great note to end on. And as I said, this is actually just part one of an 18 part series in the lifetimes of Rex Jung, really enjoyed having on the show. I hope we can have you back at some point, I learned a lot and I hope this was fun for you. Rex Jung: 29:39 It was great. Thank you for the opportunity. I really enjoy talking to you in this audience is particularly important with entrepreneurs and idea generators. I think it’s a perfect opportunity. Thanks. Richard Miles: 29:50 Thank you. Outro: 29:52 Radio Cade is produced by the Cade Museum for Creativity and Invention located in Gainesville Florida. Richard Miles is the podcast host and Ellie Thom coordinates inventor interviews, podcasts are recorded at Heartwood Soundstage and edited and mixed by Bob McPeak. The radio Cade theme song was produced and performed by Tracy Collins and features violinist Jacob Lawson.

Welcome back to another IELTS Writing Task video, and today I'm going to be focusing, again, on opinion essays. Because I have a student on my Patreon who I'm coaching, I decided to do something that pertains to who's on my membership. So, let's go over different types of linking devices and an opinion essay that scored an overall 7.0 band. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/arseniosesllearningPodcast on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7hdzplWx6xB8mhwDJYiP6fPodcast on ListenNote: https://www.listennotes.com/c/778cf3cfd2564ba5b01f693bfebc96de/arsenio-s-esl-podcast/Podcast on CastBox: https://castbox.fm/channel/Arsenio's-ESL-Podcast-id1251433?country=usCalendar - https://calendly.com/arseniobuck/teaching-coaching-for-1-hourFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/Arseniobuck/?ref=bookmarksYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIzp4EdbJVMhhSnq_0u4ntAWebsite: https://thearseniobuckshow.com/Q & A: ArsenioBuck@icloud.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/arsenio-buck-9692a6119/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thearseniobuckshow/?hl=enBuzz sprout: https://www.buzzsprout.com/165390Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/arseniosesllearning)

Our heroes find the goblins' stolen treasure. Do they take it for themselves or complete their quest?

Support Topic Lords on Patreon and get episodes a week early! (https://www.patreon.com/topiclords) Lords: * Shane is a Jesuit Regent who used to make video games. * https://twitter.com/OptimistPanda * Donate to the Jesuit Refugee Service: https://jrs.net/donate * Nathan makes games mostly about jumping and shooting 2D monsters. * https://twitter.com/MommysBestGames * http://mommysbestgames.com/ Topics: * Beforeigners (Norwegian TV show about refugees from different historical periods showing up in present-day) * Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASr0n5LnWnU * Curating your child's entertainment so they grow up with good taste * I spent half an hour watching someone solve a Sudoku and it was amazing * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKf9aUIxdb4 * Brandon asks: "Taking care of children vs taking care of pets" * Other jobs game designers would do well performing, after they leave game dev * History of changing worldviews -- not just Darwin, but things like the Big Bang and Continental Drift were originally seen as crackpot fringe theories Microtopics: * Saying your names at the beginning of the podcast and activating your wonder twin powers. * Quality inventive gameplay-driven entertainment. * Doing an earnest plug for once. * Figuring out how to make games for someone other than gamers. * Your game dev heroes being in their fifties and chasing success they had in their twenties. * Taking a vow of poverty and annoying off your wife and child. * Needing to find a patron because your art is not commercially viable. * No longer having your finger on the pulse of indie games. * Assuming the internet will be all over a particular TV series but somehow there are not endless memes about it. * Vikings apparating into modern Oslo and and solving a murder mystery. * The show about Vikings solving a modern-day murder mystery somehow not incorporating The Immigrant Song. * The American remake of Beforeigners where it's still about vikings so the protagonists can be white. * Finding out that a game is only four hours long and asking if it could be two hours instead. * Introducing video games to your child in order of release so they develop a taste for the classics. * Figuring out how to introduce your child to the Internet without ruining them. * Installing an internet proxy to protect your child from depraved porn by replacing it with videos of normal people having normal sex. * Today's teens playing Bushido Blade and discovering that it has a pocket sand button. * The classic game history situations. * Wanting your child to like all the hobbies you think are boring. * Watching a man repeatedly astonish himself at his own ability to solve a puzzle. * Feeling like you are in conversation with the puzzle designer. * Watching a movie over and over again. * Taking the smallest possible step when a problem seems impossible. * One of those Master Class videos if the person was discovering that they were a master while making the video. * A five year old taking the family car to California to buy a Lamborghini with the $3 in his pocket. * Feeling your family tree stretching out forwards into the future and behind you into the past. * Watching your child grow agency and opinions and knowing it's your responsibility to shape them. * You and the cat enjoying each other's company while the cat doesn't die. * Your kid doing something bad and everybody looking at you. * Cheering when your child goes down the stairs correctly. * Game design teaching you to see the world as systems. * Studying economics at an academic level and feeling like you're turning our game design skills inside out. * Trying to convince people outside of game development that being a game developer has taught you anything meaningful. * Being failed up to a level design role because anyone can scrub out a tile map. * Level designers getting more respect when it started requiring technical chops. * Needing a web page and getting your nephew to do it rather than paying an expensive consultant, because frankly 99% of people can't tell the difference. * Trying to write your own CSS renderer because you don't want to just make it a web page. * Trying to convince your friends that you were once a big shot in the game dev world. * The Societate Jesu having an incredible faction progression. * Giving people progressively cooler titles instead of raises. * Getting an extra year of being a priest before you die. * Doing a cool thing while you're alone and getting bummed out that nobody saw it. * Trying to throw fruits and vegetables as close as possible to the ceiling without actually hitting it. * Hating doing marketing so much that you invent a project where the whole point is that it's a secret and you'll never promote it. * How South America kind of fits right into Africa. * Hypothesizing continental drift and the scientific community telling you to fuck right off. * The lost continent of Lemuria. * Fringe scientific theories only gaining traction when existing scientists die. * Taking comfort in the fact that how people in the past were wrong but what we believe now is definitely correct and we'll never have to change our minds. * Being presented with contrary evidence and dying on the spot. * The most delicious bolus. * Eating cookie dough rather than ruining it by putting it in the oven. * The variety of textures and flavors of drinking milk and then eating cookies. (Not dipping the cookies in milk.) * The worldview shift that leads you to change your handle from Cynical Panda to Optimist Panda. * Playing Bomberman '93 with your nine year old and eventually having to explain to him that 93 is your dad's age. * An alternate-history Spock-with-a-goatee video game console. * Living in your house for 30 years and suddenly discovering three additional rooms. * Buying a NES and SNES classic even though you've been playing those games in emulation since the 90s.

