Podcasts about inevitably

‍Traditionally seen as a productivity flaw, time blindness is revealed here as a money problem, quietly undermining pricing, profits, and self-worth for solopreneurs with ADHD.This episode explores why common fixes like timers and time blocking miss the deeper issue, and instead, offers practical ways to design around the unique ADHD brain.Listeners can expect actionable tools—like range pricing, value-based pricing, and multipliers—to help create smarter, ADHD-friendly business practices.Key Takeaways: 1. Why time blindness is more of a money issue than a productivity problemMissed deadlines are visible, but it's the underpriced projects and unseen labor that are draining your profits.2. How the ADHD brain's sense of time impacts your pricing (and sends you into the red)3. Why accurate estimation is a myth—and what to do insteadSpoiler: The strategic move is to build pricing that works with your brainThe Three Places You're Losing MoneyThe invisible cost of time blindness shows up in three big ways in most service-based businesses—and maybe in yours too:● Quoting New Work: Saying “yes” to projects we've never done, referencing a project that only looks similar, and then confidently (but cluelessly) assigning a price. Inevitably, unknowns explode, and you end up working for free● Scoping Familiar Work: Every project you think you know by heart, but memory only shows you the highlight reel.● Hidden Labor: The worst offender. All the little admin tasks, endless revisions, back-and-forth emails, and extra meetings never get included in my quote. They don't feel like “billable” work, but they devour hours and energy in unpaid work.Six Pricing Strategies that Correct The Effects of Time Blindness:● Range Pricing: Quote within a range, not a fixed number.● Value-Based Pricing: Charge for outcomes, not hours.● Multipliers & Buffers: Take your default quote and multiply it (1.5x, 2x, even 2.5x if you're feeling brave).● Project vs. Hourly Pricing: Bill by project, not hours, so you're aren't penalized for hyperfocus sprints● Built-In Revision Rounds & Communication Caps: Set clear boundaries on extra work and comms, and make it official.Time blindness isn't going away—but by meeting your brain where it is, you can transform ADHD traits from liabilities into business assets. Design your pricing not despite your ADHD, but in partnership with it—and start keeping your hard-earned money where it belongs: in your business.Try The Multiplier Experiment on your next proposal:1. Write down the number you want to send.2. Multiply it by 1.5x (or higher—it should feel just a bit stretchy).3. Send that quote. Notice the resistance, the stories, the “what ifs.”4. Collect the data: Did the client say yes? No? What did you learn?Every proposal is a data point for better pricing decisions. Stop leaving money on the table!Research on ADHD & time blindnessYour ADHD-ish ™ host, Diann Wingert Diann Wingert is a business strategist, coach, serial entrepreneur, former psychotherapist, and passionate thought leader at the intersection of ADHD and entrepreneurship. In addition to hosting the ADHD-ish ™ podcast, Diann is the creator of The ADHD-ish ™ Method, a practicing Buddhist, dog mom, and relentlessly curious human.Diann explains neuroscience in a relatable way. Through her accessible storytelling, Diann empowers others to understand their brains, manage their energy, and show compassion to themselves as they navigate the demands of being a business owner and in their everyday lives. Resources Mentioned in This Episode: Sign up for Di AI, my ADHD business coach digital clone, for free: https://bit.ly/di-ai-accessMake sure you don't miss the next episodes in this “Reframing Your ADHD Traits as Business Strategies” series. Subscribe/Follow ADHD-ish on Apple or SpotifyWant my help to build your business with your ADHD traits in mind? Schedule a free consultation to explore 1:1 ADHD entrepreneur coaching.‍ ‍© 2026 ADHD-ish™ Podcast. Intro music by Ishan Dincer / Melody Loops / Outro music by Vladimir / Bobi Music / All rights reserved.

For 30 glorious minutes each week, Chaz and AJ let men call in with no interference or interruption from women. The callers can safely complain about the issue that's bothering them, without any women trying to correct them. Inevitably, every week, a woman calls in to ruin the fun. 

The King of Spain, Ashley Giles, is our special guest on this week's Tailenders. Inevitably we travel back to the 2005 Ashes series - the greatest series of all time -  but also reflections on the highs and lows of professional sport, the genius of Richie Benaud, bowling to Brian Lara, the Art of Spin and the challenges of running Worcs CCC.  Plus Mattchin has a new feature ‘Village People' as he seeks to discover the underbelly of Village Cricket.

One of the great joys and benefits of entrepreneurship is we get to be nimble, we can flex and evolve as circumstances change the face of business rarely stays the same over time. Fiona and I have certainly enjoyed a varied 25 years or so in business and today we're sharing a little of that picture.Whilst we may have learnt how to adapt over the years, one thing sadly neither of us has ever been able to control is the ever changing landscape of the market. Recessions, pandemics, global turbulence, the pace of tech...all impact the daily reality.In this conversation we are exploring how business has evolved over the years and the things that have helped us find, maintain and lean into our edge and what has, and still does, make it a continual creative challenge to stay in the game and most importantly enjoy it. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Another Premiership season comes to a close (unless you're in Paisley or Maryhill). After all the hope and fears comes the joy and tears as the final league table takes on an all too familiar appearance.Josh is joined by Andy, Daris, Krys and Stephen to reflect on probably the most dramatic top flight season in several generations. Inevitably, most of the chat is around the top four teams - three of which went into the split in contention and the other who played a massive part in deciding how it ended.On top of that, Steve Clarke's 26 man squad for the World Cup was announced earlier in the day of recording, so with three of the five people hopping the Atlantic, the guys give their thoughts on the men chosen to try and finally get Scotland to the knockout promised land for the first time ever.Thank you to everyone for tuning into this latest episode of SFF Podcast.Linktree - https://linktr.ee/SFFPODCASTBluesky - @sffpodcast.bsky.socialTwitter/X - @sffpodcastInstagram - sffpodcastTikTok - @sffpodcastFacebook - Scottish Football ForumsMastodon - @sffpodcast@mastodon.scotEmail - scottishfootballforumspodcast@gmail.com

Another Premiership season comes to a close (unless you're in Paisley or Maryhill). After all the hope and fears comes the joy and tears as the final league table takes on an all too familiar appearance.Josh is joined by Andy, Daris, Krys and Stephen to reflect on probably the most dramatic top flight season in several generations. Inevitably, most of the chat is around the top four teams - three of which went into the split in contention and the other who played a massive part in deciding how it ended.On top of that, Steve Clarke's 26 man squad for the World Cup was announced earlier in the day of recording, so with three of the five people hopping the Atlantic, the guys give their thoughts on the men chosen to try and finally get Scotland to the knockout promised land for the first time ever.Thank you to everyone for tuning into this latest episode of SFF Podcast.Linktree - https://linktr.ee/SFFPODCASTBluesky - @sffpodcast.bsky.socialTwitter/X - @sffpodcastInstagram - sffpodcastTikTok - @sffpodcastFacebook - Scottish Football ForumsMastodon - @sffpodcast@mastodon.scotEmail - scottishfootballforumspodcast@gmail.com

#1007 | Ed and Dan review Manchester United's 3-2 win over Nottingham Forest in the final home game of the season. More than 4 xG created, 29 shots taken and Bruno Fernandes' 20th assist. Plenty of entertainment on offer. It's Michael Carrick's 11th win of his short tenure, but he's found a way for United to keep emerging victorious from these narrow-margin games. It was a day when Casemiro said farewell to Old Trafford, Luke Shaw scored his first goal for three years, and Bryan Mbeumo eventually got on the scoresheet too. There was some controversy about Matteus Cunha's goal, although rules are rules, innit? Inevitably, the conversation turns to the summer. Can United give Carrick the tools he needs to succeed? 00:00 Intro and Match Reaction 05:51 Casemiro's Farewell 12:54 Game Analysis: Goals and Key Moments 17:21 Midfield Replacements: Casemiro's Successor 44:21 Bruno's 20 Assists: How Good Is It? 47:35 Summer Transfer Window 01:00:38 Michael Carrick as Manager If you are interested in supporting the show and accessing a weekly exclusive bonus episode, check out our Patreon page or subscribe on Apple Podcasts. Supporter funded episodes are ad-free. NQAT is available on all podcast apps and in video on YouTube. Hit that subscribe button, leave a rating and write a review on Apple or Spotify. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This New Moon in Taurus,  "Soul Worth is Your Core Essence".  This earth elemental  provides a grounding and steadying energy in the life creation process. It is where the “stick-to-it attitude can be seen. This zodiac sign embodies the concepts, ideas and values of creating and building something of worth with lasting value. Taurus is the focal point for bringing ideas into form.  Taurus is the complement to Scorpio, even while referred to as it's opposite sign in astrology discussions.  The basic relationship is that the 2nd house associated with Taurus, is where you begin to recognize your own valued self-possessed resources.  Scorpio, 8th house is how we exchange with others our valued resources, and they with us.  (See previous episode, "Full Moon in Scorpio). One of the key aspects of Taurus is its association with manifestation of physical possessions, and the flow of money as a measure of resources, usable talents, abilities, and skills for exchange. This is the time to reflect on creating both inner and outer heart-centered connections, which offer experiences of personal truth.  Instead of setting intentions from a place of being “not enough or good enough”now is the time to embrace your “Whole Self and Soul Worthiness”.Taurus is the opportunity to express deepest appreciation for being able to live life from Soul awareness. Living in the “Soul Worthiness” way is claiming the ability to be a creator with the Universal Source.  This New Moon in Taurus is an invitation to reshape your mind to create a meaningful, passionate life that will stand the test of time. The Taurus archetype is the awareness of the “spark” animating the physical body.   “I Manifest” principle. The Taurus energy is the nourishing of being through self worth.This New Moon in Taurus brings us into a profound awareness of being a part of Nature.  Of the three Earth signs, Capricorn and Virgo, Taurus brings us into relationship with our physicality.  Every person possesses a unique emanation and energetic life frequency.  When a person actually listens to one's body in cooperation with mind and heart, this comes together as a unique type of intelligence. How do we access our unique personal body intelligence and inner wisdom? Our bodies literally speak to us through the feeling states.  For example,  you get up in the morning and you notice the birdsong, and interestingly, listening to the birds feels calming to you. In fact, you notice your whole body feels rather relaxed. On the other hand, you are walking along on a city street, there are lots people whizzing by, as well as the sounds of heavy machinery drilling, earth moving machines rumbling, and diesel fuel smells are in the air.   Notice how your body sends you signals which are much different from the  relaxation of the birdsong.The sign of Taurus provide us with greater understanding of how our magnificent bodies serve as our central "anchoring" point.  The more we observe, listen and feel our own body-wise connection the more we can live greater heart-centered and Soul led lives.  In essence, we need body/mind/spirit awareness.  During this lunar cycle, the Taurus energy is providing an energetic framework for understanding how to ground and regulate our nervous systems, through tuning into the Earth's frequency.  Currently, on a daily basis millions of people are voicing their feelings about emotional, bodily, mental unrest and psycho-spiritual disconnection.  This New Moon is an invitation from the Universe to seek a quiet space from inside self.  Inevitably the question comes up, "how can I feel peaceful, and where is restfulness to be found? It's inside each one of us, and the guide to self understanding is through our bodies, as the gateways to heart-centered insights. Prosperity and Abundance through Self-WorthTaurus is a feminine and  fixed earth sign. Sound alchemy,  your voice is deeply associated with the sign of Taurus.  Singing, chanting, toning, humming, any sonic activity has a grounding effect, which helps to regulate the nervous system. Dancing, gardening, drumming and movement put us in alignment with our home planet, Earth.This sign represents the ability to create, produce and bring an idea into fruition.  In our astrological map, it's the area of life where a person will persist and eventually achieve success, as a result of embracing one's physical body wisdom, sensual and tactile connection. There's understanding of self-worth, sacred  valuing, and inner soul awareness.This sign is associated with the 2nd house on the zodiac wheel.  It embodies the talents, gifts, abilities, developed skills, resources, feelings of self-worth and self-esteem.  The guiding/ruling planet is Venus which provides the inner awareness of sight, smell, taste, touch, sound, as well as responses to expressions of beauty. The 2nd  house reveals how the core attributes mentioned above are manifested in form, especially through financial flow, lived-values, self worth, sensual pleasure, peace, harmony and the ability to relate to others in all kinds of relationships.The placement of Taurus in your “Star Chart”, is the area of life where you are learning to balance financial security, self-expression, self-worth and clarify how to embrace physical reality.  It is the overall “value center”.  It's important to fully recognize that your self-worth does not depend on what other people say, or tell you who you are, or are "suppose to be".The Following Prompts will help in learning how to use your astrology chart as a guide for connecting deeper with the Taurus energy that will help you be more present for yourself.New Moon in Taurus with Venus Rulership/guidanceJournal Prompts:Natal Venus sign and house placement, and sign on cusp of 2nd house?____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Describe 5 important valued self-resources(gifts, talents, skills, inner “treasures)                  Describe Self-Worth and Self-Care rituals that hold importance for you.  (Example: Gardening is often a really important nature and self-care connection for Taurus.)Claiming the Practical Magic of Taurus Touch, taste, smell, wind blowing, and to feel all the sensual pleasures.  In order for the growth process to occur, there has to be a life giving exchange between the Earth and the seed. In other words, this is the sign that reminds us of the energy of growth, of which every nutrient and aspect of life comes from the Earth Herself. This New Moon in Taurus is a powerful time to observe your own way of being connected to Earth, and how to personally contribute to renewal of what needs changing.  Journal Prompt:Describe how you can bring more “earthy magic” into your life.  Create a collage depicting something you value. Let's have an Astrology Conversation.  I look forward to seeing you.  Now is the time.https://www.soulsoundinsights.com/light-reading.htmlhttps://www.soulsoundinsights.com/music-musings-meditation.htmlI am proud to announce my new offering as a Certified Creative Depth Coach.  As a Creative Depth Coach, I provide guidance, support and soul insights on how to discover, explore and navigate your life by  recognizing your magnificent "Creative Genius". Some of my modalities and Soul tools are "Art as Process" EFT Tapping,  Sound and Music for Inner Journeying , using the wisdom of Astrology, Tarot, Oracle and Numerology. l   Enjoy Full Moon Lunar Eclipse in Taurus Drumming Video:https://vimeo.com/769123538/b344b2b541"Calling the Wild" or " QuickSilver and Astro Magic" Original Music by MaeRuth McCants 

In this episode of Say Yes to the Mess Jami welcomes Patrik Simpson and Pol Atteu to chat about The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills and other hot topics. Patrik, an accomplished model/actor and Executive Producer, and Pol, a talented haute couture dress designer and boutique owner, were best friends with Anna Nicole Smith. Inevitably, the conversation led to Anna Nicole and some of the things she went through as a very misunderstood celebrity. Jami, Patrik and Pol also touched on some headline-making true crime cases such as Nancy Guthrie and JonBenét Ramsey. Follow Jami @JamiOnAir on Instagram, TikTok and YouTube. Watch Say Yes to the Mess and Serial Streamers on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@jamionair and subscribe so you don't miss out on the latest documentary recaps. Check out Jami's other podcast - Dirty Money Moves: Women in White Collar Crime: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dirty-money-moves-women-in-white-collar-crime/id1619521092. Want to advertise on this podcast? We've partnered with Cloud10 Media to handle our advertising requests. If you're interested in advertising on MURDERISH, send an email to Sahiba Krieger sahiba@cloud10.fm with a copy to jami@murderish.com. Visit Murderish.com for more info about the show and Creator/Host, Jami Rice. Remember, fix your face and stay lookin' hot …because you don't want to end up with a crappy mugshot! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back to The Fit & Fulfilled Podcast. In this episode we discuss:What it really takes to actualyl unlock a new reality that looks & feels so different to your pastThe reason why you might be seeing glimpses of your desire but not the full-blown manifestationBreaking free from your existing patterns that have been keeping you stuck in unwanted loopsThe identity shifts you need to prioritise while manifestingHow to regain complete control of your external reality so that it stops controlling youPrivate Coaching with KhushbuShort-Term Coaching Options with KhushbuWatch The Going ALL IN Manifestation MasterclassJoin Seal The DealWays To Work TogetherTake The Quiz To Figure Out Which Manifesting Bubble You're Currently Stuck InWatch 'Be It To See It' MasterclassClick here more details & to apply for my 1:1 coaching program Uplevel Your LifeAccess the Freedom From Fear WorkshopJoin Calm, Cool & CreatingJoin School of Magnetic ConnectionWatch 'Be It To See It' MasterclassAccess the Money Manifestation MasterclassClick here to read some of the amazing outcomes my clients have manifested for themselvesFrom the bottom of my heart, thank you so much for being here. If you aren't already, come join the party over on:Instagram: @khushbu.kweighWebsite: https://kthadani.com/

Relebogile Mabotja speaks to Dr Thebe Ikalafeng the Chancellor of Sol Plaatje University in Kimberley exploring the relationship between higher education and cultural identity specifically whether universities strengthen, challenge, or unintentionally erode cultural traditions. 702 Afternoons with Relebogile Mabotja is broadcast live on Johannesburg based talk radio station 702 every weekday afternoon. Relebogile brings a lighter touch to some of the issues of the day as well as a mix of lifestyle topics and a peak into the worlds of entertainment and leisure. Thank you for listening to a 702 Afternoons with Relebogile Mabotja podcast. Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 13:00 to 15:00 (SA Time) to Afternoons with Relebogile Mabotja broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/2qKsEfu or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/DTykncj Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Since it's natural…does that inherently make it better? Everyone knows by now that RFK Jr. took aim at synthetic dyes, generally made from petroleum and/or concocted in labs, claiming they can compromise our health. Think “Yellow 5” that makes Mountain Dew a neon shade or those bright-red Skittles courtesy of “Red 40.” Arguably, well before the MAHA report was published…the broader CPG industry had been slowly transitioning away from artificial food dyes. But that's neither here nor there…as I'm more concerned with the blanket consumer belief that “natural always equals better.” As an example, did you know natural colorings won't face the same regulatory scrutiny level as synthetic dyes? Yet natural sources may be treated with pesticides…and the processing to strip contamination usually involve various solvents (which could remain in the final material). Also, (something like eight times) more natural colorings than synthetic dyes are required to make the same shade in a final food. Inevitably, some will cry foul…claiming I'm a paid robot for Big CPG, Big Chemical, or whatever. However, as a strategist with deep domain expertise…I'm simply trying to push back on this notion that natural sources of color inherently mean that they are safer (or free of potentially harmful compounds).

On this episode we're diving into the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Inevitably that conversation involves a little bit of drone technology talk, but we focus mostly on the human demands of this kind of warfare. When every single piece of equipment, food, etc. has to travel the last several miles on foot, what does that require of the individual soldier? When there is near constant visual and thermal surveillance, how do operations have to adapt? We break down all that and more, with some time saved at the end to talk about the ACFT implementation, since our guest played a key role in that as well. Major General Kline graduated from Shippensburg University, Pennsylvania in 1992 and was commissioned as a Field Artillery officer where he served three years as a Fire Support Officer and later a MLRS platoon leader before transferring to the Aviation branch until his promotion to Major General.Major General Kline commanded tactical aviation units at the company, battalion, and brigade levels. His aviation command assignments include A Company, 5th Battalion, 158th Aviation Regiment in Germany; 5th Battalion, 101st Aviation Regiment (Task Force Eagle Assault) in Fort Campbell, Kentucky and the 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade located at Hunter Army Airfield in Savannah, Georgia. In combat, Major General Kline served as the Executive Officer for 5th Battalion, 101st Aviation Regiment in Tikrit, Iraq from 2005-2006; Deputy Brigade Commander for 101st Combat Aviation Brigade in Bagram, Afghanistan in 2008; Battalion Commander of 5th Battalion, 101st Aviation Regiment at FOB Wolverine near Qalat, Afghanistan from 2010-2011; and Commander of Task Force Forge in Helmand, Afghanistan from 2015-2016. Uniquely, he also represented the United States in direct communication with the Taliban Political Commission (TPC) in Doha, Qatar in 2021. Specific to this podcast, he was Alex's commander at CIMT as his final command, overseeing the implementation of the ACFT and H2F. After leaving command but before retiring, he was the Army lead for the Ukraine/Russia Lessons study focused on capturing the lessons from that conflict, which is what we'll be focusing most of today's conversation on.

Join James and Michele for an unplanned, unscripted episode of the DWP! Mainly because we didn’t find the time to record the content for the *scheduled* Episode 421! Inevitably with this presenter pairing, conversation heads towards Big Finish, but then takes an unexpected turn into the use of comedy in Doctor Who! Jump on the board and enjoy a cosy fireside chat about when comedy has worked but at other times, fallen flat. Most importantly, don’t forget to check out Ian‘s Just Giving page and donate – as this episode goes live, Ian has just seven sleeps until he undertakes the London Marathon! That’s a whole lot of running….. Enjoy!

Playing cards have always been magical. While not as ubiquitous and long tenured as dice and other means of games and gambling, card games have been a part of western culture for over 600 years. Inevitably, as soon as something gets used for games, it immediately gets used for divination and fortune-telling as well. This form of divination has been called Cartomancy and since the 15th century it has an incredibly diverse and fascinating history, one which currently sees it as the second most popular form of divination in the western world.