BREAKING BANKS - EPISODE 330: Life Before and After Social Distancing For the first half of this episode, we travel back to a simpler time before the mass disruption of normality from the COVID-19 pandemic-- just 4 weeks ago. Greg Palmer spoke with JP Nicols in late February about the tech-driven advancements he is seeing on the frontlines of innovation from the Finovate stage and contrasts that to consumer adoption trends. In the second half we find ourselves in a world where social distancing is the new normal. Scarlett Sieber from CCG Catalyst Consulting Group reflects on the obstacles the financial services industry and fintechs are currently facing and will continue to face in the weeks and months to come.   TOPICS DISCUSSED: [2:30] Greg Palmer discusses Finovate Europe in Berlin, where 5 of the 6 winners for best in show were all customer facing technologies.   [3:30] Fintechs are recognizing in order to be attractive to financial institutions they have to meet the customer base’s needs and provide a meaningful service.   [5:40] Greg Palmer points out that financial institution employees must have a positive experience with the technology in order to help drive digital adoption.   [6:30] There are a massive number of challenger banks popping up around Europe, how many can the market support?   [9:00] Open banking opens the door to allow challengers to come in and take on traditional financial institutions, is there still a lot of opportunities in this arena?   [18:20] The Finovate podcast has special programming for International Women’s Day. [20:00] JP Nichols joined Greg Palmer on the Finovate podcast recently to talk about the gap between the technology adoption curve versus the hype curve.   [37:05] Scarlett Sieber discusses the broad impact COVID-19 has had on her personal and professional life and how New York City feels a little apocalyptic.   [39:00] The issue being put on the back burner, Scarlett Sieber believes, is solving real customer pain points and problems. This will be the focus of financial institutions moving forward beyond the coronavirus.   [40:13] Showing revenue from a ROI and profit perspective is going to be tremendously important.   [45:45] Hypothesizing that the number of fintechs that will be interested in the accelerator model will increase dramatically.   [50:01] The coronavirus pandemic might be the push that will get consumers more comfortable utilizing digital banking features like investments and payments.   GUESTS: Greg Palmer @GregPalmer47 host of @Finovate Scarlett Sieber @ScarlettSieber @ccgcatalyst   RESOURCES MENTIONED: https://www.ccg-catalyst.com/ https://n26.com/ https://horizonfin.tech/ https://finovate.com/ https://finovate.com/startup-booster/ https://provoke.fm/show/finovate/   SPONSERS: Fiverr @fiverr CoMotion @UWCoMotion Novae Miles Card @WeAreNovae Theragun @theragun Breaking Banks is the #1 global fintech radio show and podcast, created by Brett King. Tune in for a look at how technology and customer behavior will bring about more changes in banking in the next 10 years, than in the last 200 years. Listen every Thursday at 3pm eastern time, noon pacific on the VoiceAmerica Business Channel. Subscribe at Provoke.fm to hear the show nearly 2 million listeners from 72 countries are raving about.

On this slow news week, host Alberto Calderon discusses the latest Dave Filoni comments, the controversy surrounding early copies of The Rise of Skywalker novelization and Instagram reports that The Mandalorian season 2 has wrapped filming. We also take a few minutes to talk about episode 3 of The Clone Wars: On the Wings of Keeradaks. We Hypothesize in Hyperspace by speculating if the currently announced The High Republic books are the basis for the next set of Star Wars movies and which of the announced and rumored directors attached to Star Wars are best suited for each story. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Support Topic Lords on Patreon and get episodes a week early! (https://www.patreon.com/topiclords) Lords: * John is excited to be a Topic Lord * JP does stuff at http://vectorpoem.com/ Topics: * 1:36 Horses will climb stairs but can't get back down again. * http://www.firecritic.com/2009/08/18/fire-pole-or-sliding-chute/ * CLOP: http://www.foddy.net/CLOP.html * 12:13 Do you get enough sleep? If so, how? * 21:36 The ad for a movie sequel that was the entirety of the previous movie in the series. * The Wendy's tabletop RPG: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/10/dd-licious-wendys-now-has-a-tabletop-rpg-and-the-villain-is-frozen-beef/ * Too Many Cooks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrGrOK8oZG8 * Bandersnatch, the semi-interactive Black Mirror thing on Netflix: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackMirror%3ABandersnatch * Adaptation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptation(film) * The weird trailer for Identity that preceded Adaptation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8fjyxM7DgU * 35:34 How much work would it take to insert a fictional person into the historical record? * Fall; or, Dodge in Hell - A novel by Neal Stephenson about near-future technological advancements like uploading your consciousness to the cloud and curating your online existence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall;or,Dodgein_Hell * 49:18 John's recurring dream about seeing the wrong image and ending all levels of reality Microtopics: * Lord enthusiasm. * Thinking of Ghostbusters because you can't imagine a firefighter. * Foraging for oats on the top floor of a fire station. * Installing a pole because your infant son can't descend stairs. * Finding a horse in a tree. * Playing CLOP to learn empathy for the descending horse. * Replacing a spiral staircase with a normal staircase. * The entire city burning down because the firefighters can't get past the horse that's stuck on the landing. * Becoming a morning person because of your government job. * Your child possibly loving the daycare lady more than he loves you. * Taking melatonin because you don't have the discipline for not looking at screens before bed. * The shitty dreams of melatonin boot camp. * Gnawing on the melatonin and leaving it on the nightstand for next time. * Your body getting stuck on a particular sleep schedule long past its relevance. * Hypothesizing how much long-lasting damage you did with your teenage sleep habits. * Focusing better because everyone else is asleep. * Working until 4am because you're being so productive. * Not knowing how ads work because you have an ad-blocker installed. * Finding about how ads work from an 11 year old. * Your alternate reality self who enjoys a good advertisement now and again. * Maintaining the pace of film trailers for over an hour. * Mistaking the trailer before the movie as being part of the movie. * Nobody being fooled by your fake trailer because people don't watch movies in theaters any more. * Avoiding watching Bandersnatch because you're a completionist. * The technical difficulties of adding late choice points to an otherwise linear film. * Being nostalgic for old UIs of web services. * Finding a web page that hasn't changed in 15 years. * Finding a web page that looks 15 years old but also has a mobile style sheet. * Editing an innocuous fact on Wikipedia that nobody will bother to fact-check. * Asking to view a historical document and sneaking in a quill pen and inkwell to modify it. * Citing your doctored document on Wikipedia. * Befriending a history professor and asking them to mention your fake Kansas senator in a published paper. * Falsifying movie running times just because you can get away with it. * Citing an obscure magazine as your source on Wikipedia because nobody will bother to check. * Clinging to the scraps of the past that you've salvaged from eBay and garage sale VHS tapes. * Poor documentation of pop culture leading to compelling mysteries. * Drowning true information with false information. * The downside of having a unique Google string. * Having repercussions on all levels of nested reality. * Dreams as really lazy storytelling. * Remembering facts without remembering their origin. * Getting stuck opening a door to mask dream loading time. * Making up any old bullshit and being convinced it's a Beatles rarity. * Desperately fleeing from the "The End" title card. * Realizing your dream is actually just the plot of The Neverending Story.

To celebrate the life of the legendary Formula 1 driver Ayrton Senna, 25 years to the day of his tragic death, we are re-releasing this bonus episode. In this episode, Peter and med school colleague (and brilliant psychiatrist) Paul Conti reminisce on their favorite moments in Formula 1 history, their deep admiration for the late Ayrton Senna, and the remarkable careers of their favorite drivers. Paul also helps to illuminate the psychological components that made the luminary drivers great, and the cautionary lessons we can take from their incredible lives. We discuss: Who is Ayrton Senna? [3:47]; How Senna’s death changed the sport [9:52]; The 80s & 90s: a remarkable era of Formula 1 [12:57]; Hypothesizing what caused Senna’s fatal crash [17:47]; Comparing Stewart and Senna, their incredible bravery, and what lessons we can learn from them [23:32]; Best documentaries on racing, and some of Senna’s best moments [31:02]; Gilles Villeneuve, Stefan Bellof, and some of the other greats [39:17]; Why Senna is widely acknowledged as the best of all time [46:17]; Great rivalries and personalities [49:32]; Rendezvous, a high-speed drive through Paris [56:52]; and More. Learn more at www.PeterAttiaMD.com Connect with Peter on Facebook | Twitter | Instagram.

Episode one thirty one sees Australia's own video game Justice League unite to share their experiences (both good and bad) with Red Dead Online. They also do battle with: - Bag dramas from the Fallout 76 collectors editions, is nylon a worthy canvas substitute? - Hypothesizing about The Game Awards - Nintendo cancelling their YouTube Creators Program - Rocksteady NOT making a Superman video - Who Am I? *Plus lots more gaming related banter!!

In this bonus episode, Peter and med school colleague (and brilliant psychiatrist) Paul Conti reminisce on their favorite moments in Formula 1 history, their deep admiration for the late Ayrton Senna, and the remarkable careers of their all-time favorite drivers. Paul also helps to illuminate the psychological components that made the luminary drivers great, and the cautionary lessons we can take from their incredible lives.   We discuss: Ayrton Senna [3:45]; How Senna’s death changed the sport [9:50]; The 80s & 90s: a remarkable era of Formula 1 [12:55]; Hypothesizing what caused Senna’s fatal crash [17:45]; Comparing Stewart and Senna, their incredible bravery, and what lessons we can learn from them [23:30]; Best documentaries on racing, and some of Senna’s best moments [31:00]; Gilles Villeneuve, Stefan Bellof, and some of the other greats [39:15]; Why Senna is widely acknowledged as the best of all time [46:15]; Great rivalries and personalities [49:30]; Rendezvous, a high-speed drive through Paris [56:50]; and More. Learn more at www.PeterAttiaMD.com Connect with Peter on Facebook | Twitter | Instagram.

In this episode of the MYD Earth Show, we speak to a Namibian Artist whose research into the origins of the Brandberg White Lady has lead to an interesting hypothesis. Sharing his opinion as an artist, Linus Malherbe, has drawn deductions based on artistic style that offer an interesting opinion to this world-renowned piece of art’s origins.