Inevitably in life, all of us will face unexpected turns and be required to navigate terrain we didn't choose and don't understand. What do we do when life is interrupted, when the story you were happy to tell is no longer true? When the crisis isn't obvious or clear or public? When the help we need feels as desperate as a house fire but it's not fully ours to ask for? I have a few ideas. Listen in. Links + Resources From This Episode: Watch this episode on YouTube The Quiet Collection app Order The Next Right Thing Guided Journal Grab a copy of my book The Next Right Thing  Find me on Instagram @emilypfreeman Download the transcript

Are you attracting the right people or stuck in a cycle of people-pleasing? In this candid recap, Lesley Logan and Brad Crowell dig into the highlights from the recent interview with Barb Betts, a powerhouse keynote speaker and author of The Relationship Advantage. With over 20 years of expertise, Barb's insights on choosing genuine connections over surface-level relationships will transform your perspective on your own identity. This episode explores the provocative idea that authenticity isn't about "doing" something new, but rather "undoing" the layers that aren't actually you.  If you have any questions about this episode or want to get some of the resources we mentioned, head over to LesleyLogan.co/podcast https://lesleylogan.co/podcast/. If you have any comments or questions about the Be It pod shoot us a message at beit@lesleylogan.co mailto:beit@lesleylogan.co. And as always, if you're enjoying the show please share it with someone who you think would enjoy it as well. It is your continued support that will help us continue to help others. Thank you so much! Never miss another show by subscribing at LesleyLogan.co/subscribe https://lesleylogan.co/podcast/#follow-subscribe-free.In this episode you will learn about:Building a relationship with yourself before connecting with others. Stop people-pleasing by undoing everything that is not you.Replace envy with curiosity to escape the comparison trap. Apply visibility, vulnerability, and relatability to build real trust. Release relationships that require you to show up inauthentically. Episode References/Links:Pilates On Tour® (London, UK) - xxll.co/pot      OPC Spring Training (Virtual Event) - opc.me/events   eLevate Mentorship Program - lesleylogan.co/elevate   Submit your questions or wins - beitpod.com/questionsBarb Betts Website - https://www.barbbetts.comThe Relationship Advantage by Barb Betts - https://therelationshipadvantagebook.comGetting the Love You Want by Harville Hendrix Ph.D. - https://a.co/d/0dGm43Y3 If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. https://lovethepodcast.com/BITYSIDEALS! DEALS! DEALS! DEALS! https://onlinepilatesclasses.com/memberships/perks/#equipmentCheck out all our Preferred Vendors & Special Deals from Clair Sparrow, Sensate, Lyfefuel BeeKeeper's Naturals, Sauna Space, HigherDose, AG1 and ToeSox https://onlinepilatesclasses.com/memberships/perks/#equipmentBe in the know with all the workshops at OPC https://workshops.onlinepilatesclasses.com/lp-workshop-waitlistBe It Till You See It Podcast Survey https://pod.lesleylogan.co/be-it-podcasts-surveyBe a part of Lesley's Pilates Mentorship https://lesleylogan.co/elevate/FREE Ditching Busy Webinar https://ditchingbusy.com/Resources:Watch the Be It Till You See It podcast on YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq08HES7xLMvVa3Fy5DR8-gLesley Logan website https://lesleylogan.co/Be It Till You See It Podcast https://lesleylogan.co/podcast/Online Pilates Classes by Lesley Logan https://onlinepilatesclasses.com/Online Pilates Classes by Lesley Logan on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjogqXLnfyhS5VlU4rdzlnQProfitable Pilates https://profitablepilates.com/about/Follow Us on Social Media:Instagram https://www.instagram.com/lesley.logan/The Be It Till You See It Podcast YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq08HES7xLMvVa3Fy5DR8-gFacebook https://www.facebook.com/llogan.pilatesLinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/lesley-logan/The OPC YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/@OnlinePilatesClasses Episode Transcript:Lesley Logan 0:00  If you're not clear on who you are, you actually fill in these gaps you people, please, and then you're wondering, like, why you have relationships that, like, don't represent you, or don't feel right or don't fit, it's because you didn't know who you were, and you you brought that on yourself. Lesley Logan 0:14  Welcome to the Be It Till You See It podcast where we talk about taking messy action, knowing that perfect is boring. I'm Lesley Logan, Pilates instructor and fitness business coach. I've trained thousands of people around the world and the number one thing I see stopping people from achieving anything is self-doubt. My friends, action brings clarity and it's the antidote to fear. Each week, my guest will bring bold, executable, intrinsic and targeted steps that you can use to put yourself first and Be It Till You See It. It's a practice, not a perfect. Let's get started. Lesley Logan 0:56  Welcome back to the Be It Till You See It interview recap where my co-host in life, Brad, and I are going to dig into the candid convo I had with Barb Betts in the last episode. If you haven't listened to that one, you didn't hear it, and you're not gonna understand what we're talking about, but.  Brad Crowell 1:09  Well that's true. If they didn't listen to it, then they didn't hear it. Lesley Logan 1:11  Well, we're thrilled you're here. So if this you might, this might be the first, Be It hot episode.Brad Crowell 1:17  We're so happy that you're here. Lesley Logan 1:18  You know, it's taken 665 episodes. We didn't realize maybe this is the first one, and that's why you didn't listen to it. And I shouldn't say you fucking missed out, because, like, you're new. How would you know? So welcome. This is not what my voice normally sounds like. It doesn't normally sound like I'm on the brink of a sneeze, but I have a sinus stitch, and here we are. We are gonna while you're listening to this, we are in Europe, and we have to record these things early, and so we can't wait any longer. This is how it's gonna be. So stick around.Brad Crowell 1:46  That's true. Lesley Logan 1:46  It does get better than this. It's basically just it sounds less Lesley. Today is April 9th, and it's National Unicorn Day. Brad Crowell 1:53  That's right.Lesley Logan 1:54  You're fucking welcome.Brad Crowell 1:54  You are very welcome. National Unicorn Day.Lesley Logan 1:57  There are other days that we can celebrate. But, I mean, come on, hello. National Unicorn Day is a day to celebrate the most popular mythical creature ever. Why? Because if we don't take time to celebrate a beautiful horn, rainbow, printed mythical creature, then we're most definitely missing a trick. I don't think it's trick. You've been missing out. Brad Crowell 2:17  You're missing out.Lesley Logan 2:17  You're missing out. It's missing out. The unicorn is a symbol of happiness, fantasy and wonder. It's an icon of color, of childlike splendor and magic. They often make appearances on birthday cakes and children's clothing. And let's be honest, quite a lot of US adults still dig them, too. I mean, hello, my Lisa Frank people. My Lisa Frank people, I love you probably have as a tattoo, because adults need stickers too. National Unicorn Day is your chance to express some unicorn love. So show some color and delve into the magnificence of unicorns with us.Brad Crowell 2:47  No, we're saying that word one more time.Lesley Logan 2:50  Show some color and delve into the magnificence. Brad Crowell 2:54  That is the word. Take three. Yes, you did two times. Lesley Logan 3:05  Keep sake. Alright. Oh my gosh I wish you guys knew what I'm happy about. Anyways, leave it in. Delve into the magnificence. You guys, I have a bright yellow box, kind of like a pizza box size that my dad gave me a gift in and on my 41st birthday, maybe was my 40th birthday, probably, probably my 41st anyway, in front of everybody before I had ordered a drink. I just want to put that there. There's, we're at a bar, but I have not had a drink. So it's, we can't blame anything. We cannot blame it on anything. Lesley Logan 3:49  My dad hands me this gift, and it has words on the front, and Brad goes, What does it say? And I said, it says, Keep sake. And Brad is looking at upside down.Brad Crowell 3:57  I was upside down, and I was like, Is that what it says? And I read it. And I was like, try again.Lesley Logan 4:03  I said, keep sake.Brad Crowell 4:05  Like, hello, I'm reading it. Lesley Logan 4:07  I'm reading it. Brad Crowell 4:08  Keep sake.Lesley Logan 4:09  And he's like, you want to try that one more time? And I'm like, it says, keep sake. And it's Brad said, what does it say babe?Brad Crowell 4:16  Definitely says keepsake. Lesley Logan 4:17  Keepsake. Brad Crowell 4:18  Yeah, but we'll go with keep sake.Lesley Logan 4:19  Now, anyone who was there understands how hilarious it was and signs off all text messages to me. Keep sake. I want to frame it so bad. I just don't know that I got to do it anyways. Keep sake. Lesley Logan 4:33  All right, you guys. We're on vacation right now, so I don't know why you're not, but we are. We are somewhere in France, but we're going to see you very soon. If you are in London at POT check out.Brad Crowell 4:43  Yeah we're celebrating our 10th year anniversary, actually.Lesley Logan 4:45  Yes, we are. Brad Crowell 4:46  Decided to take some time off. Lesley Logan 4:47  It's actually the exact dates that we did our honeymoon 10 years ago. So, it is. We did it in March.Brad Crowell 4:54  Of 2016, holy cow.Lesley Logan 4:56  You didn't know I that's why I said it's our second honeymoon. Because it's the same time.Brad Crowell 5:00  You're totally right. It's 10 years after the first honeymoon. Lesley Logan 5:03  I know. Brad Crowell 5:03  Wow, amazing. I didn't even put that together. Incredible. Well, we are going to be in London next week. Or actually, hold on, today is the ninth so in like two or three days, we're gonna be at POT.Lesley Logan 5:12  No, we're literally on a train from Paris to London in this moment.Brad Crowell 5:16  Yes, in this exact moment, we are traveling underwater.Lesley Logan 5:20  That's what they say. So if you want to see us, if there's any tickets left, you want to go to.Lesley Logan 5:24  xxll.co/potLesley Logan 5:26  And it's just in case you're wondering, it's xx not excess, the letters. Brad Crowell 5:33  Yes, as in kiss, kiss, hug, hug, xx and LL, because we thought that was cute. Okay, after that, we're heading back home. We're going to be back in Vegas for spring training. Spring Training is with onlinepilatesclasses.com we love to call it OPC and we do an annual event. Yeah, you know me, we do an annual, annual event. This is called Spring Training. And this year it's all about getting upside down.Lesley Logan 5:57  Yeah. OPC members, it's free for you.Brad Crowell 6:00  Free for OPC members.Lesley Logan 6:01  If you're not an OPC member, you are missing out. I'm just telling you. It really is for Pilates lovers. It really is one of the best things you could subscribe to, because you can do it in addition to your other things, like it doesn't have to be your only thing, but we actually give feedback on your form, like for exercise you're struggling with. We have a really amazing community that answers lots of questions. We can support you on the equipment choices, all that good stuff, and we help hold you a candle to your Pilates practice. And we do this fun event. It's free if you're a member, and it's not free if you're not a member, so then you have to pay for it if you're not a member, so you're gonna go to opc.me/events. To get on the waitlist for that. Actually, probably right now you can sign up for it. And I don't know how much it is on this date, but it's available for you to register for. If you go to opc.me/events it should direct you to where that is.Brad Crowell 6:46  Yes, opc.me/eventsLesley Logan 6:49  And then at the time I'm recording this, there's five spots left in my mentorship program. Just five. It could be gone by now. I have no idea. Unless you want to go to lesleylogan.co/elevate if it's sold out, I'll say so on the website. And if it's not sold out, you can apply to be in the mentorship program. Once I've accepted all the applications and they have accepted their spots, it's you have to work on 2028. Oh, geez, that's far okay. Brad Crowell 7:16  Oh, don't sit on it. Lesley Logan 7:17  Oh, my God, do not. I don't wait that long to work with you. It's way too much fun.Brad Crowell 7:21  Yeah, right. Well, before we dig into this amazing conversation that you had with Barb Betts, we have a question. Today's question is from @marthanovera on YouTube, and she was commenting on the Teaching the Hundred to Beginners video. She said, Hey, amazing tips. Quick q, when preparing for roll ups, when you say you don't like arms holding behind the knees, would it be helpful to have the client let go and reach the arms forward as they curl to their lowest point? Would it be a useful prep for an actual roll up?Lesley Logan 7:55  Trying to picture what you're saying. Sorry, it's not you, Martha, it's it's my sinus medicine. Brad Crowell 8:01  Okay, so. Lesley Logan 8:02  I understand. Brad Crowell 8:03  You do understand. Lesley Logan 8:04  You're preparing for roll ups and I don't like when people hold behind the knees because they just use their arms, which is why I don't like it. I but I understand why a half roll up exists. I have it in my flash cards. I actually have information on how to best teach it. And if they're holding behind their thighs, like close to their knees, just wanna make sure that they're not using their arms to do it. But of course, they might need but, of course, they might need to. But is it helpful for them to reach forward as they curl their lowest point like so they let go? It could be, it might be extra to be honest. Here's the problem. People make Pilates too complicated. What I mean is like, okay, curl forward. Okay. Now, right there. Stop. Reach your arms forward and keep going.Brad Crowell 8:41  I think people like, whip up. They like, you know, to get up into that roll up. That's what I did at first, for sure.Lesley Logan 8:48  All right, so what I would say, Martha is, if they're not ready for the roll up, maybe we need to do other things. Maybe they need to do some pre Pilates work.Brad Crowell 8:56  Yeah, I was gonna say everybody's favorite elbow slip will really help with the roll up.Lesley Logan 9:00  That might even be too hard. Maybe they actually get. Brad Crowell 9:02  It's really hard. Lesley Logan 9:03  Honestly, look, if they don't have access to a Cadillac, that would be a bummer, because where I'm thinking they need to go is the half roll up with the roll back bar. Actually need to use the springs that help them go down and up, versus just working on themselves. I would also say stomach massage on the Reformer would be really great. I would say push down on the Wunda Chair can be really helpful. And if they don't have access to any of that equipment, Martha, then I would put them on the wall, and I'd practice the roll up at the wall. Clearly, something is tight and something is weak. So instead of trying to modify the roll up again and again until it's almost nothing, like the roll up, which is basically like borrowing cash off a credit card, which is the highest interest rate, makes it really hard to pay back whenever you use too much modifications. Are they ever going to be able to do the actual exercise? Ever, right? It's gonna take years, it's gonna take months. So I would say, put them at the wall and work on the roll down, up and down the wall. So they go put their back and then work on exercise that would stretch the front of their thighs and strengthen the back of their legs and then add the exercise back in. It's perfectly fine for them to skip it, get better at it. And I know that that sounds terrible. Sometimes people like I'm just trying to make Pilates accessible. I'm not saying don't make it accessible. What I'm saying is.Brad Crowell 10:14  Yeah, but there are building blocks here, and maybe you haven't built the foundation necessary to be able to do the roll up without either cheating or hurting someone, right, so.Lesley Logan 10:22  Correct and here's the other thing, you remember how. Brad Crowell 10:24  Not that you're hurting them, but they could hurt themselves. Lesley Logan 10:26  Training wheels work. They like, don't actually touch the ground. It's like, if you lean to one side, a training wheel touches the ground, right, catches you. Then I saw someone's training wheels that like, touch the ground, having training wheels that touch the ground on both sides. That kid is never riding a bicycle, ever. It's never gonna happen. So you have to actually make sure that you're not putting a tripod on a bike, versus actually something that will help them test the waters. Brad Crowell 10:51  It's a great visual. Lesley Logan 10:52  Thanks. I just came up with it. Now, how did I not think about that genius example? But another thing I'll just say is, like, not every exercise is for everybody at that time, and we have to understand that, like our job as the teachers who are teaching people is to make sure that we understand, by looking at a body what they're ready for, and then prepare them for what they're ready for. And for the clients, it is understanding that if you can't do an exercise yet, it doesn't mean there's something wrong with you. It means that we actually have to find the connections to help you get there. And for whatever reason, this is completely normal at a gym. Like, no one would go, Oh, my God, I can't bench press. You've got to make this bar lighter. Rogue should make a lighter bar. No, they're like, here are some lighter dumbbells. Here is another way you could do push ups at the wall. There's like, all these different things. You take bands and you build up your flexibility and your abilities.Brad Crowell 11:47  It's like doing pull ups, right? Like, the same thing. This is a great these are great parallels.Lesley Logan 11:50  For whatever reason, at a gym, people are understanding that they have to build up their strength to do something. But in Pilates or even in yoga, I would argue, people are like, you should make the exercise possible, no.Brad Crowell 12:00  I mean, even when you are like, I can like, even when you're like, I got this, I can do a squat with 175 pounds. You don't, your first squat is not 175 pounds. You build up your bar to get to 175 pounds, even if you know you can already do it.Lesley Logan 12:15  Today, I Dave, I back squatted 120 pounds today. Brad Crowell 12:18  Did you just call me Dave? Lesley Logan 12:20  Babe. Brad Crowell 12:20  Oh, babe. Lesley Logan 12:21  What's this with the sinus infection sounds like Dave, but it's babe. Hey, babe. Hey, Dave, I back squat 120 pounds, which you know how much I started with? Brad Crowell 12:29  Tell me. Lesley Logan 12:29  65 pounds. Did three reps then I added 20 more pounds, 85 pounds, then I got to 105 and did six reps. Now I started my rounds, and I went to 110 then 115 120 why? Because you have to get your brain connected to it. And I just, I just want to say, like, for whatever reason, people like, oh, I have to make Pilates accessible to everybody. No, you have to make everybody ready for the exercise you're gonna give them. That is your job. If you're a teacher, that's your job. If you're a teacher, and if you're not doing that, then you're not helping people. You're just putting a tripod on their bike and going see you did it. You did Pilates. That, to me, is almost lying to them. Anyways. Now I'm on a ped, I'm on a fucking like.Brad Crowell 13:06  Now you're on your own tripod. Lesley Logan 13:08  No, what do you call those things? I'm on a pedestal. I'm not pointing fingers at people, Martha, I just want to say also. Brad Crowell 13:14  Your soapbox, you mean. Lesley Logan 13:15  My soapbox. That's what I'm on. Telling you guys the day will hit. Martha, I appreciate this question. I know it comes from a place of love and wanting your clients to get it, and I love that you're trying to be creative, and so I hope I'm not. I hope you don't feel like I'm like, attacking you. I just, I want to give you different perspective of how to think about readying your clients, and I hope that gives you some.Brad Crowell 13:34  I like it. I like it. Well, that's a great question. Martha, thanks for writing that in and feel free to keep writing in questions. If you have a question, text it to us at 310-905-5534. We also love to celebrate wins. If you haven't, if it is your first episode tomorrow will be Fuck Yeah Friday, and that's gonna be amazing, so.Lesley Logan 13:52  One of, one of, one of the people who sent a win in, they're like, I don't know if it's qualifies. They're in one of our they're like, an eLevate grad and like, I know if it qualifies as a win, but I heard my win on the FYFs today that I sent in, and it's been months since I've had that win, and being able to hear it and recelebrate that is another win.Brad Crowell 14:12  Well, if you have either a win or a question, you can also send it in at beitpod.com/questions be it pod.com/questions and we can't wait to celebrate yours, so stick around. We will be right back. We're going to talk about Barb Betts. Brad Crowell 14:28  Barb Betts is a keynote speaker, author and recovering real estate broker who turned an accidental speaking career into a full time role as a thought leader with over 20 years of experience, she helps professionals understand how relationships drive leadership, sales and long term success. She's the author of the relationship advantage, and is known for her practical, trust-centered approach to relationships, and I think her book has just come out. So we're really Barb. We've known Barb now for like, five or six years, and yeah, this is really exciting for her. So we're fired up.Lesley Logan 14:59  She's kicking ass.Brad Crowell 15:00  Yeah, fantastic. So one thing, oh, actually.Lesley Logan 15:02  It's my turn. Brad Crowell 15:03  It's your turn. Lesley Logan 15:04  I start. I always start. It's my turn. Brad Crowell 15:06  It's your turn. Lesley Logan 15:06  Yeah. She said, I love this so much. She said, to have a real relationship with anyone else, you first have to have relationship with yourself. You guys, this is like. Brad Crowell 15:14  This is like, this is like, mic drop moment, boom.Lesley Logan 15:17  Y'all. This is, like, every time I have people in my life who complain about the people who are dating, gonna go, there's something wrong with you, because you, if you keep attracting people, like one of our friends today, I'm excited for them, but like, I saw online that they're just talking about, like, this is the third person that's ghosted me, and it's like, why do you people three people in a row ghost you like what are you putting out in the world? Because one person goes to okay, that like lightning strikes once in a while, but like, three there's something going on there. So she mentioned that relationships are a mirror of yourself, you're only capable of building a relationship with someone else to the capacity you have one with yourself. So she also argued the biggest problem we have in life is we're trying to build relationships with others, and we don't even know who we are. So we show up to these relationships. Inevitably, we people please and present an inauthentic version of ourselves. And I have a series coming up on I think it's listening to your inner self. And I brought up a book called Getting the Love You Want. And I also just want to say, I have no idea if it ages well. I have no idea if that person's like a real marriage counselor. But there's this thing about in the book that talks about how when you get into a new relationship with anybody.Brad Crowell 16:28  Harville Hendrix. Lesley Logan 16:30  You, you fill in all of your holes, so to speak, you fill them in, but you think that the other person you're with fill them in, and then in a few months, when you're exhausted and tired, you don't fill them in anymore. And then you're like, you've changed. And it's like, actually, you changed because you were filling those things and you were presenting an inauthentic version of yourself. And so I just think that, like, what if you are someone who's wanting new friendships, new relationships, better clients, you know, Barb's big thing is that, like, if you have really great relationships, you can have great longevity in your business and things like that. But if you don't know who you are, you're not going to be attracting people that you want in your life, whether they're clients, friends, a romantic partner, any of that kind of stuff. You gotta know who yourself is.Brad Crowell 17:07  Harville Hendrix is a doctor. Lesley Logan 17:09  Okay, great. Brad Crowell 17:10  So they have a PhD. I have no idea in what, but it's Dr Hendrix. So yes. Lesley Logan 17:15  Yeah, I remember it being great. I also only read the first chapter. I kind of got the point. Do you ever do that you're like. Brad Crowell 17:29  I'm like, okay, got this chapter, I see where, yeah, this is like, ADHD. Am I finishing your sentences? How about I finish your book in the first, I'm like, got it.Lesley Logan 17:39  But, but I will just say, like, I appreciate that thought. And it comes to this, it's like, if you're not clear on who you are, you actually fill in these gaps, you people please. And then you're wondering, like, why you have relationships that, like, don't represent you, or don't feel right, or don't fit, it's because you didn't know who you were, and you you brought that on yourself.Brad Crowell 17:57  Yeah. Well, I got really into when she was kind of dissing the word authenticity, yeah, even though the irony is, she wants people to be authentic, and she also she acknowledged that, and she said that, but she said her big beef with it is the word authenticity is like so overused, and it's also under explored. And she said she critiques the common self-help mantra of just be yourself, you know? And she argues that to be is a verb, that the verb to be is inherently performative, right? Comparing it to deciding what to be for Halloween or when you grow up, right? So if we are going to, like, I think the Halloween parallel is perfect, like, I am going to be Iron Man for Halloween, and you're like, putting on a costume to be Iron Man for the night, but then we're also told to be authentic. And we're like, okay, I gotta, like, be authentic in this moment coming up right now, but like, in my real life, am I actually authentic, or am I putting on the costume of authenticity for this thing? I'm gonna go do whatever, right? And so I think that that was, like, that was really intriguing to me, because she said, that's, I think, how most people are thinking about it, like, okay, I got to put on my two my authenticity hat. Now, you know, she said, authenticity is not about doing anything. Authenticity is about undoing everything that is not you. Lesley Logan 19:16  I love that, and I think that that makes it a lot easier.Brad Crowell 19:18  Another mic drop moment, like, I seriously, there was some, like, really deep stuff in this episode with Barb, and she was just casually throwing out these, like, epic topics. I was like, whoa. Let's dig into that more. She started talking about comparison, and she said, comparison is actually the thief of authenticity. When you're comparing, you are now all of a sudden, adding things into your life that are not you. But if authenticity is about undoing everything that isn't you, then comparison is really the number one trap. But if you compare yourself to someone else for different reasons, you're running a race, you cannot win. She advised that to we need to reframe comparison by replacing envy with curiosity, right, which I love. Wow. Look at them. How are they doing what they're doing? Yeah, you know, rather than feeling defeated by someone else's success, we should view them as showing us that there's a path that's possible, or maybe even literally showing us the path. Oh, I could do that too, right? You know, and how you could achieve it your own way. So I just thought it was powerful. Really, really concisely well said. Lesley Logan 20:19  I mean, we've been listening to Barb talk about building great relationships for a really long time and so does that see her be able to put in a concise book that anyone because she does this on speaking. But when are you gonna go see or speak you'd have to be at one of those speaking places, right? And like, this is something anyone can use. And I think, like, I love the word authenticity, like it's a value that we have at our company, a value that I think is really important, but I agree with her, I is overused and under explored. It's kind of like the word Pilates. Gonna be really honest, it's very similar, like, I do Pilates, but most of the time, people tell me that I'm like, oh, and then I'm like, where do you do it? And they're like, I do it over this place. And I'm like, those aren't even reformers. Why is the room hot? What are we doing? Oh, and you're and your shoulders hurt later, you're not doing Pilates. But I don't want to be the person who tells them that, like, like, that's just an annoying thing. So I kind of feel like I understand, and I love Pilates, and I love being authentic. So I feel it's a predicament. I'm in a I'm in a conundrum.Brad Crowell 21:20  Conundrum. Yeah, it's something we have to remove. All right. Well, anyway, we will be right back. We're going to dig into some Be It Action Items that you covered with Barb Betts, stick around. Brad Crowell 21:30  All right. So finally, let's talk about those Be It Action Items. What bold, executable, intrinsic or targeted action items can we take away from your convo with Barb Betts. She said there are three things that have to be present to have a real relationship with others and even with yourself. She calls it the VVR formula, visibility, vulnerability and relatability. VVR. So visibility, are you actually showing up and being present? Visibility, are you actually showing up and being present. She links this to a really interesting law called propinquity, which I have never looked up and thought that was interesting. She said that the greater proximity increases the chance of a relationship. So if you're not in the room, you can't have a relationship.Lesley Logan 22:15  Oh, that's kind of like how Hinge, the dating app, used to start. It was based on if someone had ever been in a location that you've been to? That's how Chris and Laura got together. They both went to some area in Century City Mall, crazy. She shopped there, and his office was down there. And so they're like, you two are near each other some of the time. Brad Crowell 22:33  Love that. Well, yeah. So visibility, obviously. Vulnerability is the second thing. And I thought, again, this was another really powerful thing. And she said, there has to be some level of vulnerability in your life with other human beings. So are you willing to say, I don't know the answer to that? Or text someone and just be like, Hey, I was just thinking about you. I miss you, right? And there's that is being vulnerable. And when you do that, it really does, like let them know that they're special, that they're they care. So you know, by being vulnerable, you're helping connect the dots, and it builds relationships. The third is relatable relatability. You have to have a point of connection or common ground. She believes that this is often something forced, that people are forcing right? I mean, you know, it's like, I think actually people who get in a relationship and they they say things like, Oh, we love the same music and movies and all this kind of stuff, but, like, that's the only things that are a part of it. There's got to be more the vulnerability is, like, super important, you know, and honesty and trust and, of course, all those other things. But relatability is a definitely the beginning. It will help jumpstart all these conversations and all these things, but you know, if you're forcing it, you're not being vulnerable.Lesley Logan 23:52  I mean, that's yeah, that's kind of it. Brad Crowell 23:54  Yeah. She emphasized that if you don't have these three things, then you won't build a relationship.Lesley Logan 23:59  Yeah. I believe that. Brad Crowell 24:00  Yeah, what about you? Big takeaway. Lesley Logan 24:02  Okay, stop hiding. Let your walls down. Let people in. Admit you're not perfect. Admit where you know your vulnerabilities are. Pay attention to how you feel on social media. Pay attention to what you're looking out and how you're comparing yourself to others. I mean, these are great things to like even journal on. They kind of help with what you were talking about before, first of all, if you're listening to this podcast, you're already admitting you're not perfect. You've been listening to us. I sound like a fucking shit right now. I sound like a Bakewell. But I also think, like, when you admit those things, it you don't have to pretend, and you you can just, it doesn't mean you get to like, it's like a bus pass to like, being an asshole, but you can just be like, like, I am not an organized person. I'm not I It's not something I'm going to learn to do. I put things down. I don't put them away. I'm not a dirty person. I'm a messy person, you know. So I that means I have to know that those are my things, and I need people in my life who will put things away or keep things out of my hands so I can't fuck it up, you know. You just have to know these things. And if you do feel like shit when you're watching social media, stop doing it. One of my clients, she just, social media doesn't make her feel good, so she doesn't have any account. She just, she's like, I just, like, I have no idea what's going on, and that's okay, because, like, honestly, like, I don't it wasn't helping. The benefits of being in on, like, whatever is something that is like people are talking about don't outweigh the negatives of how I feel about myself when I watch it. So I think this is really important. And I I understand if you've been hurt before, it's hard to let your walls down, but you waiting for someone to be trustworthy enough to let your walls down. Guess how you do that? You trust them. You have to like, let your wall like the way it works you have to let your walls down first so you can trust them. Let your walls down. That's how it goes. So if people suck, go find new people. I also just want to say, like, I love.Brad Crowell 25:49  Burn those relationships or not relationships, because they're not relationships. Lesley Logan 25:54  No, I think, like, I love how Barb talks about, like, building authentic relationships. I made big fan of just like (inaudible) just don't go like, I'm amazed at how many friends you have from like, different parts of your life, and like. Brad Crowell 26:05  Who, me? Lesley Logan 26:06  Yeah, and I have I, if I saw those people in a place right now, I would not avoid them. I would absolutely go, oh my god, hi from high school, if I to be honest, and no offense even from high school, if I recognized you. I really didn't know who I was in high school, so I don't know, like, who you remember, because probably, but like, I would just say, like, I don't have those but I wouldn't be like, Oh, I don't talk to those people anymore. It's just like, I outgrew those things because I got to know myself more, and it's not a slight to them. It's just like, you keep going. So it's okay to let relationships go, if you have to show up inauthentically to be in them, yes, and I think that that's really important information, you know.Brad Crowell 26:47  I think, I think that's worth saying again, you know, like, and I it's something I struggle with, is letting a relationship go, you know, because, for me, I value relationships really highly. But I love the idea that if you have changed to the point where being in a relationship with a friend or even a family member means you have to be inauthentic to be in that you're allowed to hit pause, you know. So yeah, and it's gonna be healthy for you in the long run, and it is something that we have to protect ourselves, you know? Because, like, think about this. We talk about this all the time. When we let our friends or family, we tell them our dream, and then they shit all over it, and then we take that seriously, you know? And it's like, like, we all know that that has happened, but also too, like, clearly, there's a discord there. Doesn't mean we're firing those friends, but the point is that if we are aware, conscious enough that we should protect our dreams when we're sharing them. You know, in that way, it's also okay as you shift, change and grow. If you have to, like, pretend to be your old self to be in a relationship with someone, maybe you move on.Lesley Logan 27:53  Well, I'll just say, like the other day we were at, not the other day, the other day, but a while back, we were at an event, and I saw some people in person for the first time in six, seven years in our industry, and I used to handle the lot, and there was just a few different times they showed me, kind of like, who they were and how I needed to be in their relationship with them. And they're not bad people by the way. They just their needs and how they want to be and what they want to talk about, are things that are not something I want to do, and how I'd have to be in a conversation with them is not authentic to me. And I went up, I hugged them, I genuinely said, how are you what's going on? And they did vague, this is what's going on, even like they were not vulnerable, no. And what they did say was like. Brad Crowell 28:39  I literally know the conversation you're talking about. Lesley Logan 28:42  They were like, they were like, kind of pumping up whatever it was they were doing in a very like, I'm over here and this is over here. And I was like, yeah, I'm really glad that I'm saying hi, and I'm so glad that over the last six years we haven't been in contact, because, like, who they want me to be in that conversation is not who I am and I have voiced multiple times things that, like, I was like, ooh, I don't really like this, X, Y and Z, yeah. And guess what? So I voiced it. They didn't want to hear it, or they don't care, or they don't see it that way. You have to be a negative. It's just like, it's, we're different. And I think.Brad Crowell 29:15  But this comes back to knowing yourself. So because you know yourself, it allows you to be like, ooh. Lesley Logan 29:20  Yeah. So because of that, so it was great to just have a check in. Like, oh, did I let something go? Was it me? No, actually, we are oil and water and that is okay, and we can exist as balsamic and oil. Sometimes they're great on bread. Sometimes, there's gonna be people who glad that we're both at the exact same event, but I don't have to pour myself into their bowl for the for it to.Brad Crowell 29:45  To finish the metaphor. Yeah, love it. Awesome. Lesley Logan 29:47  All right. I'm Lesley Logan. Brad Crowell 29:48  And I'm Brad Crowell. Lesley Logan 29:49  You guys are amazing. I just am so grateful for you. Thanks for sticking it out with this voice. I hope that we record in a couple of days better. If it's not, you're gonna keep. Listening anyways, because you love me and we are hopefully really helpful, and so you're gonna leave a review, too, me hypnotizing you leave a review show this with a friend who needs to hear it. Until next time, go Be It Till You See It. Brad Crowell 30:10  Bye for now. Lesley Logan 30:12  That's all I got for this episode of the Be It Till You See It Podcast. One thing that would help both myself and future listeners is for you to rate the show and leave a review and follow or subscribe for free wherever you listen to your podcast. Also, make sure to introduce yourself over at the Be It Pod on Instagram. I would love to know more about you. Share this episode with whoever you think needs to hear it. Help us and others Be It Till You See It. Have an awesome day. Be It Till You See It is a production of The Bloom Podcast Network. If you want to leave us a message or a question that we might read on another episode, you can text us at +1-310-905-5534 or send a DM on Instagram @BeItPod.Brad Crowell 30:54  It's written, filmed, and recorded by your host, Lesley Logan, and me, Brad Crowell.Lesley Logan 30:59  It is transcribed, produced and edited by the epic team at Disenyo.co.Brad Crowell 31:04  Our theme music is by Ali at Apex Production Music and our branding by designer and artist, Gianfranco Cioffi.Lesley Logan 31:11  Special thanks to Melissa Solomon for creating our visuals.Brad Crowell 31:14  Also to Angelina Herico for adding all of our content to our website. And finally to Meridith Root for keeping us all on point and on time.Lesley Logan 31:27  There's a gnat that is just like. Brad Crowell 31:29  I know I tried to kill him twice on my screen without shaking my camera.Lesley Logan 31:32  Flying around my face. I feel like that dog today. I'm like. Gonna wash my hair after this.Brad Crowell 31:44  Yeah, the more you keep touching it, the more amazing it looks on camera.Lesley Logan 31:53  Yeah, what is happening? Okay, that's pretty good. Nope. Do I look like a unicorn?Brad Crowell 32:09  Yes, you are always a unicorn babe. Okay, ready? Okay, let's talk about Barb. Betts. Barb is a keynote speaker, author and recovering real estate broker who turned and we are on a roll. All right, let's start that over. Brad Crowell 32:38  She said there are three things that you have to have to be present. Sorry. She said there are three things that you have to be present to have. This is fucked up. There are three things that have to be oh, that not you. It's just have to be present. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