This week in anguish: - The end of Brock's season might as well be the end of the team's season. We recap the year that almost was.  - Hypothesizing just how much angrier we would be if it wasn't our still-beloved Trevor Linden at the helm of this rudderless ship. - Two weeks after everyone else is done with it, we get all worked up about Friedman, negativity, and people telling you how you should be a fan.  - Weeping with (and for) Elias.   Thanks for listening! If you liked the show, tell a friend. You can leave us a rating and review on iTunes, and follow us on twitter (@thisweektristan and @thisweekardella). We can be reached by email at thisweekinanguish@gmail.com. 

Leadership Perspective: Reverse Paradigms, Intervening vs. Observing Podcast Transcript Your job is to facilitate and illuminate what is happening. Interfere as little as possible. Interference, however brilliant, creates a dependency on the leader. - John Heider*   Managing self is the leader’s first responsibility. Managing group process is next. Setting the example is a primary foundation for defining the transformational leader. In Bowen Systems, the leader changes the behavior of others in any group emotional system by changing self. Leading an ongoing business, ministry, or nonprofit requires a high functioning culture with leaders on teams aligned with the organization’s values and guiding principles. I facilitate meetings. That’s one of my primary skills and passions. I have rehearsed managing group process for 40+ years in a career as musical conductor. What I’ve learned is that the leader can’t make anybody do anything - if they can, it doesn’t last very long and the outcome is typically compromised. The relationships are also compromised and many times damaged beyond repair. Many leaders work in groups - teams, of various sorts, which are group emotional systems. We impact everyone else in that system with our actions, both good and bad. More often than not, when group members are not performing up to the expectations of the leader, it’s a direct result of the leaders actions or inactions. The first principle of Transformational Leadership in my world is being able to let go of things that someone else can do and in mastering the art of delegation. Micromanaging is deadly by taking power assigned to others. Coaching is empowering by enabling others. Leadership is a system in which the leader builds and equips leaders in teams. Sometimes the leader needs to intervene. Sometimes the leader should observe and comment later. Knowing the difference is the wisdom of leading. In their book, Facilitative Leadership in Social Work Practice, Breshears and Volker provide a helpful sequence of steps in managing group process. 1. Observing and diagnosing what is happening in the group. 2. Hypothesizing what you would like to have happen in light of the group’s task or development phase. 3. Do something that encourages change. Here's the routine - observe, think, and then act. We all learn from our mistakes if we pay attention and apply the principles to the next situation. It’s the leader’s duty and delight to assist others on the team to grow their skills. This can be accomplished in several ways: Affirming: Encourage boldness and the spirit of attempting to meet the challenge. Affirming is honest feedback and not trumped up artificial verbiage. Be sincere. Be direct. Be factual. Informing: Provide information needed to accomplish the assignment. Set a time-line for progress. Define “check-in” times for coaching and correcting. Provide information and check for understanding. Directing: The musical conductor directs and shapes the music. The musical score it similar to the strategy in that it provides directions for each person. The overall experience and the attention to details and the development of the culture depend on the direction of the leader. Don’t be AWOL when the team needs direction. Correcting: Speak to what’s working, what’s not working, and what needs to change. Thia is mentoring and not micromanaging. When the musical director stops the rehearsal and tells the trumpets that they are too loud, they are not upset. The culture expects the director to make corrections with specific details. The conductor continues with the information that the trumpets need to reduce the volume by one dynamic level. Not making corrections gives the impression that the leader is not capable. Don’t focus on pleasing people. Focus on doing the right thing and people will respect you. Rehearse for excellence by observing first and then acting. The reverse can be dangerous. *Heider, John (1986-04-19). Tao Leadership: Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching Adapted for a New Age **Breshears, Elizabeth M. and Volker, Roger (2013) Facilitative Leadership in Social Work Practice

Read more about Dr. Deming's work in his books, Out of the Crisis and The New Economics.   Cliff Norman and Ron Moen, of Associates in Process Improvement (API) discuss the history of the Plan Do Study Act (PDSA Cycle) and their research on the subject.  Cliff and Ron start with how the underpinning of Deming's philosophy was the idea of "continuous improvement", with the PDSA Cycle underlying that philosophy. They discuss the PDSA Cycle of never-ending improvement and learning, and how the iterative nature of the cycle fits with The Deming System of Profound Knowledge®. As Ron shares, Dr. Deming believed that "business is more exacting than science" as businesses must continually learn and improve to survive. Next Cliff and Ron delve into why they wrote a paper on the PDSA Cycle. Ron explains that the quality movement in America began after the NBC White Paper, If Japan Can..Why Can't We? aired in 1980. This raised interest in the Japan and the Plan Do Check Act (PDCA) cycle, which originated there.  Although Dr. Deming never spoke of PDCA, it was connected to him in the early 80's. That incorrect attribution was the inspiration behind the paper.  Cliff and Ron discuss the evolution of the PDSA Cycle, starting hundreds of years ago with the theories of Galileo and Aristotle. Listen as they take you through the progression, from the Shewhart Cycle, through the Deming Wheel and ultimately the PDSA Cycle as we know it today. Tripp Babbitt: [00:00:14] In this episode of The Deming Institute Podcast. Ron Moen and Cliff Norman of API are our guests. Ron and Cliff will discuss the history of PDSA and some of the research they've done on the subject.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:00:35] Hi, my name is Tripp Babbitt, I am host of the Deming Insitute podcast. My guests today are Cliff Norman and Ron Moen.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:00:44] Welcome, gentlemen.   Ron Moen: [00:00:46] Thanks, Tripp. Glad to be with you.   Cliff Norman: [00:00:47] Thank you. Thanks.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:00:49] I wanted to start out with our subject today is going to be kind of the history of plan, do study act. But for those in the audience that maybe are quite familiar with the Shujaat cycle and the history of Plan D0 Study Act, can you tell us a little bit about how it fits into the broader Deming philosophy?   Cliff Norman: [00:01:09] This is called the underpinning of Deming's philosophy was the idea of continuous improvement. And the PDSA cycle is kind of underlies that idea. Once we start improving has to be never ending.And the idea that learning and improvement are never ending underlying that under theory of knowledge.   Cliff Norman: [00:01:29] And as we'll discuss, having was heavily influenced by pragmatists out of Harvard University and the idea of inductive, deductive and inductive learning and the innovative nature of those two ideas are built in to the PDSA cycle. So it really fits up under the theory of knowledge in terms of a system of profound knowledge. What to add to that?   Ron Moen: [00:01:57] Sure. I think the context here for Deming, at least, is that we're talking about improvement of products and services, processes and systems. So it has a business context, but it goes broader than business. But I do have a quote used to say in a seminar. He said, business is more exacting than science. And what he meant by that is that a scientist really doesn't plan to study. You set up your experiments and you share what you've learned. You do your publication. Whereas in business you actually say in business you have to continually learn continuous improvement, Kyra. But also you need to act. So it's more exacting than science business. You have to act in what you're doing. So not only have you learned, but then you have to take action as a basis for that. So you can think of that as really the plan to study act. So in that sense, I think the PDA was adaptive. The scientific method was more adapted to business and industry and a very broad context for any improvement activity.   Cliff Norman: [00:03:04] Instead of Plan Do study publish its Plan Do Study Act.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:03:10] Yes, well said. OK, very good.So when you wrote this paper on plan Do Study Act and gave a history. What was why did you choose this particular subject to write on? What was what was your what was the impetus behind it? What was the purpose behind that?   Ron Moen: [00:03:30] I think what we were seeing in the early 80s, first of all, the quality movement in the United States really was from Deming's presentation.   Ron Moen: [00:03:39] And the NBC white paper, Japan can. Why can't we? Well, that made Japan very popular, too. And so what we were seeing coming out of Japan was the Plan Do check Act and having helped Deming with multiple seminars in the 80s, he never used the term. He never lectured it, and it wasn't part of it. He talked about the theory of knowledge, how we generate knowledge and so on. But the PDCA became connected to Deming back in the early 80s. I knew that was incorrect. And so what I was really trying to do is understand how it came about. And so that's how we end up with this paper. I might add it took me over 10 years to work on.   Ron Moen: [00:04:24] Ok, because the bottleneck I had was nobody in Japan claimed authorship. They kept pointing to Deming. And then when I'd work on Deming and the four day seminar, she had nothing to do with it. So there was a disconnect there that took me quite a while maybe.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:04:42] So what's let's start down this path of the PDSA. So. So how did it evolve over time?   Ron Moen: [00:04:49] Cliff, why don't you back us up to the history of a few hundred years? I think we need to back up the scientific method.   Cliff Norman: [00:04:56] The in the article circling back, Ron and I went back quite a ways, a lot of the information that we had, the first reference in this is from a book called The Metaphysical Club. But then it goes shorefront ways back. But in Western culture, we often credit Galileo with being the father of modern science. And of course, before that used to go to Aristotle on the idea of deductive reasoning. And unfortunately, you know, Aristotle would come up with things like males and male animals and nature have more kids than females or the version of that in nature. And the poor man was married twice.   Cliff Norman: [00:05:47] And if Sir Francis Bacon had been around and he didn't get there till 15, 64 with the idea of inductive reasoning, he said, you know, we can't just have theories, we have to go test them. And Aristotle, who is married twice, he had two opportunities to test that theory. I don't know that it would have changed his mind. But in science, it only takes one observation, as Einstein said, to cause us to either revise or throw out our theory. So he would have had that opportunity. And so those those two are really when we look at deductive reasoning and the follow on by Galileo and and so Francis Bacon really coming up with inductive learning.   Cliff Norman: [00:06:29] And then it goes in in the article, we talk about the influence of pragmatism, which was an American born philosophy of learning and the rest of it, and went Deming was working with Shewhart. He was really impressed with Shewhart intellect. And he asked Suhag. And while they were having lemonade, I think I'm sure it's frankly hard, you know, what causes you to think the way that you think? And Trueheart told him that he had recently read a book by CI Lewis entitled Mind and the World Order and WCI. Lewis had done had taken what the pragmatist school from Charles Purse William James had brought forward, you know, just right after the Civil War. And from that, you know, things have to be practical. We can't just have some theories that are not tested. And so the whole pragmatist's school had a huge influence on Shewhart and Deming, and it was from that. And the short cycle was taught to the Japanese in the 1950s. And so while it's picked up there.   Ron Moen: [00:07:36] So Shewhart really, I think we should be credited with bringing the scientific method to industry and his 1939 book, which was they helped an editor that talked about the scientific method, is connected to three step. Cycle through short cycle with was basically specification production and inspection specification production and inspection. And she says that those three as a circle and they're continuously going to go round it over and over again for industry, that these are really the same thing as in the scientific method.   Ron Moen: [00:08:21] Hypothesizing, carrying out the experiment and testing the hypothesis. So she said these three steps constitute a dynamic scientific process for acquiring knowledge. So I would connect in history, sure. To bring the scientific method, which had been around for 500 years, as Cliff just said, to industry for the first time.   Ron Moen: [00:08:43] So that was the Shewhart cycle that really influenced Deming from thereon. So Deming took that Shewhart cycle, and when he lectured in 1950 to the Japanese, he made it quite different. I think he said it's a four step process. First of all, I said the old way of thinking is design something, build it, sell it. So the context here is designing new products, services. So design the product, sell it, make it and sell it, he said. Instead, you've got to add a fourth step and that's test the product and service and through marketing research and then go around the cycle again. So he made this a cycle as well. Circle it was four steps. So this was his lecture in 1950 in Japan and the Japanese called this the the the Deming wheel, not the Deming cycle they call the Deming wheel. So it was a four step wheel.   