We live in an era where our favorite artists’ mistakes are put on blast in real-time. Inevitably, they will disappoint us. What do we do with our disappointment? Our hosts Angela Rye, Andrew Gillum, Bakari Sellers, and guest-host Brittany Packnett Cunningham, continue a conversation from episode 125 that aired 04-02-26. If you’d like to submit a question, check out our tutorial video: http://www.instagram.com/reel/C5j_oBXLIg0/ and send to @nativelandpod. Welcome home y’all! —--------- We want to hear from you! Send us a video @nativelandpod and we may feature you on the podcast. Instagram X/Twitter Facebook NativeLandPod.com Watch full episodes of Native Land Pod here on YouTube. Native Land Pod is brought to you by Reasoned Choice Media. Thank you to the Native Land Pod team: Angela Rye as host, executive producer, and cofounder of Reasoned Choice Media; Andrew Gillum as host and producer, Bakari Sellers as host and producer, and Lauren Hansen as executive producer; LoLo Mychael is our research producer, and Nikolas Harter is our editor and producer. Special thanks to Chris Morrow and Lenard McKelvey, co-founders of Reasoned Choice Media. Theme music created by Daniel Laurent.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hello! Newcastle United's financial accounts for 2024-25 are out - and our chief NUFC writer sat down with The Toon's CEO David Hopkinson to get an insight into the numbers. Inevitably, Hopkinson was asked about Eddie Howe's future after a disappointing season - and his quotes have caused quite the stir. --- As always a big thanks to our sponsors NORD VPN and Saily - two products that will enhance your travel abroad. NORD VPN providing the safety and security you need while browsing, and Saily giving you that affordable e-sim and network coverage. You can get discounts by hitting up the links in the description box. EXCLUSIVE NordVPN Deal ➼ https://nordvpn.com/toon Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee

When we say 'the cloud' what we mean is 'the data centre'. Globally, data centres are projected to consume over 1000 terawatt hours in 2026. What does that mean for energy production, distribution, and consumption? Guest Phil Harris, Cerio President and CEO, joins thinkenergy to shed light on something we all rely on but may not fully understand. From efficiency to sustainability, environmental concerns to Cerio's role improving how data centres manage energy. Listen in for the future of cloud computing.  - Related links  ●       Cerio: https://www.cerio.ai/ ●       Phil Harris on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paharris/  ●       Trevor Freeman on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/trevor-freeman-p-eng-8b612114  ●       Hydro Ottawa: https://hydroottawa.com/en     To subscribe using Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/thinkenergy/id1465129405 To subscribe using Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/7wFz7rdR8Gq3f2WOafjxpl To subscribe on Libsyn: http://thinkenergy.libsyn.com/ --- Subscribe so you don't miss a video: https://www.youtube.com/user/hydroottawalimited Follow along on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hydroottawa Stay in the know on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HydroOttawa Keep up with the posts on X: https://twitter.com/thinkenergypod --- Transcript: Trevor Freeman  00:07 Welcome to think energy, a podcast that dives into the fast, changing world of energy through conversations with industry leaders, innovators and people on the front lines of the energy transition. Join me, Trevor Freeman, as I explore the traditional, unconventional and up and coming facets of the energy industry. If you have any thoughts, feedback or ideas for topics we should cover, please reach out to us at thinkenergy@hydroottawa.com. Hi everyone, and welcome back. Data centres have come up a number of times on this show, and for very good reason, they have become a key underpinning technology for so much of our lives, every time we pull out that phone from our pockets to pull up directions or buy something online or doom, scroll on your social media or new site of choice, every time you use your phone stream a movie, leverage an AI model, whatever you end up using it for, it's funny as I read this list, I'm sure there's like some university student out there who's thinking, man, what is this old man talking about? We don't use our phones for that, whatever the kids are doing these days, whatever we're doing these days with our phones, with our computers, our tablets, et cetera. All of that leverages infrastructure that most of us have never seen and, quite frankly, probably don't really understand we talk about the cloud like it's this amorphous, nebulous thing, but in reality, we're talking about real hardware in a real building that uses real energy, mainly electricity, a lot of water. And this isn't really new, like we've been leveraging centralized data centres for many years now, but what is changing is the scale of the data centres that we're seeing now, and the pace of growth in computing power that we need to do, the things that we want to do, and that our data centres are able to deliver. So just to throw a few numbers at it, the traditional data centre servers that maybe power the early days of on demand online streaming services, for example, they used anywhere from five to 15 kilowatts per rack. But modern server racks that are used to power AI searches, for example, can hit anywhere from 60 to 100 kilowatts per rack. This is great from a power output per rack perspective, but it means massive energy needs, and that is showing up in the size of load requests that we're seeing from new data centres. New data centres today are asking for service connections that are orders of magnitude higher than those built even just five years ago, globally, data centres are projected to consume over 1000 terawatts in 2026 or terawatt hours, sorry, in 2026 and just a quick kind of refresher from high school or wherever you would have learned this, a terawatt is 1000 gigawatts, which is 1000 megawatts. So 1000 terawatt hours, which is roughly equivalent to the annual electricity demand from the country of Japan, an entire country. So given all of this, there are a lot of incentives to find ways to maximize efficiency and reduce some of that energy demand, and that's where my next guest, Phil Harris and his company Cerio come into play. I'll let Phil get into the details of exactly what Cerio does, but essentially, their goal is to reimagine the data centre to maximize sustainability and reduce energy needs. Phil is Cerio's President and CEO, and has been in the networking and data centre industry for over 35 years, including at well known companies like Intel and Cisco. And I'm really excited about this conversation. One to understand, how do we make data centres a little bit more efficient, or maybe a lot more efficient, but also just to really understand, like, what are we talking about when we talk about a data centre? What is actually happening, what is physically inside these buildings, and we'll get into a little bit of that in our conversation. So Phil, welcome to the show.   Phil Harris  04:13 Well, thanks, Trevor. I appreciate it.   Trevor Freeman  04:13 So Phil, obviously we're here today to talk about your work building sustainable data centres, or trying to make data centres a little bit more sustainable. But before we get into that. You know, you've spent your career, you know, decades of your career at different tech giants. Let's call them in telecisco to to mention, you've seen quite a bit of change. No doubt, over your time, has that changed, like, does this industry change linearly? Does it grow fairly steady, or is it kind of big jumps? And are we on the cusp of any major shifts? What can you kind of tell us about the future of this, this sector, data, tech, etc?   Phil Harris  04:48 It's interesting, I think, as companies start, and I was at companies like Cisco, for example, when it was a very small company to when it was very large company. And this should be no surprise for anybody, the bigger the company gets, the harder. It is to change, and they really find that the only way they change is when they absolutely have to, not because they want to, and that's a combination of just inertia and shareholders expectations and a whole bunch of things. So I would say that the bigger the company is, the harder is them, for them to react. And so I think small, nimble companies tend to do much better when there's a lot of transformational technology and development and changes in the overall ecosystem we live in. I think just the second part of your question, you know, I look at the current situation as a point in time where a lot of companies will have to make some significant changes, simply because we're hitting too many walls, technological walls, commercial walls, geopolitical walls, that are really sort of confining what people can do. So I think what's going to about to happen is we're about to see a significant change, and this is not atypical in the industry. If we think about back into the into the start of what we would think of today as computer science around mainframes that were happening in the 60s. You know, for about a decade and a half, two decades, there was a lot of dominance around a particular way of doing things. And then some new innovational technology came along that rapidly changed, that scaled out, and it went from a very dominant set of players to a much larger number of smaller players who could then provide more innovation and more scale and more choice. And I think we're about to see that transition occurring as well.   Trevor Freeman  06:25 So is this, is there sort of like an analogous time, 10 years ago, 20 years ago? Are we on the cusp of, like, the big, the big change that we've seen before? Like, what would you compare this to? You know, in the last 2030, years?   Phil Harris  06:40 Yeah. I mean, I think there's been eras of compute. And if we say, I mean, we can find analogies outside of the compute world, but let's just stay in the compute, computing science world. I gave the mainframe example as one, and then we went to what we call client server, which scaled out rapidly. Telephony. We went from large, big telephone exchanges that started in in the government space, went to very large organizations. Now, basically we've completely scaled out how we make phone calls to use that now 20th century as a terminology. Nobody really makes telephone calls anymore. And we went through this with cloud computing and the Internet, where there was a change in the approach to the way we did things that suddenly gave us a scale out mentality, rather than a scale up mentality. And I think that's what we have to key in on here. Is it that we can take some of you? I was on a panel yesterday where we were talking about scale, and I say, well, to scale or not to scale? That is not the question. It's how do we scale? Do we continue to scale up, which is the current model, or do we start to think about scaling out, which is a more distributed model? So we go from a small number of big things to a large number of smaller things. And typically in computer science, whatever you want to start, storage, compute, memory, telephony, everything we've ever done goes through this arc.   Trevor Freeman  07:59 Yeah, it's it's interesting, and it's, there's obviously my brain's gonna immediately try and find those, those similarities between my world that I live in on the energy side of things. And it's the same question, like, there, there's, there is no path where we're not expanding the amount of energy we need. We're not going to be using more energy. But there are different ways to do that, and there are different paths we can take the business as usual that just grow, grow, grow, decentralized energy production and large scale transmission. Or there's a combination of like, grow those things, but also find alternative methods. More ders more sort of like close to consumer energy sources and storage, et cetera, et cetera. And people that listen to this podcast know I kind of go on ad nauseam about this. So lots of similarities. There another kind of framing or foundational thing that I want to talk through before we really get into the meat of our conversation is helping ground both myself and our listeners, and what exactly we're talking about here. So we, we all use, whether we know it or not, we use, you know, like cloud computing constantly, whether it's in our calls, how we're using the internet, using AI, more, more frequently. Now, what is the physical reality behind that? What's actually happening? What is the term data centre? What is a data centre for our listeners here? What does that look like?   Phil Harris  09:26 Yeah, let's start there. That's a great question. We started recognizing that the amount of power and space required for computers in companies and government in all sorts of different applications was getting larger than we could put in a room, in a closet near maybe where people were using it. We had to sort of create dedicated space, because the power requirements, the cooling requirements, just the noise. You can't hear this, but just in my basement, I have a few different compute systems that my wife continues to tell me is keeping my neighborhood awake. The reality is the environmentals of these things became very difficult. So we created these purpose built locations that had then different requirements in terms of access and facilities and power and cooling and staffing. And so they became a new way of thinking about building compute infrastructure at a building level, not just at the individual computers themselves. So a data is usually a very large room or building, I should say that houses large amounts of compute and storage and other networking equipment. There's a whole range of different technologies that go into a data centre that allows us to process information. That's what a data centre is. To give you some analogies in the US, there's about nearly 6000 data centres, depending on how you measure a data centre. In Canada, we have about 400 in Europe, there's about 750 that we can identify as standalone data centres. You can probably find more places where computers are outside of people's homes, but that's about the ratio we're looking at.   Trevor Freeman  10:59 And we're seeing, I think, and tell me if I'm wrong here, like, all this talk about the AI proliferation, data centre proliferation, we're seeing an expansion of these. Is that we're seeing the size of these data centres expand, or we're seeing just more of them popping up. Like, what does it mean when we say we're seeing, like, data centre growth because of AI, what does that mean?   Phil Harris  11:24 Well, it's fascinating, because now our worlds collide, because the way we now think about how to describe a data centre isn't in the square footage or the number of computers, it's in how much power it consumes, and we now measure it in megawatts, and it starts in 10 megawatts, or single digit megawatts, very small data centres, into average size data centres in the 10s of megawatts, up to now the hundreds and the gigawatts of consumption that you look at these hyperscalers. But I think we have to put this into a sort of a human scale. It helps us to put this in human scale. If I were to go back to ChatGPT actually about now, 15 months ago. ChatGPT-4. If you were to put that data centre footprint into the province of Ontario, for example, where you and I both are right now, it would be the equivalent of a million internal combustion engine cars driving 30 kilometers a day, if you ever drive up the 401 you probably don't want to see another million cars on the 401 Yeah, but that's the amount of energy that we can think of in terms of a data centre of that scale.   Trevor Freeman  12:33 Yeah, and again, kind of putting it in the electrical industry's terms, what we consider as a large load so we have a specific designation of a large load request that is anything five megawatts and higher. And like, up until recently, we would get one or two of those every once in a while, like, it's pretty rare to get a large load request. We are seeing large load requests coming in at a near constant pace now, like the number of large load requests we're getting, and a lot of it is because of this, not all because of data centres or anything like that, but a lot of them are certainly driven by that need for more more computing power, more facilities that support that.   Phil Harris  13:18 That's right. And at the same time, we're seeing a demand on on energy around now home, EV charging, and other aspects of the general distribution of the power, everything's taking a step function. But if I could just say one thing to your point about before I was seven megawatts, was a high load, then we may need to change that scale. It's almost inefficient to build a data centre unless you're somewhere above the 10 megawatt range, because at that point, get somebody else to do it for you.   Trevor Freeman  13:42 Interesting, yeah, and that's where it's sort of like, almost like, renting space in a data centre for a request of that size. Interesting, something that you know, I've seen kind of in your in your writing, on your on your blogs, is the idea that traditional data centres are really built for peak capacity, which absolutely mirrors the power industry. We build our electrical grids for peak capacity, and obviously that leads to a fair amount of inefficiencies. So if you're building just a peak capacity, if you're not at peak capacity, there is an inefficiency happening. There something that you identified. It's a stat from your research talks about graphics processing unit usage rates as low as 20 or 25% so I'm assuming that means kind of like three quarters of that hardware is sitting idle or not being used valuably. Tell us a little bit about what, what Cerio what you're doing, what your composable architecture specifically is doing to reclaim that wasted power and cooling capacity,   Phil Harris  14:44 Yeah, and so it starts off with your the premise you correctly raised is that, if we think about the the equipment, the physical equipment, and how we put these devices and these components together in a data centre, the same model we've been using today is, is about 3035, Years old in terms of individual compute systems, where we run applications, software that has memory and central processing units, those typical things you have in a laptop, or you have every computer. But then we put these accelerators, these GPUs, companies like Nvidia now are the one most valuable companies on the planet, if not the most valuable planet company on the planet, because that's the technology they develop. But we're trying to put these new class of accelerators into an existing compute model which wasn't designed for this. So then itself now starts to fragment the ability to leverage those resources in a data centre. And as you accurately said, it's interesting. If I could geek out on this a little bit for the energy consumer in the room, please. Do we think? We think about the notion not only the megawatts of power going into the data but we we think about what we call power usage efficiency. And that basically says, whatever the power delivered to a data centre, how much of that is applicable to the IT systems in that data centre, a good, well run, efficient data centre is about 1.2 that means about 1.2 times the amount of power that's used is delivered. Your home, for example, is about 30 times the amount of power we use is what's delivered. We are very inefficient from our home use, by the way. But that's another problem to solve in another podcast, but in this case, that's all true until we then ask the question, but what's actually being used at that equipment? And that's now in that 25 to 30% range at any point in time, and we refer to that as stranded and idle assets that, for whatever reason, aren't where the application is or aren't applicable to be used for the application that moment because they're in some other box, or it's a time of day when people use equipment. And by the way, equipment like that isn't being used 24 by seven, but it's drawing power 24 by seven, right? So there's lots of inherent inefficiencies in that model. So what we do is we provide the ability to dynamically have pools of resources where we can dynamically attach resources to a compute system as required, at the scale you're required, and allowing you to be much more efficient in the timing of that and the amount of equipment required to meet your end solution. And by doing that, we can increase the number of accelerators that you apply to a compute system, which inherently means you are much more efficient in those compute systems, because it's not just the computers. As I said before, there's storage, there's firewalls, there's load balances, there's networking equipment, all of that can now be much more efficiently used. All of that is drawing power.   Trevor Freeman  17:35 So is the idea, then, that the equipment not being used, or when you're at a lower demand time in terms of computing power, you've got physical equipment idling, sort of in more idle mode, drawing less resources that you can then ramp up so the peak amount of equipment still there. You're just being more efficient with it when it's not being used. And you've developed a way to sort of dynamically pull that in. Is that what I'm hearing.   Phil Harris  18:00 Exactly, I'll give you an example. A data centre here in Toronto wanted to have a block of 128 GPUs. They could have, they could they could service their customers with, with the current systems they were using previously to deploying our infrastructure, they had to require deploy, actually, 200 GPUs and a very large number of servers in the to house those GPUs. By deploying this area technology, they brought that down to 136 actual GPUs, and they reduced the number of compute platforms by a factor of four. So they reduced it by 75%.   Trevor Freeman  18:35 Yeah, that's fantastic,   Phil Harris  18:36 With exactly the same outcomes to their customers. With no no contention for resources, no oversubscription of resources, just more efficient use of those resources.   Trevor Freeman  18:46 Gotcha. So still able to meet that peak demand, but not sort of firing up that equipment when it's not needed.   Phil Harris  18:53 Well, not just not firing it, not having to have as much stranded equipment, because we can use all the equipment all the time.   Trevor Freeman  19:01 Gotcha. Okay, so in when I was kind of setting up that last question, I used the term composable architecture, and I'll admit that I pulled that from your material. Help me understand what that means. So you know that I've also seen you use composable infrastructure sounds a bit abstract, like, what? What are we talking about here? What does that actually look like?   Phil Harris  19:20 When a consumer, or someone who's building a data centre buys their computer equipment, they usually will actually buy the computers, the GPUs, the storage and other things at the same time, and they will get delivered together, and that box now becomes a unit of compute capacity. But the thing about that is whether you're able to use that entire capacity, the length in which that's a useful there's a lot of innovation churn right now as new things are coming through very quickly. But that box is now solid. You know, it's statically built for the rest of its life. Pretty much, it's very expensive. IBM did a study to take a server out of a rack, these big, six foot racks or bigger, where. These servers are housed with lots of wires going into them, power and data and all sorts of things. It's about $1,000 a minute to take one of those servers out of the rack and either change something that's broken, update something so they just don't get taken out of the rack. Because the average time to take a server out of the rack is about an hour. The math on that's pretty simple. So if I'm spending $60,000 to upgrade a 20,030 $1,000 server, I'm just gonna leave it there and buy another one. So that creates more of these stranded assets. So composability says, Let's separate these things into, as I said, pools of resources, compute accelerators and other devices, and have a fabric between them that allows us to, in real time, assemble a compute system that I need. That's the composing part as I need it, because I can now take the resources anywhere in my data centre, if you've got the right fabric, which we've built that allows you then to real time build that compute system with exactly the same capabilities, exactly the same performance, and without having to change any of your software or the way the service work. Everything has to be off the shelf to make this work, and that's what we've built.   Trevor Freeman  21:05 Got you. So, two of the terms, and you'll forgive me, this is sort of a new sector for me. Two of the terms that are used as metrics to determine performance are power usage, effectiveness, and you've kind of talked about, you know, GPU usage. Is the industry moving more towards that GPU usage metric? Is that just something that you guys are kind of leading the curve on? Or where are we at on that?   Phil Harris  21:34 Oh no, this is very much the industry way of describing not just efficiency, but requirements. And we use very weird terms for this. Every industry has their weird term. Weird terminology, and we're now moving to the for example, in AI, the number of tokens per second when you and I put a request or a question into ChatGPT or CoPilot or chord, whatever we use, those words get translated into tokens, actually numbers. Every compute system is just a big calculator. At the end of the day, we do, we do massive processing on numbers. How many of those tokens can I put into the system? How long does it take to process those tokens and give me a response? And the tokens per second, per watt is now what we're asking. So how many tokens a second, and what power per token is it costing me to process information? And that's the interesting way of thinking about how AI, for example, and that's value started this conversation will be measured is the most amount of tokens per second, per watt. Now, right now, we're focusing on tokens per second. We're not looking at the last denominator, which is watts. So that's why these data centres are getting so ridiculous. Ridiculously large. And you know, we even heard it in the in the State of the Union address in the United States earlier in the week, where, you know, there's now the administration pushing cloud vendors and AI vendors to say, Hey, pretty soon you're gonna be on your own about delivering power. Because, quite frankly, the way you're going. It's going to become untenable to think about that from a national grid perspective. Now, I think that may be a little bit into the future, but I don't think it's a completely unreasonable sentiment at this point.   Trevor Freeman  23:12 Yeah, and I mean, you're talking about, and we talked earlier about the just the scale of energy usage here is reaching a new height, a new level. And if we break it down to the individual racks, you know, these racks of servers or processors that you've got in your data centre, we're now talking about anywhere from 50 kilowatts to 100 kilowatts of cooling need. And that's the big driver of energy usage, I think, is correct here is the cooling need per rack multiplied by, of course, big numbers to get those, you know, 5-10-20-30, megawatt data cetnre we're talking about when we talk about cooling and we talk about, you know, hot spots within a data centre, how does your approach differ from kind of the standard way of doing it.   Phil Harris  24:02 So that's a great question, and I think we should explain why the cooling part, it's a bit like buying really good, expensive wagyu steak every day and then having to spend a lot of money on a gym membership to then go and burn off those calories. So we put all this power into power these compute systems, but then we have to keep them cool, and the harder they that, the faster they run, the more powerful they run, the hotter they get. But we need to cool them. So there's this relationship between the more power we draw, the more cooling we need, and cooling is becoming, as I said, that sort of trade off for performance. Now there's lots of exotic ways of cooling computer systems. We can just blow air across them. We can have a liquid like the radiator in your car, or we can literally drop these compute systems into bars of solvents. Ferdinand Porsche, I like to use of other industry analogies. Ferdinand Porsche, the guy who obviously designed the first Porsches and the VW Beetle, realized if I could distribute the heat of the engine block with a horizontal block, I could blow air across it. It was much more efficient than trying to put a radiator to actually cool down the engine block the way that other cars who have the engine in the front, and it's because of surface area. Now, if I've got to put all my GPUs and CPUs and memory close together, either in the same box or the same rack, that concentration of heat needs to be addressed with cooling. One of the ways we can address this is not only to be very selected when I compose the GPU, it's the only time it's drawing power, but also I can spread them out through my data centre by having a fabric that allows me to connect them to the compute systems with the same performance, but now I can distribute my heat generation. That means I can cool more efficiently, just like that Fernand Porsche analogy of the of the Porsche 911 because now heat over over, spread of distance and surface area is a more efficient way, which means it won't mean that we won't ever get to liquid cooling. I don't think immersion cooling is a good idea for lots of other reasons. It's a necessity, more than an optimization, but we can defer the complexity, the cost of those exotic cooling systems if we're more efficient in a way we use and design our data centres.   Trevor Freeman  26:18 And I guess there's a similar description there of, if you're concentrating all that heat in a specific, you know, physical area within a bigger building room, whatever you want to call it, that that cooling system is having to work to that peak cooling need, so to that hot spot effectively. But it's not working just on that spot. It's working across the whole physical area. If you're spreading that cooling need out across the whole room, one the peak is a little bit lower, and you're just more effectively using your whole cooling system. Is that fair to say?   Phil Harris  26:52 And that's exactly the right way of looking at this. And think about it from this perspective as well. The reason we have to cool is because if we don't call sufficiently, those devices become very unreliable and reduce a useful lifespan without going into who, because they keep this information confidential. But one large cloud provider in the US, for example, a GPU that normally has a lifespan of at least three years, is going down to about nine months right now. And the reason for that reduction the lifespan of the use of that GPU, is because of the heating characteristics within these boxes that are getting even with all these cooling mechanisms are becoming now a reduction in the lifespan. So that means we have to create even, remember, I said what it costs to take a system out of a rack. That means we don't have to apply an efficient and effective cooling strategy, our power strategy and cooling trategy, then we start hitting problems very quickly.   Trevor Freeman  27:50 Got you okay. Okay, so there's a mantra that I admit I hadn't seen before until kind of reading some of your material. It's, it's friends. Don't let friends build data centres. And I think it's referring to, you know, this, this move. And there's so many industries that kind of do this cycle of centralization to decentralization, and the sort of data movement went towards that centralization, and you saw these big, massive data centres. But there's, there's kind of a move now back to, let's call it decentralization or repatriation of data. And so for various geopolitical reasons, organizations, companies, governments, are wanting to pull their data back home and have it kind of be more in their control, living in their own servers. So how are you or how is Cerio helping companies kind of get back into the data centre business or repatriate their data without, kind of, you know, getting into the troubles that led for to that centralization in the first place?   Phil Harris  28:55 Yeah, and by the way, I can't take real credit for that quote. Cole Crawford, who was one of the early guys at Facebook before it became META, and was one of the leading voices in the Open Compute platform movement, which is try and standardize how we do these things. Cole is now the CEO of a company called Vapor IO, and what he was really saying is, it's so complicated and difficult to run data centres, let alone building the capital expense. AI isn't just one thing. There's lots of stages in the workflow of AI. We train these big models. You have heard of large language models like ChatGPT or copilot, but what we use them for the results of those trained models is what we call inference. Now you'll now hear about agentic AI, where we turn those results into actions. Okay, that's the agency part of agentic. Well, the use of AI in the corporate world is now becoming, as you said, both regulated, but from an intellectual property perspective, it's about how I control my data and my information. Because if I put that all into somebody else's large language model, I basically put. Populated somebody else's large language model with what might be my proprietary information or information that's very sensitive, and it's one of the reasons why you'll hear in the press about anthropic for example, trying to put guardrails around the use of their AI, because they're very sensitive to this. Most enterprises, governments of all sorts, have realized, though, they need to have run this in their own data centres, because they need to have control over this in control over this information and the use of this information, that's the repatriation you're talking about, moving these workloads now into the organization that previously said, Hey, cloud computing can take this problem. We're going to now figure out how enterprises, which are far many more of them in far more diverse locations, can now build their own data centres and get the right power, the right efficiency, the right capabilities at the right cost.   Trevor Freeman  30:47 Does that open the door? I mean, earlier, you talked about, you know, if we're talking about a five megawatt data centre, it's almost not worth it. You know, that's just sort of renting space in someone else's. How does that track with an organization that won't have enough data or enough computing power, whatever the metric is to warrant a 30 megawatt data centre for their own data, but wants to get that that control, wants to bring it more in house, is our is your technology helping those smaller data centres exist? Is that the correlation there?   Phil Harris  31:18 We can now move it into one of the things that we another couple of terms that may be an maybe not your your listeners may not be familiar with in the compute world or the data centre world, we talk of brownfield and Greenfield. Brownfield is that which is already there. Greenfield is something I have to build new. A lot of the Brownfield world is what is the predominant sort of quantity of compute power on the planet is primarily brownfield The question is, can I take that existing infrastructure and put the capabilities we've been describing in this discussion into those brownfields? So I can reduce the cost of the expansion of that because I can reuse the compute equipments there, I can now add just the discrete GPU technology, for example, into an existing data centre that doesn't therefore blow the power budget or the cooling envelope within that environment, but I can still now start taking advantage as I figure out what my larger plans are, and at the same time, how do we have a tier of providers? I'll give you an example. There's a company in, again, in Canada, think on who are building a data centre in in Ottawa, it's going to have its own liquid natural LNG as its source of power for its own power requirements. Why? Because they can have the power they need as they need it in that location, and they can provide that secure infrastructure for both government and private enterprises, and think on is certainly in Canada, one of those companies that's really seen to be a trusted partner in this. So it will be a bit of what can I do myself? How do I have a trusted partner? We think of sovereign AI a lot. That means trust more than anything, and that's becoming the new mechanism of thinking about this.   Trevor Freeman  33:04 Thinking about the environmental impact of tech and of data. We've talked about the energy usage here, but there's also the physical aspect to it. Of the pace of improvement in technology means we see obsolescence, or we see kind of technology being outdated fairly quickly. We all, like on the personal level. We all see this with our cell phones, our smartphones, our whatever tech we have at home that seems to be out of date fairly soon. I think that the stat, or that the saying that's out there is, you know, tech is kind of obsolete or becomes trash within three years. Obviously, this is not sustainable. Is this part of the drive of what you're doing? Is it? Are you looking to sort of extend the life of the physical equipment you've touched on this a little bit, but maybe expand a little bit on that?   Phil Harris  33:52 Yeah, this goes a little bit back to that Brownfield-Greenfield discussion. But one way of looking at I guess, is when I put all of these components into what the classic model, the current model, I put my central processing unit, my memory, my storage, my GPUs, all in the same box. What is the thing in that box that I want to take advantage of as new innovation happens, versus that which is happening over a slower evolutionary cycle? Well, right now, if I put everything in the same compute unit. Go back to my cost of taking that box out of the rack. I'm pretty much limited by the slowest innovation curve within that platform. Now as what I can take advantage over time. Interestingly, GPUs are innovating currently at a clip of about once a year. Nvidia comes out the new generation of GPUs once a year, but now we're getting more GPUs into the market. We're getting much more diversity, and that diversity means I'll have more options more often. But if my compute system itself is only innovating once every three years to your point, then if I don't decouple these things, if I don't have the ability to separate these innovations. Curves. I'm always stuck with the slowest innovation curve. One of the things we've done at serial with the fabric we've built and the platform we've built is to allow you now to, if you like, dislocate those innovation curves and those options, so as new technology comes along, I can apply it to the things that are innovating slower and still get the outcomes I'm looking for. And that will significantly increase the existing lifespan of equipment that's in people's data centre.   Trevor Freeman  35:26 So, looking at a data centre of the future, and not, you know, not far into the future, let's say 5-10, years from now, are we seeing some of the same technology still exist within that data centre, or is it, you know, everything gets cycled out within like, what's the generation of a data centre, for example? Like, how often, or how soon will we see it all cycle out?   Phil Harris  35:48 I think you there's a there's a technical answer to that, and the financial answer to that. The depreciation model, so that the capital infrastructure can be written off people's books over a three or five year window is very typical. So we see that there's just a financial inhibition to changing more or faster than that three to five year window. The technical churn, as I said, is happening much more rapidly in the technologies that are drawing most power but providing most capability. So one of the things that we're looking at is how companies now start leasing infrastructure, because if they lease the infrastructure, they can now recycle that and bring new technology in faster into their organizations. But to do that, you've got to have the ability to bring new technology in and not be stuck with these static systems that we have today. So there's a set of financial instruments, and now with work that Cerio is doing, technical capabilities that allow customers to really continue to innovate. So there's no real, hey, it's going to be all churned out in three years. I'll continue to innovate over those three years, reciting the technology that can stay where it is and bringing new technologies as it becomes available at the right financial model.   Trevor Freeman  36:56 I'm curious about what that innovation is. So you talked about Nvidia, kind of essentially a new GPU every year. There's a new version every year. What is the innovation? Are they just is it getting faster and more compute power, and therefore it's pulling more energy? And is that just like a perpetual increase, or is it kind of same compute power, less energy, like, do we ever see, I guess what I'm what I'm getting at with this little bit of a ramble here is, do we ever see that that rate of change in energy usage start to flatten out and come down while we still can grow our computing power? Or does energy usage just continue to grow? Like, are we on a bit of a path with no end right now,   Phil Harris  37:44 History taught us a little bit about this. Gordon Moore, who was one of the founders of Intel actually, we had this term called Moore's Law, and Moore's Law was basically this idea that every 18 months we'll double the number of transistors on a piece of silicon. Now, for those in the computer science world, we understand what that means. For the rest of the world, the Trans World. The transistor is the smallest unit of technology within the computer. It's the basic building block of how we build computers. The central processing is all the GPUs. They all come down to taking literally silicon and in a foundry, we call them, figuring out how to make as many transistors interconnect with each other in a in a smaller area as possible, or the most amount of transistors we can. So a bit of a geeky answer to your question. But the way that we look at how each innovation improves is, are we increasing the number of transistors, which means we can do more math? Remember, all we're doing is processing numbers.   Trevor Freeman  38:41 Per unit, per physical unit, right?   Phil Harris  38:43 Per physical unit.   Trevor Freeman  38:44 Okay.   Phil Harris  38:45 And the way we do that is in these big foundries that process all this silicon into these components. They have, what are called process nodes and the and literally how we etch a transistor, it's called lithography onto a piece of silicon. Tells us the power of that piece of silicon and the more I can etch. So we get into what we call the nanometer scale, or what we call a process node. So every time, if you really look into the spec sheets of Nvidia, every generation, they'll talk about how many nanometers their silicon process is based on. Because the smaller I can get that number, the more transistors I can have on the same amount of silicon, the more processing I have, but every transistor takes power. So with more transistors, I require more power, even though in the same physical space, it looks like the same amount of silicon. Therefore, your question was a great one. Do we ever get to zero nanometers? Well, no, we're going to hit a wall here eventually. So then the question is, that's the scale up model. Try and make one thing as big as possible. How about if we make lots of things powerful, but we have more of them in China, the last year, we heard of deep seek. Deep seek was a Chinese government sponsored effort to try and come up with a. Much more cost effective way of doing the equivalent to ChatGPT. They didn't do that with bigger GPUs. They did it with much smaller GPUs, but many more of them. And that comes back to how efficient I am in deploying lots of things together. And that goes back to my earlier point about we start with scale up. Inevitably, in the industry, we go to scale out.   Trevor Freeman  40:22 And is it fair to say that the power usage per transistor, is that fairly static? Like, is there efficiencies to gain there? Or your GPU is going to use more power because you're packing more transistors into it, and once you hit that wall, that's going to be the power consumption level, is that, right?   Phil Harris  40:43 Well, this is the games that these silicon manufacturers, like Intel, AMD, Nvidia, they're all trying to figure out how to sort of figure out new and interesting ways of packaging all of the silicon in these processing units. And we've got a whole industry and science around the packaging mechanism to make those tiles, and that we now think of them as little tiles of processing power, and some that will be doing very specific jobs. Some will be doing very general jobs. It's now getting to the point where the science around the packaging of these dyes or these tiles is as much as the of the of the innovation, as the actual tiles and the processing on them. So it's an extremely complex technical problem, and we are hitting some walls here, which is why I go back to my earlier point. We're now reaching a point where is it just a technical problem we're solving, or a technical, operational and commercial problem we have to think about? And this is that wall that wall that you asked me about right at the beginning of this conversation. Are we about to hit a wall? And the answer is, yes.   Trevor Freeman  41:46 Interesting. I mean, I'm always fascinated by like, what are the what are the really smart people in the industry focusing their time on? And it's so that's why we're talking to you. Of you know, you're looking at, how do we operationalize this. How do we get the most efficient combination and structure of what we're doing here? There's folks that are looking at, how do we pack the most computing power efficiency into these specific units? I guess there's an aspect of, how do we cool this in the in the most effective way, like, what's, how do we, you know, drive down the cooling power needed? What else is out there, in terms of, like, we have smart people focused on this efficiency. What's the thing that's missing from that, that sort of list?   Phil Harris  42:36 Well, I think maybe what's going on right now. And if I could just add a, unfortunately, just one more layer of complexity.  Remember said we were processing silicon? Well, the Earth's got lots of silicon, but we don't have lots of places to process that silicon. The companies that are formed to process silicon into these processing units, we call them foundries. The world's largest is TSMC, based in Taiwan. And then we have Intel, we have Samsung, we have a few others around the world. Global Foundry is another one. There is a limit, physical limit, because these foundries are huge and they take decades of development and optimization. So if we start breaking ground on a new foundry tomorrow, we'll see output in about five years. So we have a constrained supply. So if I'm if I'm Jensen at Nvidia or any of the big silicon manufacturers, I'm going to optimize that relatively constrained supply to where I'm going to get the best return on my investment. And that's why this scale up model is happening. So given that we know that we won't have any more foundry capacity of scale for another couple of years, at least, then the reality is we've got to think differently about how we're thinking about the processing of that silicon. Do I want just ever bigger processes that become more expensive, more limited in where I can deploy them. And quite frankly, the top 15 consumers in the world of silicon consume about 80% of that silicon, if not more. How do I democratize that? Again, it goes from scale up to a scale out model, where I can use that same processing capacity to produce more silicon.   Trevor Freeman  44:20 Fascinating. Yeah, I just, I took us down a little bit of a nerd out path. You had me really interested in that. Okay, so last question here, we hear this term for a bunch of different reasons. Around the world right now we're hearing this term democratizing, happening a lot, and I know you've talked about democratizing, AI, what does that mean? What does that mean to you, or describe that for us?   Phil Harris  44:48 Yeah, I think it really means. Going back to my last point about if 15 big consumers of silicon are going to consume the vast majority of verbal supply chain, that makes the. At a losing proposition for the rest of the organizations and the rest of the governments and the rest of the individuals on the planet. So how do we make sure that AI can be built both responsibly from a sustainability perspective, right? And I don't mean just the ecological side, but that's important here too, but also from the ability to I was on a panel yesterday between the UK Government and the Canadian government, where we're looking at how do countries around the world have the ability to control their own destiny? And there's this whole notion of sovereignty and AI sovereignty right now that isn't because people want to have closed walls around them, that you want to have choice. They don't want to be dictated to by very dominant players where they, quite frankly, don't have the buying power to compete. You know that the amount of capital going into some of the AI companies, we saw $30 billion going into anthropic last week. That's actually a small increase in their capitalization relative to the other big AI players on the planet. That's $30 billion so we've got to think to ourselves, is that a sustainable model commercially? And the answer is no. So we've got to have technology. We've got to have the right ability to deliver power. We've got to have the right designs of data centres that can keep them cooled in an effective and efficient and responsible way. And we've got to be able to give them enough power to make them viable, to make them useful. That's the democratization we all have to be focused on.   Trevor Freeman  46:25 And we need every, I guess, to sort of round of the point is we need everybody to be able, everybody being, you know, whatever, major industry, countries, whoever, to be able to access that equally, so that we don't have to rely on the major players out there in order to do those things you just said, gotcha.   Phil Harris  46:41 That's exactly right. And look, there'll always be a pyramid here. There always has been a technology. There's always still the big players, right? But the question is, have the big players the stifled out the ability for smaller players to come up, innovate, provide choice, provide alternative ways of looking at things, and that's what got to make sure that we keep the and this always relies on some new technology coming along that enables that. Sarah believes that we've created that next layer in the stack, if you like, of technologies that gives us that opportunity to rethink the innovation curve going forward.   Trevor Freeman  47:14 Very fascinating. Phil, thanks for your time. I really appreciate it. This has been super interesting. It's not an area that I often get to spend my time thinking about so is great to chat today. As as you know, we always kind of round out our interviews with the same series of questions to our guests. So what's a book that you've read that you think everybody should read?   Phil Harris  47:34 Well, I'm not sure I can recommend this for everybody. One of the people who basically, along the lines of some of the things I've been talking about today, who revolutionized the computer world was a gentleman by the name of Linus Torvald in Helsinki in Finland. At the time, he's now based in the States, he realized that there was a dominance around how the operating systems on computers, the things that run the software, was limiting, basically, innovation choice and forcing us down a very closed path. So he wrote something called Linux, which was a new operating system. So be on your phone, your TV, your microwave that's running Linux today. Interesting because there wasn't an operating system that we could then generally deploy. That meant there was more developers had the ability to write applications, more hardware vendors could now have software they could run on their on their platforms. He gave the world a new innovation curve. And every time this happens to my last point, good things happen. Very good things happen for the world, for every individual on the planet. And Linus was one of those individuals who saw that need. And so his book, just for fun, and he's a very quirky guy, as you can probably imagine, is a great book about his philosophical approach to what it takes to change really big problems. And I would encourage all of you just to even just read the first few chapters. It's a fascinating view of how an incredibly smart man, smart individual took on probably one of the biggest problems we had in the 20th and 21st Century of computing, and solved it by recognizing you take a different path.   Trevor Freeman  49:11 Yeah, very cool.   Phil Harris  49:12 As far as shows, um, I don't know. I'm one of these guys. I've got two 13 year old daughters. So my wife and I get to watch TV for a very limited amount of time where we can watch it, about the things we want to watch, so we tend to sort of cram things in. But I'm a huge Aaron Sorkin fan, so if I ever need something on a rainy day to go back just to think about how the world could be, I watch the West Wing. It's a show that's imaginary. It's got incredible script writing, it's got incredible character development, but it really talks about how to think about doing the right thing as well. Now, whether you agree with the politics or not, that's a different question, but just the thought that smart thinking solves big problems, again, sort of It's a bit like the Linus Torvald book. It just speaks to me about sometimes we can solve big problems. With individuals or people who just had the right way of thinking about things.   Trevor Freeman  50:00 Yeah, I think that's the kind of, you know, call it entertainment, because it is entertainment, but it's the entertainment that sticks with you, and that we go back to time and again, is the ones that we can also, like, see the the underlying philosophy, or, you know, theory of change that goes into that entertainment. And it's, it's fun to watch. It's, you know, either humorous or dramatic or whatever, but there's still that underlying message. And I think, yeah, West Wing is a great example of of that. There's a handful of those other sort of classic shows that are in that line too. A free round trip flight anywhere in the world. Where would you go?   Phil Harris  50:40 This is hard. My wife and I were talking about this the other day, and I've had the luxury of traveling just about everywhere. I think there's 15 countries on the planet I haven't been to, but if I ever want to go to one place is Bali. And there's two reasons. One, my wife and I went there for a honeymoon, and it was the beginning of the most important chapter of my life by far. And secondly, it's because it has that balance of everything. It's I love to scuba dive. I love the rainforests, the jungle, the architecture, the people, the food. It just brings everything into one package for me. And so it just again. It's those things that sort of speak to you emotionally and also intellectually. It's one of those things that I could always go back too.   Trevor Freeman  51:26 Fantastic. Who is someone that you admire?   Phil Harris  51:29 In history or today?   Trevor Freeman  51:32 You pick, anything.   Phil Harris  51:33 that's fascinating. I think historically it's under Brit it's hard not to go back to some of my forebears, or my country's forebears, Alan Turing, who, against all adversity, social, political, technical, came up with an inspirational way of thinking about solving what are deemed to be unsolvable. And again, it's a tragic story. I think we've all, if you see the movie that was made about his life, it's a very tragic story, but it's an inspirational story about how, again, if you just take a different approach to solving what seems to be an unsolvable problem, you can you get smart people together. Doesn't have to be a big army of people. I think so. Turing is one of those people that always comes back for me t think, wow, if I could have just some of his courage and some of his imagination and some of his intellect, I'd be a very happy person.   Trevor Freeman  52:29 Yeah, and it's almost, I mean, obviously, a brilliant man, but it's the willing to think in a different way, or willing to approach a problem in a different way that I mean, there's a long list in history of major turning points that are as a result of someone thinking in a different way or doing something in a different way. And I think that's a great example of it.   Phil Harris  52:49 Just about the entire course of human life are in the midpoint of the 20th century, change on that, that man's inspiration, that man's imagination.   Trevor Freeman  52:57 Yeah, and that's, that's not an understatement. That's fantastic. Okay, last question, what's something about, kind of the energy sector, or, you know, your sector that that you're really excited about, or something that you see in the future that you're really excited about?   Phil Harris  53:09 Actually, I see it now, to be honest, there are things in the future. Hey, I have two 13 year old kids. I want to have a sustainable ecology and world environment for them to live in and bring their own families up in. And I think about how we can use power more efficiently, but how we can make it look sustainability is important. I want to see renewable, sustainable energy for the general world as a thesis right now. It's how we can be much more efficient in the use of power and the right power delivery. And I think, as I said, I gave the think on example, that's incredibly exciting, because now, if we can do that at scale, that's an opportunity to do that democratization that I spoke about. So when I think about the things that really excited me about the data centre world, the world I live in, actually that power generation and power availability in a clean, effective, well managed fashion is exactly what we need right now, while the rest of us are solving these transistor problems.   Trevor Freeman  54:04 Yeah, it's, I mean, our listeners are probably going to roll their eyes, because I say this all the time, but one of the things that excites me the most is seeing like we're in a period of change, and that's a really exciting time to be working in this and I kind of hear that from you in your sector as well, and I see it in mine, in the energy sector of we're actually getting to see some of this innovation, some of these like leaps and bounds forward. That's not to say there aren't still problems. It's not to say there aren't steps backwards as well. But it's very cool to be working on this in a time when we're seeing that change, and that's kind of what I'm hearing from you as well. Indeed. Awesome. Phil, thanks so much for your time. I really appreciate it. This has been great. Chatting with you.   Phil Harris  54:42 Trevor, the pleasure is all mine. Thank you.   Trevor Freeman  54:44 Fantastic. Take care.   Phil Harris  54:46 Take care.   Trevor Freeman  54:47 Thanks for tuning in to another episode of the thinkenergy podcast. Don't forget to subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts, and it would be great if you could leave us a review. It really helps to spread the word. As always, we would love to hear from you whether. Feedback, comments or an idea for a show or a guest, you can always reach us at thinkenerg@hydroottawa.com.

Jemma and Marina begin with story that feels like a nod to 'ye olde Trawl days' when 'Lord of the Week' was a regular thing. Then there's an equally vintage blast from Penny Mordaunt, whose greatest hits include carrying a sword and standing up to fight. She's had an unfortunate encounter with comedian Vittorio Angelone on The Last Leg.Inevitably however, no matter how much the Traw ladies try to hang around in the lighter past, they are pulled back into the big story that's dominating the news cycle.There's Nigel Farage's 4,000-mile pointless trip to Mar-a-Lago and a reminder that Reform's war-chat seems about as stable as Farage's geopolitical opinions and his parties promises to reduce council tax. Plus: the ghost of Iraq hovering awkwardly as Tony Blair pops up again, and why fossil-fuel wars do a lot more to your energy bill than Net Zero ever did.And because this is The Trawl, there's also a brief detour via The Sound of Music, some unexpected trivia, and, for pudding, Larry and Paul with Broken News.Thank you for sharing and please do follow us @MarinaPurkiss @jemmaforte @TheTrawlPodcast Patreonhttps://patreon.com/TheTrawlPodcast Youtubehttps://www.youtube.com/@TheTrawl Twitterhttps://twitter.com/TheTrawlPodcastThe news cycle might be a washing machine full of bricks… but Marina and Jemma are here to fish out the funniest bits.If you've even mildly enjoyed The Trawl, you'll love the unfiltered, no-holds-barred extras from Jemma & Marina over on Patreon, including:• Exclusive episodes of The Trawl Goss – where Jemma and Marina spill backstage gossip, dive into their personal lives, and often forget the mic is on• Early access to The Trawl Meets…• Glorious ad-free episodesPlus, there's a bell-free community of over 3,300 legends sparking brilliant chat.And it's your way to support the pod which the ladies pour their hearts, souls (and occasional anxiety) into. All for your listening pleasure and reassurance that through this geopolitical s**tstorm… you're not alone.Come join the fun:https://www.patreon.com/TheTrawlPodcast?utm_campaign=creatorshare_creator Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Andrei lies moaning from a head wound on the Pratzen Heights, symbolic of the numerous souls dead or wounded.  The depiction of Andrei chasing military glory but falling short, was influenced by how Kutuzov historically lost his son-in-law, Theodor von Tiesenhausen, at Austerlitz.   Kutuzov sent the young noble, who served as an aide-de-camp, to rally retreating troops. After Tiesenhausen seized a fallen standard and ran forward, he was quickly shot in the chest. Frenchmen swarmed him and there was a barbaric scuffle over his military decorations. When Napoleon took a victory lap, he noticed the “glorious” sight of the barely alive Tiesenhausen still holding the flagstaff. Andrei is a physical causality but was imbued with a realization of the baseness of war. Going in and out of consciousness, Andrei held onto the value of his vision. Unable to open his eyes, he thought, “Where is it, that lofty sky that I did not know?” He did not remember the intricate battle plans nor leading the charge. What brought him back to earth was the burning pain in his head. When he heard the sound of approaching horses and French voices, he finally opened his eyes and captured the clouds floating majestically and the blue infinity beyond. Tolstoy has Napolean have a fictional interaction with Andrei while making his triumphant walk.  Napolean comments on the gallantry of the fallen, notably a grenadier whose body was swelling and blackening. It is sinking in for Andrei that there is very little admirable about such a man's life being wasted. Napolean approached Andrei, whose hand was still on the flagstaff and asserted: “That's a fine death!” Andrei now regarded Bonaparte's words as the buzzing of a fly. Napoleon seemed insignificant compared with the sky, which is representative of the Almighty.Andrei desperately wished to be assisted back to life. He collected all his strength to utter a sickly groan. Napoleon immediately ordered Andrei to be treated and rode on met Marshal Lannes, who congratulated his Master. Andrei remained in agony, but regained his bearings after he was placed with other wounded officers. Napoleon encounters Andrei once again when he inspects the overflow of valuable prisoners. The senior officer captured was Nikolai Repnin-Volkonsky, an Imperial Guard Colonel, who Andrei recognized from Petersburg.  Napoleon commended Repnin, saying: “Your regiment was honorable in fulfilling their duty.” Repnin responded “The praise of a great commander is a soldier's highest reward.” More kind yet superficial words were bestowed on a young lieutenant. Napoleon then sees and remembers Andrei and calls him, “mon brave” an old fashioned term meaning “my good fellow” or “my good man.” Andrei remains silent on the only occasion he would meet his one-time idol. All the vain interests that absorbed men like Napoleon now seemed so insignificant. This is Tolstoy's comment on the value of military glory. Andrei thought of the pettiness of such men compared to the lofty, equitable and gentle sky.  His mind was on a plane of solemnity. Various factors led to his mental state including: the loss of blood, nearness of death and appreciation of the divine. Napoleon instructed that Andrei and others be cared for by his own doctor and bid Prince Repnin, Au revoir!” He galloped away -- shining with satisfaction. Frenchmen who had carried Andrei had stolen the gold icon his sister gave him. However, seeing the favor the Emperor bestowed, quickly returned the charm. Beholding the icon made Andrei consider: “it would be good if everything were as clear and simple as it seems to Mar'ya.” He yearns to know where he should seek for help and what to expect beyond the grave. Andrei considered the nature of the Almighty and how to address his prayers. Andrei realizes that he understands the greatness of something incomprehensible but paramount.  He conceptualized the Almighty's ineffable power and contrasted this with image on his amulet, which is a critique of graven images. When Andrei's stretcher moved on, he again felt pain that was difficult to endure. He experienced visions of his father, wife, sister, and future son.  He considered his quiet home life and peaceful happiness that he never appreciated. He realized only the heavens promised a similar peace.Upon examination, Napoleon's doctor pronounced a grave prognosis: “He is a nervous and sickly subject…and will not recover.” Inevitably, the doctor and War Machine moved on leaving Andrei and others to the care of the inhabitants of the district.And that finally ends analysis Book 1 and about 25% of the novel.

On this episode, Bo takes a hard look at the political battle surrounding the SAVE Act and the broader debate over voter identification, election integrity, and claims of voter suppression. Golden challenges arguments from critics who say voter ID laws disproportionately impact minority voters, pushing back on the narrative with commentary on media coverage and political rhetoric. He also discusses a reported ballot harvesting case in Alabama, rising New York political figure Zohran Mamdani and his growing popularity, the impact of government shutdown fights over immigration enforcement, and international reactions to Western political leadership. Throughout the episode, Golden offers his perspective on how these issues connect to larger debates about law enforcement, elections, and the direction of American politics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join me for a transformative live in person event in Maui on May 14-17 https://www.brianscottlive.com/hawaii-2026   Join The Reality Revolution Tribe

I've been talking about a book I've been writing and I'm here to tell you all the juicy details and that you can preorder it now! In the end, I realized the world didn't need a book on how to organize your home because you have no resources to complete the tasks. Escaping Quicksand will arm you with the tools to get your home organized and move to productivity! Thought Process and Creation This is my sixth book. I don't tell you that to brag. I tell you that to share that I have published each book in different ways. Not sure if you have written a book but I always like to share my journey and thought process in case it's something you have been thinking about doing too.  I really struggled with feeling "set" on the book theme. I wrote two other versions of "the book" I thought I was going to publish. But one morning about 5am, it came to me. The first chapter was written in about an hour and it felt right. I finally nailed down what people needed. I wrote a book on shifting your mindset to accomplish your home organization goals!   I shared the first paragraph with my team and they unanimously agreed, yes this is the book people need.   I wrote it in two weeks. It was effortless and I felt passionate about what I was sharing.  And when do people need it? In June of course. I insisted on having it released on June 23rd. Why? Because that's when our year is "wrapping up." The end of June is when I have our team week. It's when school is wrapping up, we're resetting, and dreaming. And July is a great month to read a new book. This is a thinking book. Secret: When you preorder, chapters will be released early! What's It About  You will start reading the first three pre chapters.  I started by sharing my quicksand story. I realized when you have hit "rock bottom", it turns out that you just keep going, like no end to the pit. You just keep sinking until the quicksand swallows you! I want to help you before you get too deep in the quicksand. Inevitably, it seems as though we hit 40 and reevaluate life; that come to Jesus conversation we have with ourselves.  We've had enough and know there has to be a solution out there somewhere.  And what about us? When do we put ourselves on the to do list? So, the next chapter is about self care. How do we care for our whole person? Our education, spiritual care, health, and all the other aspects of a whole person. The third prechapter is the fact that our household is an economic powerhouse.  And then we get into the meat of the book explaining Swiss cheese organizing, being a woman of excellence, morning and afternoon routines, letting go of housework expectations, taking "center stage" when doing housework, weekly planning, and from to do lists to productivity! Get the Book and Join the Book Club Who loves a book club? There are already over 1,000 people who have preordered the book and have the opportunity to join the book club. You can preorder the book through the Organize 365® website or through your favorite book retailer. Then just upload your receipt and you too can join the book club. I am planning on releasing the chapters early each week for 13 weeks. I will release videos and will be posing questions out there for all of us to discuss about the chapters and how it applies to you as a household manager. This will allow you to change your mindset in real time. It's too easy to just keep reading and not take action. This slow release will give you a week to ruminate about what you read and what the community has said.  EPISODE RESOURCES: The Sunday Basket® Preorder your hard copy of Escaping Quicksand Sign Up for the Organize 365® Newsletter  Did you enjoy this episode? Please leave a rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Share this episode with a friend and be sure to tag Organize 365® when you share on social media

Inevitably, you are going to have some one refute or oppose your stance or opinion on something. So how should you handle the situation? Do you quip back? Let it be? Pastor Mike shares some helpful advice on how to work though the situation humbly and boldly!