Ron Moen: [00:09:43] That was 1950. Shortly thereafter, those that attended his seminar and the next year he was there three or four times and that's two, three years.   Ron Moen: [00:09:53] They sort of evolved what was called the PDCA. And the PDCA was connected back to Deming's lecture very indirectly. The design was really the planned production was to do sales was a check and research into act. So Deming's four steps became the plan do check act kind of a leap of faith.   Ron Moen: [00:10:17] And that's where I spent most of my research time trying to figure out how those two were connected and who connected them. There's a book by Imai and I hope I pronounce that my am I on Kaizen?   Ron Moen: [00:10:35] And he says that basically that's that was the connection between the two. And but there was no name given. He just says that Japanese executives recast the Deming will wheel presented in nineteen fifty seminar into the PDCA. But who did it? How they did it wasn't clear. That's why I spent my research. This includes something in the 80s where I actually interviewed one of the participants in the 1960 lecture that was in nineteen eighty six when I met with him. And of course he was very old and I showed him the PDK in Japanese and I said, who did you, how did you learn this? And he said, We learned it from Deming. And so what I, what I, that didn't help me at all. What I've concluded is that the barrier was Japanese culture. No one wanted recognition for changing it. And so to this day, there's no name associated with the PDK. So it did evolve through the Deming wheel, which came from the Shihad cycle, which came from the scientific method. That's the connection we have. And from that then Dr. Deming's, since he had seen so many articles of PDK in nineteen eighty five, he introduced the Plan to Study Act and his seminar before the eighty six publication Under Wikinomics. I'm sorry to out of the crisis. And so that version in the paper is much like what we see today, and that is the Deming cycle.   Ron Moen: [00:12:19] He called it the Shewhart cycle for learning and improvement. So again, it was four steps. What what's most team's most important accomplishment and then plan a test or change, carry out the test or change, prefectly be on small scale, observe the effects of the change, study results, what we learn, what can we predict? That was the eighty six version. And then over all of his seminars, which he had about 10 or 12 a year between eighty six and ninety three. And the ninety three publication was the new economics there. It was much simpler. The step first step plan, a change test aimed at improvement, the second step to carry out the change, preferably on a small scale, third step to examine the results. What did we learn? What went wrong? And fourth was adopted change of management or run through the cycle again. So this was his final version, the published in The New Economics of nineteen ninety three. And of course, he died in December of nineteen ninety three. So that was his last version. However, in doing my research, I also found several other articles, Fleming responded to things. And so if we still had a little time trip, I'm going to share three of those there in the paper. One was a comment. It was a jail transcript, a roundtable discussion with Dr. Deming in 1980. By now. By now, they have the PDCA.   Ron Moen: [00:13:49] And so.He was asked at this round table. To respond to it, is this really the Deming cycle and he says he says they bear no relation to each other. They bear no relation to each other, meaning the PDCA and what he Deming called the Deming was a Deming circle, but they call it the Shewhart cycle for learning improvement.So there is no resemblance there.   Ron Moen: [00:14:17] The second one was in 1990, published a book with No End and Provo's on an experimental design.And Deming was reviewing the chapters and the very first chapter we had to plan to study at, and Deming's comment in a letter to me on November 17th, 1990. Sure. And call it the PDSA, not the corruption PDCA, the corruption PDCA. I was shocked. He was so angry about how I was seeing the PDCA being used and connecting that to his name.   Ron Moen: [00:14:59] And then finally, my third day of research was at the Library of Congress and the Archives, it was a response. Somebody sent a letter to him. And it was actually a paper and he asked Deming to comment on it, and it had the PDCA cycle in there, and he and here was Deming's response in this.   Ron Moen: [00:15:22] He said, what you propose is not the Deming cycle. I do not know the source of the cycle that you propose, how the PDCA ever came into existence. I know not. So I think the message in this that we're trying to get across is Deming's did not create the PDCA except very indirectly through his lectures in Japan, very indirectly. And so the connection probably is only back to the scientific method and connecting Shewhart work. So any other comments, Cliff?   Cliff Norman: [00:15:58] That's also I think I think it's also goes back to your first question as to what causes us to write this. This article. Ron and I took a first shot at this article in nineteen eighty nine in the fiftieth anniversary of the Shujaat cycle that was published in this book, Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control in nineteen thirty nine. And we put it in a newsletter for the Southwest Quality Network which has been running since nineteen eighty nine. And in writing that Ron and I realized right away there's a cap and we did not understand as Ron was just articulating what actually happened in Japan relative to PDK and what the relationship was and all the rest of it.   Cliff Norman: [00:16:46] And that's what started the additional research it was just been talking about. And it's interesting to me, you know, we always used to say that history and analytic study, as opposed to numerous study because it keeps evolving. And every time we write an article just like this one, we find additional gaps, new questions, you know, and Richard Feynman, he says that science begins and ends in questions and that's alive and well here. So as long as it's discussing, we're really not sure about the authorship. And when Ron and I presented this to the Japanese junior scientists and engineers in 2009 in Tokyo, Dr. Choteau, he started to try to fill in some gaps that again, that's one man's view. And he credited Dr. Mizuno as being the creator of this. But again, we don't know that for sure. That's a new question for us, that we need to do additional research on to shore that up. So it's one man's opinion at this point, and we can't find any documentation to support that. And so in the article where we said authorship at this point is unknown, but I would hope to close that gap if we could.