Allez, on fait le point sur le blocage du port de Marseille par des marins en grève. Come on, let's take stock of the blockade of the port of Marseille by sailors on strike.En gros le topo c'est ça : des marins français bloquent un énorme navire de croisière. Basically, the situation is this: French sailors are blocking a huge cruise ship.Pourquoi ? Et bien pour protester contre une concurrence qu'ils jugent totalement déloyale et qui menace directement leurs emplois. Why? Well, to protest against competition they consider totally unfair and which directly threatens their jobs.Premièrement sur le terrain, qu'est-ce qui se passe concrètement ? First, on the ground, what is happening concretely?Vous avez le MSC Orchestra, un paquebot géant avec plus de 3 200 passagers, qui est complètement immobilisé à l'entrée du port. You have the MSC Orchestra, a giant cruise ship with more than 3,200 passengers, which is completely immobilized at the port entrance.Les marins grévistes, qui sont menés par le syndicat CGT, bloquent physiquement l'accès nord. The striking sailors, who are led by the CGT union, are physically blocking the northern access.Du coup, c'est simple, aucun navire ne peut accoster de ce côté. As a result, it's simple: no ship can dock on this side.Deuxièmement, la cause de toute cette colère. Le cœur du problème, c'est la concurrence déloyale. Secondly, the cause of all this anger. The heart of the problem is unfair competition.Il y a des compagnies étrangères qui naviguent sous pavillon international, italien notamment, et qui opèrent sur des lignes françaises, comme vers la Corse. There are foreign companies sailing under international flags, notably Italian, which operate on French lines, such as towards Corsica.Le souci, c'est que ces compagnies emploient des marins avec des contrats non français et ils sont payés beaucoup, beaucoup moins cher. The concern is that these companies employ sailors with non-French contracts and they are paid much, much less.On parle de 650 à 1 200 dollars par mois. We are talking about 650 to 1,200 dollars per month.Forcément pour les compagnies françaises comme Corsica Linea, qui respectent la loi, la compétition est juste impossible. Inevitably, for French companies like Corsica Linea, which follow the law, competition is simply impossible.Ils exigent que l'État français intervienne. They demand that the French state intervene.Ils veulent que toutes les compagnies qui opèrent en France respectent la loi française. They want all companies operating in France to respect French law. Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Morgan McSweeney and - we now discover - Peter Mandelson shaped the Starmer leadership in the run up to the election and beyond. Now they are both gone. Inevitably this will lead to change and the first meaningful ‘reset' in a government of resets. But will it be under Starmer or his successor? Rock & Roll Politics is live and streaming this Wednesday, February 11th at the main concert hall in Kings Place. There are a few tickets left in the hall or to stream it online, and more to make sense of than ever. Get tickets here. Subscribe to Patreon for live events, bonus podcasts and to get the regular podcast a day early and ad free.  Written and presented by Steve Richards. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Morgan McSweeney and - we now discover - Peter Mandelson shaped the Starmer leadership in the run up to the election and beyond. Now they are both gone. Inevitably this will lead to change and the first meaningful ‘reset' in a government of resets. But will it be under Starmer or his successor?Rock & Roll Politics is live and streaming this Wednesday, February 11th at the main concert hall in Kings Place. There are a few tickets left in the hall or to stream it online, and more to make sense of than ever. Get tickets here.Subscribe to Patreon for live events, bonus podcasts and to get the regular podcast a day early and ad free. Written and presented by Steve Richards. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What happens when workforce innovation stops focusing on individuals alone—and starts supporting entire families? In this episode of Manager Minute, Carol Pankow sits down with Lucas Halverson and Kathy Davis of ServiceSource to explore Families Achieving Self-Sufficiency Together (FASST)—a Disability Innovation Fund initiative that's connecting VR, TANF, employers, and community partners in a powerful new way. You'll hear how FASST: ·       Tackles generational poverty through a family-centered employment model ·       Supports disconnected youth and adults with disabilities across multiple states ·       Complements VR services without duplicating them ·       Uses AI-powered job matching and strong employer partnerships ·       Creates real solutions during Order of Selection and funding constraints This conversation is a must-listen for VR leaders, program managers, and partners looking for scalable, practical models that expand impact without expanding cost.   Listen Here   Full Transcript:   {Music} Lucas: The big goal is to break the cycle of poverty. We want to create lasting self-sufficiency, reduce the need for benefits and things of that nature.   Kathy: The beauty of this project is that it was originally designed for six sites across multiple states.   Lucas: We don't intend as a program to supplant programs that already exist, but we do intend to supplement or fill the gaps that exist.   Kathy: We are one as part of this project, and you would not have to pay fee for service or contract us. We're already being paid through the grant.   Intro Voice: Manager Minute, brought to you by the Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center. Conversations powered by VR. One manager at a time, one minute at a time. Here is your host, Carol Pankow.   Carol: Welcome to the manager minute. In today's episode, we're diving into one of the exciting initiatives funded through the Rehab Services Administration's Disability Innovation Fund 21st Century Workforce Grants. And these grants were designed to spark new ideas and scalable strategies that help youth and adults with disabilities prepare for and succeed in today's rapidly changing world of work. From artificial intelligence and virtual reality to cross-system partnerships and new ways of engaging employers. These projects are testing innovative models that could reshape how we think about disability employment for the 21st century. And one of those projects, launched just this past year, is led by ServiceSource, and it's taking a unique approach to helping families move toward self-sufficiency and employment. And joining me today to talk about it are Lucas Halverson, project director, and Kathy Davis, one of the key leaders behind this groundbreaking effort. So how goes it, Lucas?   Lucas: Hey, good morning Carol. Everything's going very well. Thank you so much for inviting us to talk about our project today. We're extremely excited to be here to talk about our project Families Achieving Self-sufficiency Together. We also call it fasst with two S's. So thanks again for having us.   Carol: You bet. How about you, Kathy? How are you doing?   Kathy: I'm doing great, Carol, thanks so much for having us. We are definitely excited to speak with you about our grant, which is short for that Disability Innovation Fund.   Carol: Excellent. Yeah, I've had a lot of experience talking with other DIF grantees in like the C.D.E.F. We always give them the little alphabet soup label, but there have been different focuses each year that RSA had released the Disability Innovation Fund grant. So it's been really fun to catch up and see what things are happening. So let's dig in. So before we get into the details of your project, Lucas, could you tell us a little bit about your background and how you came to be involved in this work?   Lucas: Yeah, absolutely. So my entire professional career is related to helping others. That started as an employment development specialist right after my bachelor's degree, focusing on all things employment placement, support services, community based, competitive, integrated employment. I transitioned from that into helping individuals with more significant disabilities prepare for employment. I've done a little bit of group and individual substance abuse counseling, but largely the last 15 years or so, I've been in the world of vocational rehabilitation in a variety of roles, both on the public side and the private sector side, and was happy through those wonderful years to get my master's degree in rehab counseling and my certified rehabilitation counselor credential. So to present day, I've been with ServiceSorce for over ten years, and when the grant was awarded, I looked at it as an opportunity to still stay in the world that I love of helping people, but knew it would expand my skills and really looked at it as an opportunity to bring a pretty large proposal to life. And so here we are, fresh into the second year of our project and seeing all of that happen. So very exciting.   Carol: It's very cool. I love finding people's stories, like how you found your way into this world of work, because we all came in a long and winding road different ways, but make it in. And then once you're in, you're kind of hooked. It's hard to leave. So, Kathy, how about you? How did you come to be involved in this work?   Kathy: Well, same. I love people's stories about how they find their vocation. And I have also been serving individuals with disabilities for a very long time, well over 20 years. I started as a volunteer in high school with Easter Seals, and from there, I did volunteer work with therapeutic horseback riding. I eventually also went back to school and got my master's in rehab counseling and became a nonprofit community mental health counselor and a traumatic brain injury program manager. And because of my background in counseling and also a previous master's degree in economics, when the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act was being discussed,  and the emphasis changed to or included employers. My econ background and my master's rehab counseling background made me a little bit of a unicorn, and I was hired by a Blind services agency around 2012. And then I also did business relations for them. And then I was hired to start the first business relations program at one of the VR agencies. And really, my golden thread throughout all of my career has been starting new programs. No matter what role I've been in. I love new things, I love innovation, and so DIF has been a perfect fit for me. I'm also working on my doctorate degree, almost finished with that and doing a Pre-ETS dissertation. So I have a really strong interest in evaluation. And so evaluation actually brought me to this project. And I serve as an internal evaluator for it.   Carol: Wow, you are a unicorn. Let me say that is exciting. Very fun. Thanks for sharing that. So when you two first saw the grant announcement, what caught your attention and made you want to apply?   Lucas: Yeah. So this DIF grant cycle the F grant cycle was the first time nonprofit organizations were eligible to apply. So it was a unique opportunity for ServiceSource. And so our program development team recognized that our agency had the capacity to try to take this on, and also the expertise to successfully apply with a strong proposal, but then also administer and monitor the program successfully. So our organization, ServiceSource, is a leading service provider and employer for individuals with disabilities. So it made us well positioned to deliver impactful outcomes under this project. The DIF grant in general definitely aligns very closely with our mission and our vision and our values. And we have affiliated organizational model that we felt would provide a strategic advantage with this project. So it's allowing us to have a fairly large geographic reach. We have several teams across the country all working together on this project, and it also allows us to leverage partnerships and resources that have already been in existence across these teams and these affiliates to have the greatest impact that we can. And so really, the alignment and the capacity gave us confidence that we could do what this grant needed us to do. And so we're in that second year and really getting rocking and rolling now.   Carol: Yeah, I hadn't realized that ServiceSource had such a big footprint because I was familiar with the work ServiceSource did in Florida, and Tina down in Florida and working with the Florida General Agency. In fact, we did a podcast about that and that particular model, and I knew there were little fingers of that kind of had spread out, I believe, into a few different states, but I hadn't realized, like, really how expansive ServiceSource was. So that is an excellent point that it really positioned you well for this. Now your project family is achieving self-sufficiency together. As you said FASST with the two S's. So no, we don't have a typo. If they read the transcript later, we didn't have a spelling error. It is the FASST you really launched at the end of June. I know that first year is always a very big planning year and getting things ready. Can you give us a quick overview of what the initiative is about, and really what motivated your focus on families?   Lucas: Yeah, absolutely. Really the high level focus aims to help disconnected youth and disconnected adults with disabilities achieve competitive, integrated employment. In addition, you know, using early intervention workforce reintegration strategies to support long term success. That's where the whole self-sufficiency piece comes in, uniquely for our project. But overall, FASST is, as I mentioned, a multi-state initiative, and we want to empower disconnected adults and youth with disabilities. Our core focus is individuals that are eligible for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or TANF. So that's part of our eligibility requirement. And the ultimate focus is to remove barriers to employment and to independence. And so we do that by connecting families to community partners such as vocational rehabilitation, training providers, employers. But we also have staff that assist the individuals we're serving, build those critical skills such as job readiness, financial capability. And we have a case manager component to the team. Each team has a case manager to help with that kind of wraparound, holistic approach, to try to knock down as many barriers as possible. The big goal is to break the cycle of poverty, looking at kind of that two generational approach. We want to create lasting self-sufficiency, reduce the need for benefits and things of that nature. So pretty big goals. But we have a solid team that I'm confident can hit those goals with us.   Kathy: So and related to goals, we really our project has three overall goals. And as Lucas mentioned, it is to connect disconnected adults to find and retain that competitive integrated employment. But I'll also add that we want to have at least one high quality indicator as part of that employment, and we're helping to support them to retain their employment for at least 90 days. But we're also tracking beyond 90 days. And that's one of the really exciting and fun parts of this project. Unlike vocational rehabilitation, where you'd see a closure at 90 days, we're able to support individuals for the remainder of the project if that's what it takes to help them maintain their employment. The second overarching goal that we have is for the youth, disconnected youth ages 14 to 24. Our goal is to help them gain work skills and then either enter employment or enter education and or complete education. And then finally, the third goal would be to build the system's capacity with all of our partners to sustain our model and be able to serve more TANF recipients.   Carol: I like your holistic approach that you guys have brought up. I know back in the day, as customers would come in the door, and I was working at State Services for the Blind in Minnesota. You're looking at employment, but it's hard to just talk employment right off the get go. If people don't have food or your housing is unstable or you have all the other issues, so you've got to kind of connect all the pieces together. Employment obviously is a very important piece of this, but it isn't the only piece. You got to have it all work together.   Lucas: You make a great point, because I realized I didn't touch on the motivation to focus on families as part of this, and it's largely what you just described. You know, we recognize that families are key support systems for the individuals that we're serving. Families strongly influence decisions about anything but including employment and training, career paths. And so our whole focus is trying to have an alignment to that. And again, with our case management, part of our staffing, looking at the barriers, making sure they're addressed to increase those chances of success, because just as you said, there's not transportation, there's not a job. If there's not a house over your head, there's not a job if you don't have food. So all caregiver responsibilities and so the family tie in is really looking at barriers that affect the family. So could be the parent could be a child. But we know how it impacts the household. It creates kind of that ripple effect. And so not addressing it holistically could be a key piece missing. And so kind of the core motivation I guess to capitalize on that is to increase skills, of course, relating to employment, but also to again try to reduce the reliance on benefits as part of that. So knocking down barriers, helping go to work, reducing that need. And one of the key points with our project is as things are evolving, it does align with some of the current different federal agency initiatives. So, for example, children and families is emphasizing employment as a pathway to self-sufficiency. So that's very close to what we're looking at. And another example is Health and Human Services. They're looking at employment and family as the foundation of economic and social well-being. So our project really kind of just fits and plugs into that, because that is what our goal is with the larger focus. But I do think the holistic piece is extremely valuable for this project and will continue to be.   Carol: Yeah, you guys are definitely ahead of the curve because when I saw that that you guys had picked TANF, you know, at first I'm like, well that's interesting. Like how did you come to that? You know, to decide you were going to focus on those folks eligible for TANF and kind of make that the centerpiece?   Lucas: Yeah. So the program development folks that really dug into the proposal, part of the application process did a lot of research and found that largely there was a disconnect. There are a lot of folks that are eligible for TANF or receiving TANF that were appropriate for other agencies, such as vocational rehab, just as one example. But the tie in often wasn't there. It wasn't happening. And so, as Kathy mentioned, one of our goals is to hopefully have some better pipelines for that. So for folks and entities that are naturally working with individuals with TANF to understanding no important programs such as vocational rehab exist and what that looks like and what the scope is and what they can help with. So it just kind of was a noticed need and kind of became one of the key parts of, of this proposal when it was getting all put together.   Carol: I think that's brilliant because you always look at kind of VR can be the best kept secret. People say that all the time, and even though it seems like it would be apparent, like, why wouldn't you, you know, get connected with VR and you're in this program. People don't know that. And it's not necessary that the staff may be working in TANF, even know about VR or what's going on. We don't always do the best job at connecting with all the different partners and other folk out there.   Lucas: Another part of that decision to again, ServiceSource operating many programs across the country. There are a couple TANF specific programs that ServiceSource operated for many years, one being in Virginia that partners with the Virginia Department of Social Services, and then another unrelated program in Denver in Colorado. So there's already some knowledge base of that in addition to the research they all did. So it helped us kind of align with one of our corporate strategic goals of expansion and wanting to increase our support to individuals that are eligible for TANF. And so it kind of checked a, checked a lot of mini boxes, both there being a need and interest from our company with our goal of expanding and serving, you know, additional individuals. So it kind of presented just almost a natural opportunity, I guess, as it was all coming together. And I think it gives, you know, a pretty solid opportunity to try to interrupt the generational poverty that exists within families.   Carol: Well, that's where the magic happens. There's nothing better than having a project that fits with your own corporate mission. You know, the stars are aligned, things all sync up. It's not like you're having to kind of fit round, peg in a square hole or whatever, the square peg in a round hole, because it's all aligned really well. Now, I understand you recently received approval to expand your focus to include disconnected youth such as those in foster care, the justice system. How does that change the picture of your work going forward?   Lucas: Yeah, so kind of a really cool example. So with the DIF grants, one of the key focuses on being innovative and being flexible in changing with what you're finding during your project. And so very early on, not long after we launched the project and began some large increased efforts with outreach almost immediately, there were a handful of situations that involve youth that met the larger definition of disconnected, but didn't quite meet our project eligibility of being in a household that had a parent or guardian eligible for TANF benefits. And so we originally had intended to focus on those youth later in the project. But we talked about it and we did not want to exclude individuals. We knew we had the expertise and interest to serve, and we certainly did not want to risk coming back in the months or years ahead trying to find them. You know, it's kind of like the hot potato. If you have youth that are interested, now is the time. And so we worked with our project officer from RSA and they were very supportive of us expanding our focus to the broader definition of disconnected youth a little bit sooner than we originally planned, of course, but so that expansion includes youth now that are in foster care, the justice system that are low income or don't have stable housing. And so they don't have to have that TANF tie in for, for that kind of subgroup, but still relates very directly to our mission of serving the disconnected youth and adults within the project.   Carol: Yeah, I like that. You recognize that, you know, and take advantage of that as you're seeing that. And that's kind of the beauty of these projects, because they do ebb and flow based on how things are rolling and what you write in a proposal. As everything comes to fruition, you realize different things and you're like, oh, you know, maybe we get to pivot or do something a little differently or whatever that may be, or make this addition and it just makes the project better. I love the flexibility that RSA has with the projects to allow that kind of expansion and changes as you're going along. So I understand you've got six teams working across six states under this shared framework. How does that structure work, and what have you learned so far about coordinating across all these different regions?   Lucas: Yeah, I'm proud and very happy to report that it's been working incredibly well so far. It's kind of a new experience for our organization as well because it's bringing together multiple affiliated teams, but working collectively on the same project at the same time with shared goals. So from the start, when Kathy and I were putting this all together, one of the elements that really wasn't negotiable was building a sense of community within our team. Since we're all working on the same grant, have the same expectations. We knew if everybody was working in their own silo, it would be, you know, highly unnecessary and really counterproductive to what we're wanting to do. So we spent a lot of time in the earlier stages and continue to with emphasizing cross team collaboration. It's really kind of the key driver to our success and our continued success. And so some of the efforts to make this team that's spread across the country feel like we're all sitting in the same office space together, is having weekly meetings. So Kathy and I lead a weekly meeting with all the grant funded staff, their supervisors, the executive directors for the different affiliates, other subject matter experts from our organization, and then different contractors as necessary that are on the project. And we focus on anything and everything relating to the project, so it could be updates, progress, best practices, things that seem to be going well, maybe things that we need to work a little better on any process reviews we need to do. So we go through just anything that's relevant each week, keeps that engagement there, keeps everybody, you know, interacting. And beyond that, we also knew that with having some external contractors on the project that we really needed that to be bought in from the staff as well. And so we had kick off meetings with each contractor, both with our large group and then with each individual team, really just to build rapport, clarify roles, responsibilities, expectations, how it was going to work, what the goals were, and just start those relationships strong as well. You know, there's so much going on when you launch a project that we didn't want our external folks not to feel a partner like our internal folks. And so that's been going remarkably well. And then lastly, the last comment I'll make on this is that we also recognize that because we have really three position types that are working directly with the individuals we're serving, again, spread out across the country. We really wanted them to feel together and not, again, not separate. And so each position has its own community of practice. They meet monthly, they share best practices. They discuss challenges, Brainstorm ideas. For example, case manager in Florida found a gem of a resource that's national. There's no reason our case manager in Utah should have to spend time finding that as well. They talk about it. They you know, hey, I found this. This is great. It might help each other. And so those meetings we've had a lot of positive response on and Kathy and I hop on, if they have a topic they want us to discuss or, you know, problem solve with them. And so we've really felt that's helped bridge that large geographic distance across the teams. And we're hoping that, you know, turns into high quality and impactful services for the folks we're serving efficiently, serving our individuals and not having multiple people having to spend the same time on the same need.   Kathy: Yeah, I'll add something here, too, from an evaluation perspective. You might be familiar that when you start a new program and it develops into a fully developed, successful project and program, and then you start sharing it nationally. Inevitably, someone will, from another state or another agency outside of your region will say, well, that could never work for us because we're, you know, we have these resources or we're serving this population. The beauty of this project is that it was originally designed for six sites across multiple states. And so our implementation really is across varying populations and community resources. And so this project has such strong potential for successful implementation across multiple states and contexts. So we're very excited that we're really documenting everything that we're doing. We'll have a toolkit when we complete the project, and we're really looking forward to sharing what we're doing and how to do it with others.   Carol: And that's a really important piece to RSA. It's one of the things you write to in the project, like how is this going to be sustained past the project ending? Like how can you then, you know, transfer this information to other folks and they can implement it. So I can see where that was very appealing to them as they're looking at evaluating the different proposals that shoot. Here's a group looking at six states. So you mentioned, Lucas, Utah and Florida. What are the other four states that you're in?   Lucas: Yeah. So we're  in Delaware, North Carolina and Virginia. And we're right now in the process of bringing on a team in Colorado. We have the approval. We're just doing the logistics of what it takes to bring them on. That's one of the ServiceSource teams that has an experienced TANF program. And so we looked at that as another opportunity to be able to already leverage existing relationships and expertise to just tie right into what we were already planning to do in the Colorado team was just a little bit newer to ServiceSource, so they weren't part of the original proposal because they weren't here quite yet, but they now are. So we're extremely excited to have some additional folks joining the team and fitting right into what we're doing.   Carol: That's very cool. I know one of your partners. Our Ability, brings some cutting edge tech into the mix with AI powered job matching and training. How is that partnership helping you engage employers and job seekers in new ways?   Lucas: Yeah, so I think as we all know, the workforce development is just kind of an ever evolving landscape. So bringing Our Ability in, I'm extremely excited. John Robinson, the CEO from Our Ability, is part of our project. And at the core of our partnership is the innovative use of technology. They have a portal that's called Jobs Ability, that uses generative AI to connect job seekers to employment based on their interests, their skills, their expertise. So the system helps focus on the challenge of both unemployment but also underemployment among folks with disabilities. And their platform reaches 15,000 people with disabilities each month, which to me is pretty remarkable. That's a lot of folks consistently visiting and using their resources. And so the job matching will assist with better connections between the individuals were serving and getting into the work world, or trying to help upgrade or increase their employment in a system that's already proven, which, you know, helps with efficiency. They already know it works. And so by us leveraging their extensive employer network within the system, you know, we're really focused on fostering the employment opportunities that encourage and again, increase self-sufficiency.   Kathy: Just kind of expanding on what the Jobs Ability portal will mean for our customers. We'll be able to assist our job seekers with creating quality resumes that are keyed in on skills and experience, and there is an AI matching protocol that really matches their preferences and experiences and skills with job descriptions. It's a proprietary AI system, and so we're really excited about how participants are going to be able to be matched with jobs that actually match their skills. These are real jobs, competitive wages. As we said, we have high quality indicators for our outcomes, including wages. And if you think about it, this is a win for our participants as well as our employers, because they are going to be able to actually tap into qualified individuals with disabilities who meet the skills and experience that they are seeking.   Carol: I love AI. I know there's people I've done different podcasts around, different AI initiatives, and some people have different feelings about AI. I know there's kind of the you have the dark side of it, but this sounds super cool. I had not heard of this company. And about this proprietary software. I think that's very interesting and super smart of you to leverage something already out there, proven tested, can be used right away. Instead of you trying to like, go down the road of creating something and doing all of that, you don't need to waste, you know, time and energy in that when you've got something already done. Now, I know no large project like this starts without a few hurdles. What have been some of your biggest challenges so far, and how are you navigating maybe any kind of overlap with other services or agencies?   Kathy: As you said, VR is a well-kept secret. Many times that's what we hear. And so being experienced with that, when we started the project, we knew the outreach was going to be key. And so we did not wait to start our outreach. And Lucas and I developed a very thorough support system and toolkit for our staff to help them really be purposeful about their outreach. And as soon as people were hired, one of the first things they were told to do after they were up and running with knowledge about the project was to start outreach. And honestly, I think we've become an outreach machine and we're really keeping track of hundreds, hundreds of contacts across our six locations that we've made and also just really analyzing which of those resources are turning into pipelines of referrals. And so I think we're going to be learning a lot about that. One of the things that we also knew from the beginning is that we needed to tailor our outreach to the audience. So we have a library of outreach materials for students, for VR, for employers, for schools and parents. So there's many ways that we have. We also are created outreach in other languages. So we're definitely doing our best to reach as many people as we can about this project, and also equipping our staff to be able to speak about it, to really understand it and to be able to keep track of what we're doing to reach the populations that and stakeholders that we're going to serve.   Carol: Very cool.   Lucas: I was going to talk about the overlap with other agencies. It's been a very real discussion with our teams because, you know, how does FASST fit in with other programs that might do similar types of work. And so, you know, it's an ongoing discussion, teaching staff the significance of a comparable benefit, a very familiar term for our friends that have been in the VR world before. We don't intend as a program to supplant programs that already exist, but we do intend to supplement or fill the gaps that exist. Maybe we can move faster within a process to help somebody now that while they'll go through a process that takes a little bit longer, or maybe we can support someone a little bit longer, like Kathy said before, you know, if someone has a VR counselor and at 90 days, VR is comfortable with closing them, but maybe they might need a little bit more support. That might be a gap we can fill or a little bit more job coaching or financial literacy or something like that. And so we really focused on the design of our project to try to rapidly engage individuals as much as we can. We can serve someone start to finish on our own as a project. We don't have to have a built in external component, but we recognize the significance of resource connection, obviously. So both now and down the road for folks, if they're not receiving our support, knowing what resources exist, who can help with different things. And so it's still an ongoing process. So part of that outreach, Kathy mentioned hundreds and hundreds of outreach. We have to hit folks with the right info that makes sense to them. And so for as long as this project's going, I think it will always be a focal point for us to make sure that, you know, it's just clear what we do and what we don't do and what we can do to just try to support agencies and programs that do exist already, but then also knowing we can do a pretty good job on our own if we had to, so.   Carol: So let's hone in a little bit. You've talked a lot about outreach and have mentioned VR, but let's talk about those VR partnerships. How are your teams building relationships at the state and local level, and what can VR agencies gain from working with your project?   Lucas: Yeah, so the teams have done a really good job focusing on building relationships with vocational rehab. Again, trying to listen to what the needs are, what they're seeing as needs, and then versus, you know, collaboration of what we can offer teams that are working on having regular check ins set up. As with any agency, you know, some relationships have been a little more natural than others. But continuing to work together to try to establish those pipelines and that knowledge base of our existence, and then also that need for the individuals that are eligible for TANF. And so I always kind of say, you know, what's in it for VR agencies? And from my perspective, at least, our project can increase access to services and resources that could make service delivery easier or more efficient or more effective, which should then lead to increase or better outcomes. That's the goal. One of our objectives, as Kathy touched on, is to establish a system that connects. Connects the folks eligible for TANF and other entities such as vocational rehab. And so we're really continuing to focus on that and going to continue to ramp that up throughout the project. As the more, you know, line level relationships exist with the different offices and the different staff. And we've learned that adults with disabilities receiving TANF benefits are often best served by VR. As I mentioned, you know, programs can be complex sometimes, and so trying to smooth that out a little bit might be helpful for them. So we kind of see an additional potential to have connect VR teams with employers. We just talked about our ability and John and his team. They have very robust employer connections across the country. And so that'll be a regular interaction. So we might be able to connect some employers. Some of our interest is connecting educational partners as well. So looking at programs that can help foster people to get into good jobs and, you know, and other stakeholders of course, as well. So we kind of see it as a very big collaboration opportunity for our teams. And I really think at the end of the day, it really just to me looks at shared impact. So we work together. How can we all show that the good work everybody's doing is impactful and supporting the individuals that are coming to us that are needing that support?   Carol: It takes a village. It really does.   Lucas: It does. It takes a village. And we have one team, the state they're in recently. Just last month went on order of selection. And so we're using that as another opportunity to be a support because at least I know us in this podcast know when going on Order of Selection, the most significant disabilities have to be focused first. And so those individuals with less significant disabilities are typically the ones that have to wait. And we can serve them. So that team is working with their VR agency to make sure that's known, so that if they have folks going on the waiting list, that it might be a great opportunity to shift them to us and we can support them while they're on the waiting list. And whenever the time would come for that release, we can just catch up together and see where we're at.   Carol: That's a perfect example of really great collaboration, I love that. That I'm glad you mentioned that.   Kathy: Yeah, I just want to mention too, it's kind of tied into that. The reason we're seeing agencies start to use Order of Selection is because of increasing costs. This project would not cost BR to use our services because we're funded through the grant. So if you need an employment service provider, we are one as part of this project and you would not have to pay fee for service or contract us. We're already being paid through the grant, so it really helps with cost.   Carol: Yeah that's perfect. So as you guys look at the year ahead, what are your priorities and what does success look like for FASST as you continue to grow and refine your model?   Lucas: Many things, but I think largely continuing to strengthen the project. You know, we're still relatively new in implementation. And so we've learned a lot and will continue to learn a lot. And so we just really want to make sure we're maximizing the positive impact of the individuals we're serving. First of all, strengthen develop clear pathways. The end goal would be for this to be replicable at the end to scale our model effectively. And so I really think this second year, now that the team's together, everybody's getting comfortable with our process. This year is really where the car starts driving full speed, is how I feel. And I know Kathy, you have some ideas on quality and partnerships too, right?   Kathy: Definitely. As an internal evaluator, I'm looking at quality of this project. I want to make sure that we're ensuring fidelity to our model and the key components of our model and project, and we're going to be making adjustments throughout the next year, especially based on the needs of our participants and even our staff. And we're going to be capitalizing on our successes and sharing best practices across our teams through those communities of practice that Lucas talked about. We want to be consistent in implementing our project across the teams and our locations. So again, we have process documents and we're making sure that we're doing things similarly across our locations. And then we're definitely going to be collecting data. We've already started that process, and we want to make sure that we can demonstrate our outcomes so that we can inform our improvements and just really develop that replicable model in the end. And then as far as collaborations and partnerships go, we're working with our local partners to strengthen our connections and expand resources for our disconnected youth and adults with disabilities. So really looking forward to the next year being strengthening of our program and proving our model.   Carol: Well spoken like a true evaluator indeed, I love that. Oh, that is good stuff. So how could our listeners learn more about your work or connect with the FASST team? Do you have a website or something you could share with us.   Lucas: Yeah, so there's a few ways. So if someone's wanting to get connected to Kathy and I quick, we have an email. It's FASST, which is FASST@ServiceSource.org. Comes directly to Kathy and I, and we can answer questions if it's specific to a team, a referral, something like that. We get it out to the appropriate folks across the different teams. We do have a website. There's a lot of hyphens in it, but so largely it's ServiceSource.org/families-achieving-sufficiency-together. The hyphens had to be in there. So it's a little much if someone's trying to write it down. So I don't know if there's a way to have that posted somehow.   Carol: Yeah, we'll definitely put that in when we post the podcast. We can put that in the transcript too, to have the website linked right there.   Lucas: And then, also always like to put a plug in for the National Clearinghouse of Rehabilitation Training Materials, or NCRTM. They have a website for all DIF grantees that provides information about the project so you can see any of the grant cycles, what they're doing, where they're located, and of course, ours being one of them. So it has information and also ties folks back to our project site as well.   Carol: Well, Heather Servais will sure appreciate that shout out to them. They have great stuff. I sure appreciate you both very much. This is interesting. It'll be fun to catch up with you in a year or so and see, like now that you said you're kind of going full speed ahead to see where things land, I appreciate you.   Kathy: Thank you.   Lucas: Thank you so much.   {Music} Outro Voice: Conversations powered by VR. One manager at a time. One minute at a time. Brought to you by the VRTAC. Catch all of our podcast episodes by subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening.   Lucas: The contents of this discussion were developed under Grant H421F240144 from the US Department of Education Department. The Department does not mandate or prescribe practices, models or other activities described or discussed in this discussion. The contents of this discussion may contain examples of adaptations of, and links to, resources created and maintained by another public or private organization. The. The department does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of this outside information. The content of this discussion does not necessarily represent the policy of the department. This publication is not intended to represent the views or policy, or be an endorsement of any views expressed or materials provided by any federal agency. Edgar. 75.620.   Carol: Well, thank you both. I really appreciate you. Good job.   Kathy: Thanks Carol.   Lucas: Thank you so much.   Music} Outro Voice: Conversations powered by VR. One manager at a time. One minute at a time. Brought to you by the VRTAC. Catch all of our podcast episodes by subscribing on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening.

Foundations of Amateur Radio Building a shack makes a number of assumptions about your situation and to make it abundantly clear, it's not the only way to enjoy the hobby of amateur radio. Visiting clubs locally and remotely, being a member of a club, visiting other amateurs, setting up your station in a suitcase or a backpack, on a bicycle, in a car, on a bus, or in a boat are some of the many other avenues open to you. That said, there is something magical about building your own shack. It has the ability to transform your hobby and if you have the opportunity, I can highly recommend it and I'd like to encourage you to consider the notion. As I've said previously, there is plenty of exploration and learning associated with putting one together. After you've spent some time reflecting, planning, designing, sourcing, building and testing the environment where you do amateur radio, you're likely to reach a point where you'll refer to that space as "your shack". You might even come to think of it as your shack, rather than a collection of trade offs that you've constructed in the best way you know how. Inevitably, you'll wonder what to do next. Several things come to mind. Creature comforts is probably the most obvious, a push to talk foot pedal, or a desk microphone, either on a stand or hanging from a boom, an audio mixer, a couch, a soldering station, a microwave oven, a fan, or air conditioning, in other words, plenty of opportunities for improvement and enhancement. Then there's computing, something that might interest you, or not. It offers the ability to explore a whole different side of amateur radio, from logging through to digital modes, from weak signal propagation to tracking satellites, the possibilities are endless. Your shack is also potentially a communal place where you can meet with your friends to share the experience. It's a place for contemplation, for relaxation, for "being" an amateur. All of it is open to you as possibility, an excuse to improve and enhance. The thing is, that too will come to a point of, let's call it "completion", and you're left with more questions. Amateur radio is inherently experimental in nature, that's the whole point of the pursuit. Your licence gave you access to the playground, your shack is that playground. Now it's up to you to play. Of course what playing looks like is unique to you. Over the past 15 years I've been describing what playing looks like to me, and from the over 3 million downloads last year from my website alone, not to mention the newsletters, rebroadcasts, podcast inclusions, other streaming services, news reports, social media and messages I've received, they've encouraged you to explore and investigate this wondrous activity. The point is, the shack you just completed isn't finished and hopefully it never will be. Whichever one it is, the first one, the one after that or the next one, your shack is a place where you can experiment, learn, discover, test, fail, succeed, challenge and enjoy the hobby of amateur radio. It's not the only place where you'll find this hobby, but it's your place. So, have at it. I'm Onno VK6FLAB

My guest today is someone who is no stranger to the front of the field. A perennial podium finisher as a professional mountain biker, and over the past decade-plus one of the most accomplished ultra-endurance cyclists on the planet, he has first-place finishes at the Tour Divide, AZT, CTR, and many many more. The truth is, I'd need to create an entirely new podcast series to fully unpack the range, depth, and longevity of his career as a lifelong cyclist. For that reason, he's a man who truly needs no introduction: Kurt Refsnider. Most recently, Kurt became the first person to ride the 5,000-plus-mile Orogenesis Route -- a project more than a decade in the making, shaped by many contributors over the years. Like the Great Divide Mountain Bike Route, the Orogenesis Route traverses North America from the Canadian border to the Mexican border, but it instead features as much singletrack as they can pack in - 50% of the route is singletrack. And when it reaches the border, the route doesn't stop. It intercepts and continues down the Baja Divide, one of the most iconic bikepacking routes in the world. This was no small undertaking. Not only was this Kurt's biggest bikepacking trip to date, but he was also the first person to put bike tires on large portions of the route—sections that had only been scouted digitally and pieced together through community knowledge. Inevitably, that meant running into real roadblocks. This wasn't just a bikepacking trip; it was a true bike adventure. I can think of no one more qualified to take on a project of this scale, both physically and mentally, than Kurt. It was an absolute pleasure to have him back on the podcast. He's a true OG and a legend in the sport for very good reason. And beyond all the accolades, he's simply a genuinely kind and thoughtful human being. The Bikes or Death Podcast is Presented by Old Man Mountain To support this work: www.Patreon.com/bikesordeath Kurt's website: https://www.ultramtb.net/ Orogenesis Collective: https://orogenesiscollective.org/    

Anne Stevenson-Yang characterizes China's history as a cyclical pattern of rising and crashing expectations, where eras of opening to the West—such as the 1890s and 1979—are inevitably followed by severe closures. She suggests that the current era represents another downturn in this cycle, where the excitement and prospects previously celebrated by the international community are now being "smashed back down" as the country closes itself off again.1783

This episode of Politically Uncorrect opens with the chaos of the Bills–Broncos divisional playoff game and its controversial ending. Michael breaks down what the loss means for Buffalo's long-term outlook and where it leaves Josh Allen as the window continues to shrink around him.From there, the focus shifts to the NBA — specifically, the new and unexpected state of the Golden State Warriors. With Jimmy Butler out for the season, Steve Kerr had no choice but to finally play Jonathan Kuminga, who returned after a month-long absence and immediately looked sensational.Michael dives into the energy surrounding Kuminga's return — from online reactions to the loud real-life applause the moment he checked in and continued to dominate. The segment evolves into an honest critique of the dynamics between fans, the coaching staff, and the Kuminga situation as a whole.Inevitably, the frustration boils over. Michael reaches new levels of hatred for Steve Kerr, but he doesn't stop there — he addresses the elephant in the room:Stephen Curry's lack of leadership and how it may be the true catalyst behind the entire Kuminga saga.

Matt Ridley's seminal book, The Rational Optimist, has inspired many since its publication in 2010 and greatly influenced the creation of The Optimism Institute.  In this far-ranging discussion, Matt will describe an early education that he said was steeped in pessimism but how later in life he found that much of what he'd been taught was simply not true.  This led him to set on a nearly evangelical quest to spread the word that interaction and trade between people and nations, including the free exchange of ideas, will continue to set us on an inexorable path towards increasing prosperity.    Chapters:  00:00 Introducing Matt Ridley Bill Burke introduces Matt Ridley, acclaimed author of "The Rational Optimist" and other influential books. He highlights Ridley's extensive background, including his service in the House of Lords and his work on various scientific committees.  02:39 From Pessimism to Rational Optimism  Matt Ridley shares his personal journey from a pessimistic upbringing in the 1970s to becoming a 'rational optimist' based on evidence. He recounts how his research for 'The Rational Optimist' revealed that many assumed negative trends, like decreasing happiness with wealth, were actually false.  06:01 The Genesis of "The Rational Optimist"  Ridley explains his evangelical motivation for writing 'The Rational Optimist,' aiming to counter pervasive doom and gloom, especially among young people. He also sought to explore the evolutionary roots of human prosperity and growth, driven by an innate curiosity about why the world was improving.  07:28 Ideas Have Sex: Cooperation and Trade  Matt Ridley delves into his concept of "ideas having sex," explaining how human cooperation, trade, and the exchange of specialized skills drive prosperity. He posits that this fundamental human tendency to swap goods and ideas is as crucial to cultural evolution as sex is to natural evolution.  13:50 Social Media's Impact: Polarization and Progress  Ridley reflects on social media's impact on his 'ideas having sex' theory, acknowledging its initial promise for communication but also its role in political polarization.   19:29 Panglossian vs. Rational Optimism  Ridley distinguishes his rational optimism from Panglossian optimism, emphasizing that he believes the world can and should be improved, not that it's already perfect. He counters common pessimistic arguments by pointing to long-term improvements in living standards and the gradual nature of good news compared to sudden bad news.  23:56 Trust and the Pencil's Lesson Matt Ridley discusses the importance of interpersonal trust for societal prosperity, contrasting it with institutional trust. He also elaborates on the 'I, Pencil' essay, illustrating how millions of specialized individuals unknowingly collaborate to produce even a simple item like a pencil.  33:15 Gratitude, Specialization, and Daily Miracles  Ridley encourages gratitude for the vast network of people who contribute to our daily lives, using the example of a simple meal.   36:50 Climate Change: A Problem to Be Solved Matt Ridley shares his nuanced perspective on climate change, acknowledging it as a real threat but cautioning against panic and exaggeration. He suggests viewing it as a problem solvable through human ingenuity, while also highlighting the overlooked environmental benefits of CO2 and the harm caused by some climate prevention measures.  42:51 The Future of Innovation: Worries and Hopes  Ridley discusses the limitless nature of knowledge and innovation, emphasizing communication over population size for progress.  

Want to start the year together? Learn more here: https://www.allieireeves.com/threshold

A move into a new home involves lots of excitement and lots of work. Inevitably, the first time you try to cook a meal in that new home, you'll discover that a few crucial tools and condiments are missing. In this lesson, learn about the essentials of the Chinese kitchen. Episode link: https://www.chinesepod.com/1533