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:17:52] Ok, let me let me ask a couple of questions. As I was reading the article, you start with the Shujaat cycle from 1939. And I noticed that there was this Straight-line process that that Ron has already talked about, specification, production, inspection, and then it went to evolved apparently or through Shewhart reading went into more of a circular motion as opposed to a linear piece. Is that is that what mined in the world order brought to Shujaat is the the circle type of specification production inspection from a linear look? How does this relate?   Cliff Norman: [00:18:32] I think what Shewhart recognized and particularly from the pragmatist's, that is what what what you learn in the real world, you know, you need to act on that. And the learning is going to be continuous and updating your theories is really important. So from a theory of knowledge standpoint, I think that's what Shujaat took from a practical school Ron. What would you add to that?   Ron Moen: [00:18:58] Yeah, what he said in his thirty nine book was that the circle is three sets of dynamic scientific process for acquiring knowledge. So it's multiple iterations of it and that's how we acquire knowledge. Once again, the basis for that is Theory of knowledge, which Deming lectures on in all of its four day seminars. Really important aspect, which I assume that everybody had taken a course in college and a theory of knowledge or epistemology. But there weren't many hands that went up when they would ask that, but it was really critical in his thinking. And so the TSA is involved with Deming. Here is truly a methodology that comes directly from theory of knowledge. The acquiring of knowledge, building of knowledge is very dynamic, and that's why there should been multiple PDSA. Saifullah, now, in all fairness.   Cliff Norman: [00:19:55] They also say that his productions use a system that he shows half an inch, you know, that you once you produce a product or service, you have that structure in place in which to learn and get feedback from customers. And so all that that whole idea was built even into that diagram in 1951.   Ron Moen: [00:20:15] One and the other is the context or the overall philosophy is always making improvements. Of course, the Japanese kaizen was critical for this, but the thinking of Deming and others that we have to continually improve our products and services. So that requires an iterative nature of learning.   Ron Moen: [00:20:34] And the PDSA cycle is the best tool to do that.Ok, Tripp,   Tripp Babbitt: [00:20:40] Yeah, no, I was just as I'm listening to this, I'm going through I was looking at some of the drawings in the article, you know, with the Shujaat cycle and then the Deming wheel, which is apparently the part that seems to be the mystery, because your belief is that he showed them the Schuett cycle. It sounds like in 1950 when he met with the folks and the Deming wheel somehow emerged from that conversation. And what and who is it seems to be the question that that's unanswered. Do I have that right?   Ron Moen: [00:21:14] Yes, it is a cycle we don't know. OK, yeah, OK. And again, I could never get to it. And my my explanation is that the Japanese culture, no one wanted the recognition. They wanted to continually give Deming the credit because it came from his lectures in nineteen fifty nineteen fifty one has already published and working as a PDK with the QC circles and so on in the late 50s and early 60s I think it was so it was already around and then they would see that because he continually went back to Japan and the lecture there, he attended many of the Deming prize ceremonies, but he never mentioned the PDK. I've never seen anything other than the three references that I gave you. He was criticizing people that used him so. So I think in the United States, PDCA was in a lot of the literature and, you know, there's nothing wrong with it. But Cliff and I try to answer, what is the PDCA? It's really mostly for implementation and problem solving is to implement something. Now, Deming, when he did talk about the PDCA, he said c means check and he says in the English language check means to hold back. That's really almost the antithesis of theory of knowledge to hold back. There's no learning and holding back. So he thought this was very misleading and really didn't help build knowledge. But for implementation, I think this is fine to ask somebody to do something. They go ahead and do it. You check to see if it's been done.   Ron Moen: [00:22:53] So, you know, it's served that very useful purpose. But what Deming try to do is make it more general and not only for implementation, but for testing and early testing, prototype testing and so on for products. But it's more general than just testing products and services to.   Cliff Norman: [00:23:12] We've got we've got a lot of pushback when we presented at JUSE that they're very clear to us and they kind of own the PDCA cycle, that it was all about the implementation of a standard. In fact, I went back and looked at Dr. Ishikawa's book on total quality control, and they're very clear about it. You know, management determines goals and targets and determine the method. And then the workers say they do the plan, that the management came up with inspection checks to make sure it's OK, that we've implemented the correct standard and it's working. And if it's not working, then we take action to correct it. And Jayyousi was very clear. That's very different than PDSA, which is about the whole idea of the depth of impact of learning and people changing what they find out and developing a new path and all of that.   Cliff Norman: [00:24:04] That's that's what we found in the PDCA as practiced by JUSE.   Ron Moen: [00:24:10] So the PDSA, the PDSA, again, that plan to do is really the deductive part.That's where you set up your hypothesis and make your predictions or state your questions. The study of activity, inductive parts. So it's deductive inductive iteration which goes back to the Francis Bacon contribution and 16 hundreds. So that was really critical in Deming when he taught the PDSA. It was really kind of deductive inductive. So there is where the learning takes place so that can be used in testing anything, prototypes that can be testing a management theories. It really has very broad application.   Ron Moen: [00:24:53] So something that a broader approach, PDSA, much broader now, it can also be used with often implementation can be used for implementation.   Cliff Norman: [00:25:07] Deming would often say tourism seminars that there's no experience without a theory in which to observe it. And I walked up to him. He was having a gathering of statisticians at New York University. And and I said, you know, Ulysses S. Grant said a man has had a bull by the tail. And those a couple more things about it. The man who has it. And then he laughed. And then he said to me, Mr. Norman, don't you think you had to have some theory in order to understand which end to grab, you know? And so when we're in the PDSA cycle, we have an initial theory that we're going to go out and we're going to learn from and then from that, as Ron was just talking about, we're going to have the inductive point that kicks in and study and that we do see people running around and trying to reverse at all. They'll say, no, you start with induction first and all that.   Cliff Norman: [00:25:57] I think then we would argue with that, that when you're out trying to learn, you've already got some initial theory that's a good currency that you're going to start with.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:26:09] I guess the question we see this kind of evolution go on all the way back from nineteen thirty nine as we read the paper. And then there was the Shujaat cycle eighty six, the PDSA cycle in nineteen ninety three. Assuming that probably came out of the new economics with you guys using this all the time. Is this the end or I mean and I say that kind of tongue in cheek but has it evolved with application as you guys have continued to use PDSA. Where does it go from here, maybe is my my broader question is, is it perfect as it is or myself and our other colleagues?   Ron Moen: [00:26:54] We published a version of our version of it in 1991. We took Deming actually Deming reviewed this and liked it, but he didn't put it in his 93 book. And so the planning is really we we asked people to state the objective. What are your questions that you want to answer and what are your predictions to those questions? Then you have a plan to carry out that cycle, carrying it out. Then when you go through the to the study part, you compare your results or complete your data analysis, compare your data to your predictions, summarize what was learned. So we made this deductive inductive, which I think is more closely tied to to the scientific method and Deming dead. So I think that's a change that we made and we've been using that since 1991. So it's really the planning is you might think of PDSA as pinnings prediction and then the study part is comparing your prediction to what happened and then what did we learn from that? So it's a little bit different. Deming liked it, but he didn't put it in his book. So a lot of times with Deming, he would assume that most things are known. You don't need to be that specific, whereas I think both Cliffe and my experience is that you need to be much more prescriptive.   Ron Moen: [00:28:19] He kept it very high level plan to study at well, so we added that to it. And I think we've been using that since 1991.So it's has a lot of leverage, right, Cliff?   Cliff Norman: [00:28:33] Yeah, I think so. I could just add another angle to your question and I think really cover it quite well to me. The future is to use the method with some rigor and what we don't see with PDSA inspectors. There's article written on it in the British Medical Journal with PDSA and the authors of this deceptively simple. And so there's a lot of misuse and abuse of the idea and the name of PDSA. But when somebody wrote this down and they have to pose a good inquiry question rather than a yes and no answer and really make a prediction about what they're going to do there and then develop a data collection plan around that and be prepared to be surprised and do that. Or our pet theory isn't working out and be prepared, you know, to update our thinking and how we're going to approach the world after we've been surprised.   Cliff Norman: [00:29:31] And unfortunately, what a lot of people do is they go out, they fall into the confirmation trap, they try something one time and then a very small range of conditions and then they get the answer they want and they're done. And PDSA, if they're using the rigor that you're asking yourself the question, the what conditions, could this be different? And have I tested over a wide range of conditions here? There's a bunch of things that go along with that.   Cliff Norman: [00:29:55] And I think those authors from the British Medical Journal went on target. It's deceptively simple. And unfortunately, what we had up to now are some fairly simple and as H.L. Mencken said, usually wrong applications of PDSA as opposed to following the rigor that Ron was just talking about.   Ron Moen: [00:30:14] The British publication was only last year, wasn't it? Yeah. That January this year problem tenure is so.   Cliff Norman: [00:30:22] Yeah. Wonderful. Wonderful article.   Cliff Norman: [00:30:25] Ok, and what was the name of the article again. Problems with PDSA,   Tripp Babbitt: [00:30:30] Problems with PDSA.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:30:32] Ok, well, and I think this might yeah, I think this may fit into kind of my my last question.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:30:37] And, you know, we know, you know, organizations out there. You know, we're talking about scientific method and things of that sort. But we know organizations out there are pretty good at copying each other. It's a cultural thing. You know, they have the certain assumptions and beliefs. And and so when you guys are out there using PDSA, how does that how does that work in or filter into, you know, the existing kind of style of managing organizations where you just you're basing everything off of assumptions and beliefs, you know, how do you get get the scientific method to take hold when people are so used to just, you know, you make a decision? Oh, the corporation I worked for before, you know, did it this way. And so it'll work for us type of thing. How are you guys breaking those habits using PDSA so?   Ron Moen: [00:31:32] Well, they come in and at first we have what's called a model for improvement. And so on top of the findings, study act for any organization. They have three questions called the model for improvement. What are we trying to accomplish? Second question, how would we know a change is an improvement? And the third question is, what changes can we make that will result in improvement?   Ron Moen: [00:31:56] So those three questions sort of frame the starting point for turning the PDSA cycle. So having an idea that you want to test comes out of that question number three. But the really the first one to start, what are we trying to accomplish? What is our aim? How will we know what changes, improvements? Articulate what what what would it look like if the changes were made? And then the third one, what are the ideas that we think are we predict will actually result in improvement? And that's when the PDA starts going around. So we think this model for improvement, which we published in Will, there was a clip, I think that was a little bit later the. I know it's 1996 that the improvement died right after that, but that really has helped, I think, organizations tie the PDSA cycle into what are we trying to accomplish? The first edition of the Improvement Day, 1996. Yeah. Yeah.   Tripp Babbitt: [00:32:58] Well, I think we've covered off pretty well some history and actually got a little bit into how this might be applicable to organizations. So, gentlemen, I appreciate you sharing your time with the Deming Institute podcast. And we look forward to future episodes and research that you're doing.   Cliff Norman: [00:33:17] Thanks, Tripp.   Ron Moen: [00:33:18] Thanks, Tripp.