Make Morality Mainstream Again The adultification of teen fiction has intentionally Frankensteined books for teens into cesspools of ideological normalization. A while ago, I met a mother and her daughter, the latter of whom I hadn't seen in several years. On the cusp of turning twelve, she'd obviously grown in the time since, and, her mother proudly informed me, had become quite the reader. Indeed, the girl held quite a thick book in her hand. Which was it? The girl showed me the cover. I turned to the mother. “Do you know what your daughter is reading?” She'd figured telling her eleven-year-old she could read whatever was marked 14+ was a safe enough guardrail for appropriate content. As reading is an experience between book and reader, the mother wouldn't have seen what her daughter was taking in. She couldn't either know that her daughter's book was familiar not because it was something I'd read but because it was something I wouldn't. Worse, she thought she could trust the institution. THE READING DILEMMA Parents want kids to read, but as most can't keep up with their reading habits, they don't fully realize what's being allowed, even promoted, in books for young readers. As with other once vaunted institutions, the publishing world has morphed in ways many aren't fully aware of. Over a decade ago, I signed my first contract for Young Adult (YA) fiction. Before and since, I've watched the genre boom through the stages of audience demographic to viable business. Throughout, YA has expanded from books for teens to a genre unto itself, attracting talented writers, lucrative contracts, and the golden goose of Hollywood adaptations. YA is officially for readers 14-18 years (and up). However, as it's after Middle Grade (8-12 years), tweens are frequent readers, plus many eleven-year-olds reading up. There is “lower” and “upper” YA, but they're unofficial categories for libraries or writers specific about their target audience. Most retailers and publishers categorize all teen books under the general YA umbrella. NA, New Adult, mainly written for college-aged readers into their early twenties, is often sheltered under the YA umbrella too. Alongside the wider publishing industry, YA has changed significantly over the years, reflecting broader shifts in society. What follows isn't an analysis on talent or quality but content, as something about words in a book makes what's written more real, valid, romantic, admirable, aspirational. Thus, the intent is to shed light on some of the many topic and imagery that are included in books for young readers. At risk that this won't earn me any friends in publishing (at best), here's some of what I've seen: DEVOLUTION OF YA FICTION Growth of the YA audience/genre is an objective benefit, logical as it is to increase methods for targeting potential customers. As YA has increased in business and position, its morphing into genre unto itself has attracted many adults readers. As a YA author, I read mainly within my market and see the appeal for adult readers considering how well the genre's developed. The migration of older readers to YA is certainly one of the many reasons it's been so adultified. Other factors include the poisonous stranglehold ideological tentacles have on many aspects of culture, entertainment, and education. The shifts adults have finally caught onto in adult fiction and film have infected literature for younger audiences, picture books through YA. A quick example, originally, romantic comedies centered on a man and woman who clashed at the outset, then eventually found their way to each other at the end. The story would build to some romantic declaration, then a kiss. Anyone who's been watching knows that there's now a whole lot of touching that happens before any romantic declaration occurs. Longer, more frequent kisses are only second to scenes of the pair sleeping together before deciding how they really feel about each other. All this is becoming commonplace in YA. What was once cutesy stories about a high school girl chasing a crush has now become stories featuring a whole lot of other firsts, even seconds, and then some. The devolution of YA is a result of purposeful normalization and reshaping of societal norms through manipulatively emotional appeals by writers, agents, and editors. On average, books from larger publishing houses take roughly eighteen months to two years to evolve from contract to product on the shelf. To say, story trends are set in motion well before their rise in popularity. Whatever the view on agents as gatekeepers to the larger houses, publishers only publish so many books in a year, an amount significantly less than all the people who want to be published. Hence, agents act as preliminary filters for editors, whittling down potential authors to relatively more manageable numbers. An agent must really believe in a writer and project to nab one of those few spots. Like most creative fields, writing is highly subjective, so in addition to general quality, each agent and editor has preferences for stories they want to work with. They're also usually pretty clear about what they're looking for, so part of the progression of change can be traced back to what's being requested. CHARACTER INCLUSION CHECKLISTS When I first entered the “querying trenches,” wish lists from agents mainly specified genres and their various offshoots. Although ideologies make a home in all genres, most were subtler, more akin to a light sprinkling than the deluge of today. Within a few short years, wish lists changed. Unofficial “checklists” appeared in the now familiar cancerous categories of equity, representation, marginalization, and other socialist pseudonyms. Nonfiction for teens is dominated by activism, coming out, and adaptations of left-wing figures' biographies. Rather than prioritize quality, potential, uniqueness, the new gatekeeping is often focused on the inclusion of certain ideologies. For the first while, emphasis was on strong female characters, an odd request considering the YA market is dominated by female writers and readers. Previous character portrayal thus had little to do with some imagined patriarchal oppression. Now, female characters are “fierce”, projections of feminist fantasies celebrating girl bosses who are objectively pushy, uncooperative, obnoxious, self-righteous, and/or highly unrealistic. Somehow, they capture the most desirable love interest, a magical combination of masculinity and emotional vulnerability, who is inexplicably un-neutered by support of her domineering principles. Frequently, the girl makes the first move. Worse than overbearing feminism is unrealistic portrayals of a girl's physical abilities accompanied by most unsavory rage and wrath and anger. Supposedly, these traits aren't anathema to the gorgeous guys (when it is a guy) these girls miraculously attract. Unless there's a moth to flame metaphor here, it's a lie to pretend wrath is a healthy attraction. This well reflects the move away from what's become so-last-century stories featuring underdogs who searched deep for courage and heart to overcome challenges, raising up others alongside themselves. A time when character development focused on, well, character. More wholesome stories have been replaced with a self-proclaimed oppressed burning with self-righteous rage and violence. Such characters have seeped into fantasy for adults as well, most notably in armies featuring female combat soldiers and warriors without special powers, who somehow go toe-to-toe if not best male counterparts. Often this sort of matchup is shown as some cunning of smallness, agility, and destruction of arrogant male condescension. Never mind that such fighting is highly unrealistic, and any male is rightly confident if paired against a woman in physical combat. No amount of small body darting or ingenuity will save a girl from the full force of one landed male punch. The unquestioned portrayal of women able to best men in physical combat is worrying considering the real possibility of a reader confusing fact with fiction. Besides, a country which sends its women to war will no longer exist, as it's a country with males but not men. The current not-so-secret of major houses is that a book doesn't have a high chance of getting published if it doesn't check certain markers, especially for midlist and debut authors, though A-listers are not immune. A Caucasian is hardly allowed to write a story featuring a so-called BIPOC, but a straight author must somehow include the ever-expanding gay-bcs, and it must be in a positive light. Some authors were always writing these characters, which at least reflects acting of their own volition. For the rest, many didn't start until required. Because of the careful wording around these ideologies, many don't speak out against these practices so as not to appear hateful and bigoted. The mandated appearance of so-called marginalized and under-represented in stories lest the author risk erasing…someone, somehow also operates along these lines. Although, apparently, only very specific groups are at risk of disappearing. These standards are ridiculous in their least damaging iterations. How many so-anointed BIPOC were consulted over their standard portrayals? How can every individual of every minority be consulted for approval, and who chooses which faction decides? How many Latinos, speakers of gendered language, agreed to Latinx and Latine? Christian characters in mainstream publishing are rarely portrayed as steadfast believers or even rebels rediscovering faith. Jewish stories usually feature a character who's “lived experience” is assimilation, so the character is of a religion but doesn't represent it. A real portrayal of the true beliefs these characters come from would not align with the world mainstream publishing wants to shape. Even more ludicrous is that “disabled” and “neurodivergent” are considered identities, as if a physical or medical condition is cause for new labeling. The approach used to be that you are still you, worthy of respect and consideration, despite these conditions. In the glorified world of the self-hyphenate, the world of we-are-our-self-declared-identity, it's the foremost feature mentioned, with accompanying expectation of praise and exaltation, regardless of an individual's character or behavior. Don't confuse the argument against the labeling with the individuals, because they are separable. Worse than the tokenism is the reduction of individuals to secondary characteristics. Is this really the first thing you have to say about yourself, the most essential thing to know? When did it become norm to turn skin color or medical condition or physical ability into a character trait, the very notion of which says that anyone in this group must be viewed primarily through this lens, as if each is exactly the same? How myopic. How belittling. Following the cue set by movies, books for teens also morphed from cutesy rom-coms to ideological showcases. Unsurprisingly, there's been the introduction of the stereotypical gay best friend. Then storylines focusing on coming out or discovering someone close was gay, with accompanying template for writing them. The one coming out is always the strong one, the resilient one, though much language must be banned lest they be offended or erased, so their strength is dependent upon a carefully constructed bubble. Not only is inclusion necessary but happiness is the only possible, deliberately portrayed reaction. Never mind if some or all of it runs counter to a writer's religious beliefs. Moreover, “I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I'll still treat you with respect” was never an acceptable response. And it is an acceptable response in all manner of situations, unless you exorcise it in efforts to forcibly shape a particular worldview. Additionally, the attitude is that since you can't tell me who to love, and loving this person makes me happy, you must not only ally but champion me. Why is it offensive to present different acceptable, respectful reactions to teens? Who exactly is erased if this character isn't presented at all? As before, don't confuse the argument against mandate with the individuals. The contention isn't about love, but about religion protecting the sanctity of romantic relationships and marriage, a religious practice since the dawn of time, as seen across centuries and civilizations. Marriage is described as sanctified and holy, because it's Divine in nature, and thereby under the domain of the religious. If it's just a contract, then of course any government can regulate it. It’s disingenuous to deny that such enforcement clashes with the very nature of what writing is about. It shuts down discussion, then subverts it entirely by pretending there's nothing to debate. That shouldn't be a source of pride for publishing, but deepest shame. In their efforts to supposedly widen the window of story matter, they've narrowed the frames and tinted the panes to exclude suddenly unacceptable voices entirely. PORNOGRAPHY AND CONSENT Compounded upon all this, most books are no longer relatively clean romances building to a single kiss, as every stage of the relationship has become more explicit. Some scenes are akin to manuals, containing the sort of imagery once the sole province of steamy romances. When efforts are rightly made to remove these books from shelves, screeches of censorship! erasure! representation! resound. We wouldn't, and shouldn't, tolerate any adult approaching a kid on the street and telling stories with such description, nor should we allow it from close friends or family. Authors do not hold special status in this, no matter what the screechers screech. Taking such books off shelves isn't an indication of bigotry, intolerance, hatred, or erasure, but moral obligation. The counterargument from writers, agents, and editors is that explicit detail is necessary because of something to do with “lived experiences” and consent. First, if kids are doing it anyway, then adults definitely needn't assist. Second, consent is not quite the magical word society would have us believe. Third, “everyone has different experiences” is not a reason for writing graphic content, and the replacement of “intimacy” with “experience” is largely responsible for why relationships are in the gutter and leaving people unfulfilled. Intimacy is something private between two individuals; experience is a vague euphemism to pass off what should matter as transitory, despite irrevocable effects. It's difficult to imagine in an age when phones, cameras, and microphones track a person everywhere, but there was once an ideal called privacy, and the intimate was part of it. Pushback also leads to defenses of “sexuality,” another way of saying adults want to teach kids all kinds of ways to pursue these “experiences”. Changing the wording doesn't alter the nature but does allow immoral actors to force celebration of their fantasies and fetishes. The wrongness is incontestable, though not surprising from those who promote polyamory for teens and romantic relationships between humans and demons or other ungodly creatures. The feeble argument for writing scenes of teens sleeping together is they must see what consent looks like. Again, authors do not hold special status or exemption. There is no strong enough argument for writing scenes for teens in which one character undresses another and verbally asks permission every step of the way. Especially because the new trend seems to be the girl not only “consenting”, but also a burning I want this. If she wants, this wording implies, then she must have, abandoning all reason and morality. Consent has become an excuse for all sorts of undesirable, immoral, even illegal behavior, but mutual agreement is supposed to make it okay. This isn't the behavior we should be promoting for teens; we should be giving them better things, bigger ideas to think about. Worst of all, why is any adult writing about two sixteen-year-olds sleeping together? A teenager, no matter how mature, is still developing and while smart and clever not really old enough to fully understand what she's “consenting” to, and is probably being taken advantage of. We treat eighteen with the same magical power as consent, as if any age should be sleeping around, even if legalese only extends so far. Teen pregnancy, abortion overall, would hardly be an issue if everyone stopped sleeping with people they shouldn't. Any adherent to morality knows this, though morality is just another thing scuttled from teen fiction. G-dless ideology is the new morality; immoral, manmade gods have replaced G-d; lust is the new love; sexuality excuse for pornography; perceived racism and misogyny validation for violence and rage. Many are we who did not consent to this. These scenes are in teen films as well, though how many parents know this in an age of individual devices? Adults pretending to be teens take each other's clothes off before a camera for real tweens, teens, and/or adults to watch. Please explain in clear and simple language why this is not a form of pornography. What absolutely vital role does this scene have in advancing the story? Consent is not enough. Wanting is not enough. We're encouraging teens to turn their bodies into used cars, dented, scraped, scarred, and baggage laden, for what? Why is this hollowing out of self and morality good? This serves no benefit for teens and the overall state of relationships. Consent has become an excuse for all sorts of undesirable, immoral, even illegal behavior, but we're supposed to think that everyone agreeing makes whatever they agree to okay. It's incredibly obvious that feminism and the sexual revolution didn't free women, but chain them in a prison of animalistic, unsatisfying desire, dooming them to jadedness, frustration, and loneliness. But they're so responsible! So mature! By such logic, a responsible sixteen-year-old should be able to buy guns, alcohol, and drugs. But identity! No, identity doesn't mandate a book with graphic imagery, nor is it “sexuality” or “feeling seen” or any other term you hide behind. Witness the tattered remains of social morality that writers do not balk at writing this for teens. They should balk at writing this for anyone. Once we recognized that betterment came through battling temptations. It is not difficult to see how the enforced normalization of all this was also an effective ridding of undesirable shame. Not only have we banished feeling bad, we've enforced celebration of what shame once kept in line. But they'll never be prepared! How did any of us get here if none of this existed for millennia? But look at the sales! Many people also bought rock pets. Deviants and defenders will attempt to claim that (a) this sort of stuff always existed, which isn't really a reason for its continuance, and (b) previous generations were undoubtedly stifled in their inability to express their true selves. Perhaps. And yet, previous generations built civilization, with significantly less medical prescriptions too. Previous generations were better at family and community, meaning and purpose. We have “experiences.” But this is what married people do! Some writers introduce a faux or rushed marriage into the plot, perhaps because their weakening moral compass prevents writing an explicit scene between unmarried characters. Marrying the characters and making them eighteen doesn't magically okay writing this for teens. Everyone does it—indeed there are many common bodily functions which shouldn't be demonstrated in public—isn't either reason enough. Pressures to include these scenes is evidenced by authors long regarded as “clean” storytellers, authors who won't swear or indulge in graphic or gratuitous content, authors who clearly express Christian beliefs in their acknowledgements, writing them too. Would they give this book to their priest? To a young church member? Would they read the scene aloud for family or friends or the very teens they write for? If even the professed religious authors do not have the fortitude to oppose this, if even they can be convinced of the supposed validity, then gone is the bulwark protecting children from the psychological and moral damage resulting from these scenes. But inclusivity! We must reflect the world around them! Considering what's in these books, all should pray teens aren't seeing this around them. Either way, that doesn't excuse writing about it. Moreover, cries for inclusivity from those shutting down differing opinions are inherently without substance. True inclusivity is achieved when stories focus on universal truths and laudatory values shared by all. The fundamental argument is that “could” is not “should”, and the only reliable arbiter between the two is Divinely-based morality. Current permissiveness is only possible in a society which worked for decades to expunge religion from its vital foundational position and influence. The demonization piled atop its degradation was simple insurance that the moral truths of religion wouldn't interfere with the newly established secular order. We can still be good people, they claimed. Witness the tattered remains. Allowing, championing, this sort of writing has not made us better, and instead of listening to concerns, activists and proponents double down. Need you any proof of the separation between ethics and morality and elitism and academia, scroll through an article or two in defense of these scenes. The more “educated” the individual, the twisted the pretzel of rationalization. Rational lies, all of them. These lies are prominently center of the new crusade against so-called “book banning,” although the books are still available at retailers and publishers. Fueled by self-righteous hysteria, activists take great pride in influencing state legislatures to enact decrees against book bans in protection of “lived experiences,” representation, and the like. If a teen doesn't see two boys or girls or more sleeping together, so the thinking goes, then they face imminent, unspecified harm, never mind that their sacred voice has been quashed. They claim BIPOC and queer authors are specifically targeted, failing to mention it's the content not the author rejected. Somehow the bigots are the ones who don't want kids reduced to “sexuality”, while the tolerant are the ones who do. Need anyone ask if these protections extend to writers who don't align or even disagree with their worldview? I'd say these books are better suited for adults, but adults are despairing of the unreadability of books in their categories too. And that aside from the targeted “decolonization” of books and authors that adults, especially men, enjoyed reading. From the myriad of books extant, no plot was ever turned, no story ever dependent upon an explicit scene, in the bedroom or elsewhere. Neither does such render the work art or literature, but rather indecent and abhorrent. Parents struggle to encourage their kids to read when such are the books available. ELIMINATING THE WEST For some time, agents have specifically requested non-western narratives, histories, and legends. Atop the deteriorating state of the current education system, teens aren't being presented with a fictionalized character in history, which may thereby spark interest and curiosity in real history. No wonder they know so little of the past when they're not offered history at all. What does make it in represents very select time periods. Other permitted historical fiction is alternative histories where the past is magicked or reimagined, almost always in some gender swapped way. While alternative histories can be creative, the lack of regular historical fiction seems to indicate the only permitted history is a remade one. Otherwise, most of western history isn't on shelves because no one wants to represent it. Which means no one's fighting for it to be published. Which means young readers aren't given glimpses into the past that made this present and will highly influence the future. And this from those who claim large swaths of the population don't properly teach history. The same who pushed the fabricated and widely debunked lie that slavery was unique to the west, the only culture who actively sought to end it. The same who have yet to consider the absolute necessity of mandating schools to teach the true horrors of communism done right. The same who have a monochrome view of colonization and chameleon approach to the faux oppressed-oppressor narrative. A rather high volume of Asian-based stories, histories, and mythologies fill the market instead. The proliferation of Asian and other eastern fiction isn't objectively concerning, but it's deliberate increase alongside western stories' deliberate decrease is. It's less an expansion of viewpoints and more a supplanting of anything west. I grew up reading historical fiction, but there's a dearth on shelves for teen readers, who must see where we come from through the eyes of characters resembling our ancestors. Instead of walking through time in their shoes and understanding their struggles in the context of when they lived, we project modern ideologies upon the one protagonist somehow vastly ahead of her time. It's deliberately false and disconnects readers from the world that created the one we live in. Whatever your opinion of our world, it was formed in those histories, and we cannot appreciate the present without understanding the world that made it. MENTAL HEALTH Another major trend in teen fiction is the focus on the broad category of mental health, its emergence unsurprising considering the uptick in modern society. Whatever the viewpoint on diagnoses, the truth is that the ones calling for greater awareness have much to do with having caused the issues. Teens living in the most prosperous, free society that ever was should not have such measures of mental health struggles, yet they do. Skim the messaging of the last several decades and it's no wonder why. Teens are raised on a bombardment of lies and damaging viewpoints resulting in a precarious Jenga structure at their foundation. For decades they've been told they can sleep around without lasting consequence, negating the need to build deep, lasting, exclusive relationships. Families, a fundamental source of meaning and grounding, have been shoved aside for the faux glory of sleeping with whomever, whenever, and the new solution of “found family”. Just because a pill supposedly prevents biological consequences doesn't mean a different sort of toll hasn't been exacted. And that follows the perpetual degradation of dress, reducing the entirety of an individual to a form as valued or devalued as any other physical object. Added to the disrespect of the body is the incessant, unfounded claim that “climate change” is going to destroy the planet by…well, soon. Never mind that we're doing better than before, and all predictions have been proven wrong. Imagine what continual doom and gloom does to the mental state of a teenager already grappling with ping-ponging hormones, who should be presented with optimism for the future they're about old enough to create. Well, we have a pill for that too. Teens have been told the American dream is gone by those who set out to destroy it, that American greatness isn't worth dreaming about by those who recolored it a nightmare. Hobbies and collected skills, the work of their own hands, have been shunted for social media trends and unfettered internet access. Phones are given to younger and younger kids, so they don't grow up in the tangible, real world but an algorithmic, digital one. Inevitably, the worst of that world affects them. They're told that they're hated, feared for the way they were born. They're told they're not even who they've been since birth, basic facts purposely turned into issues and doubts to shake the foundation of self. Those most adamant about the contrived need for teens to discover identity are the most diligent at axing their very roots. The response to the mental health crisis, the jadedness, the internal turmoil they've helped facilitate by destroying the enduring, reliable fabric of society is to encourage more of the same empty, hollowing behaviors. Atop all this is never-ending rage, rage, rage. At the base is the deliberate removal of religion. No matter an individual's choice of observance, religion undeniably provides what liberal society and decadence cannot; meaning. Eternal, enduring meaning. The knowing that you're more than a clump of cells passing through this timespan, because you are an integral link in a chain reaching back millennia. Your ancestors didn't endure hardships or fight to build civilization so you could be the end of the line, but so you could gratefully take your place in it. You and your actions matter. Not because you're a political vote or celebrated community, but because you were made in the image of G-d Who woke you today as there's something only you can do in His world. What effect would the proliferation of this messaging in literature have on the mental state of the youth? And for those pontificating about diversity and inclusion, who in truth only want different skin colors espousing the same beliefs, there is no greater unifier than religion. Belief in a higher power unites individuals of different backgrounds, colors, and, most valuably, opinions, in ways no mandate or ideology ever can. While lengthy, the above in no way encompasses all the changes, reasons, and effects pertaining to the devolution of teen fiction. And, as the focus is not on talent but content, it can be shifted as easily as it was before. You may disagree with everything I've written. You may accuse me of jealousy, hatred, bigotry, racism, misogyny, xenophobia, erasure, et al. I only encourage you to look for yourself. Peruse bookstore aisles; click through new releases; check who's getting awards. What do your eyes see?

​ @CalNewportMedia  Is It Finally Time To Fight Back Against Technology? (This Bestseller Says “Yes”) | Cal Newport https://youtu.be/IV4c_VOv1e8?si=YLxNN1KkcRRNRgKX  @actoninstitute  Abraham Kuyper's Principles for Christian Liberalism with Matthew Tuininga https://youtu.be/gNgdItCGMUc?si=tZkrW_kQ-I1HSEmW  @WhiteStoneName  The Unending Hell debate, also information v meaning, scale, institutions vs bodies https://www.youtube.com/live/W5C4AXpK9eI?si=VPS_jA55IrL5v1Rw    https://www.livingstonescrc.com/give Register for the Estuary/Cleanup Weekend https://lscrc.elvanto.net/form/94f5e542-facc-4764-9883-442f982df447 Paul Vander Klay clips channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX0jIcadtoxELSwehCh5QTg https://www.meetup.com/sacramento-estuary/ My Substack https://paulvanderklay.substack.com/ Bridges of meaning https://discord.gg/mQGdwNca Estuary Hub Link https://www.estuaryhub.com/ There is a video version of this podcast on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/paulvanderklay To listen to this on ITunes https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/paul-vanderklays-podcast/id1394314333  If you need the RSS feed for your podcast player https://paulvanderklay.podbean.com/feed/  All Amazon links here are part of the Amazon Affiliate Program. Amazon pays me a small commission at no additional cost to you if you buy through one of the product links here. This is is one (free to you) way to support my videos.  https://paypal.me/paulvanderklay Blockchain backup on Lbry https://odysee.com/@paulvanderklay https://www.patreon.com/paulvanderklay Paul's Church Content at Living Stones Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh7bdktIALZ9Nq41oVCvW-A To support Paul's work by supporting his church give here. https://tithe.ly/give?c=2160640 https://www.livingstonescrc.com/give

Edmund Fitton-Brown warns that the West's premature "retirement" of counterterrorism efforts has allowed threats to incubate in conflict zones like Afghanistan. He argues that ignoring these regions inevitably leads to attacks in the West, as terrorists seek attention by striking "peaceful" environments, necessitating renewed forward engagement. 1910

It's holiday season which means holiday parties which means conversations with relatives and friends you haven't seen in a while. Inevitably we all have to deal with nosy questions we don't want to answer, and so rather than being a victim to this today I'm giving you tools to answer these awkward questions like "when are you getting married/pregnant/how much do you make" whether you want to address them head on or deflect the convo or simply get out of the convo and run away lol I have tips on all the above! @drconniewang, @justaquickpinch

In this episode, Chip and Gini discuss the importance of strategic planning for 2026. As they near the end of 2025, they emphasize the need for agencies to set themselves apart and adapt to the evolving landscape, particularly through the effective use of AI. Despite ongoing economic challenges, they highlight the potential for AI to enhance both efficiency and strategic thinking. Chip and Gini also stress the importance of refining the ideal client profile and taking calculated risks. They share their personal experiences with using AI to assist in planning and decision-making processes, pointing out both the benefits and limitations of current AI technology. Key takeaways Chip Griffin: “I do think more than ever, continuing forward on the path that you’re on for the vast majority of agencies is not a good idea. I think most agencies require at least some modest course correction and some more than that.” Gini Dietrich: “Really think about how you can set yourself apart and get in front of prospects now and in January so that you can be doing the things that will help you scale and grow and be sustainable for the future. And some of it’s not gonna be fun.” Chip Griffin: “I think really refining that ideal client profile is something that most of us ought to be taking a very close look at for 2026 in our planning process.” Gini Dietrich: “Be willing to try some things and take some risks and see what works and see what doesn’t work, and then go move on to what works and try again.” Resources The Ragan article regarding upskilling and improving AI skills Related Planning for agency growth Using the AIM-GET Framework to drive your annual planning How to involve your team in annual planning for your agency and its clients Look to your track record as you define your agency's ideal client View Transcript The following is a computer-generated transcript. Please listen to the audio to confirm accuracy. Chip Griffin: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Agency Leadership Podcast. I’m Chip Griffin. Gini Dietrich: And I’m Gini Dietrich. Chip Griffin: And Gini, I’m, I’m flipping through the calendar here, you know, ’cause I still have a paper calendar. Of course. I mean, who doesn’t? Gini Dietrich: Of course. Right. Chip Griffin: And it looks like we’re almost to the end of 2025. Gini Dietrich: We, we are. Which is crazy. Crazy. Chip Griffin: Which, which means that 2026 is right around the corner. Gini Dietrich: Yes. Yes it is. Chip Griffin: And what do we usually do near the end of each year? Gini Dietrich: We plan for the following next year. Yeah. Chip Griffin: And, and we have an episode talking about that. So when we have no other good ideas to bring to the table, we turn to the trusted proven stuff from the past Gini Dietrich: 2026. I mean, we could talk about 2026 trends. We could talk about 2026 AI things, but I think planning for our business growth is good. Chip Griffin: Yeah. That all goes into planning, right? So, I, and, you know, I, I’m, as long as we don’t do predictions, I’m fine. I hate predictions. Gini Dietrich: Oh, shoot. Let’s do predictions next week then. Chip Griffin: No, no, no predictions. No, that’s, that drives me up a wall. Gini Dietrich: Note to self. Note to self. Chip Griffin: And I, and I know we are just, you know, probably days away from the flood of Gini Dietrich: Yep. Chip Griffin: Articles and Yep. And podcast episodes and videos with everybody making their predictions for the year ahead. Yep. Just stop it. Gini Dietrich: Yep. Chip Griffin: So my prediction is we will see lots of predictions. Gini Dietrich: That is a good prediction. I think you’re probably going to be right. Chip Griffin: It seems pretty likely. Gini Dietrich: I’d bet on it in fact. Yeah. Chip Griffin: Yeah. Mm-hmm. Alright, so as we start thinking about 2026 planning, let’s look at it for through the, the lens of, of what, what we might do differently in thinking about 2026 than we typically do. Right? Because we, there’s plenty in our archive where people can go back and listen to us generally talk about planning. I’m sure we’ll touch on some of that in the next 20 minutes. I don’t wanna disappoint listeners. We, we will, you know, reach back to the things that we’ve talked about before, but I think it’s helpful to, to think about, you know, what’s, what’s different about 2026, and I think you’ve already hinted at one of the key things. Gini Dietrich: Oh, AI for sure. Yeah. I saw a really interesting post on LinkedIn from Parry Headrick who was talking about how he used to work for Shift and he was the VP of the San Francisco office, I think, and he said, you know, this was during the recession and I was… Anybody who was in business during the recession knows all of your business went away. It was not a fun time to be in business at all. And he talked about how he went to the office every single day for months on end, and he made cold calls to tech firms and he, he would say, we can do like a PR plan for you, a PR 101 like, and he said one out of every 100 calls accepted the offer. And then they went all out and created a really strategic, as much as it could be, plan for these companies. And gave it to them for free so that they had, they could generate some business. And he said that that was one of the things that kept the office going during that time and how miserable it was. Like he talked about it was boiling the frog, like it was miserable and it was not enjoyable. It’s not why he was doing that job, but they had to keep the office open. And I think that, I read that and I thought, you know, that’s really interesting as we think about 2026 because the last couple of years for agencies have been miserable. We have been slowly boiling the frog for sure. And you know, I have a lot of friends who have laid people off, some have gone out of business, some haven’t gone outta business, but don’t have any clients. Like, it has been rough. And I’m not sure that 26 is going to be much better. So I think one of the things that I will be advising people is, and, and for us too, is really think about how you can set yourself apart and get in front of prospects now and in January so that you can be doing the things that will help you scale and grow and be sustainable for the future. And some of it’s not gonna be fun. It’s not. Chip Griffin: Well, you’ve, uh, certainly taken this on a depressing turn here. Gini Dietrich: I mean, we can talk about AI too, but Chip Griffin: I mean No, I mean, we can, we can talk about how miserable and awful things are for everybody. Uh, that’s, Gini Dietrich: it’s been rough. It’s not like it hasn’t been rainbows and unicorns. It hasn’t. Chip Griffin: No, it, it has, it has not been rainbows and unicorns. But I, but I would also, I would, I would push back a bit. I, I don’t think we’re as bad as ’08 or ’09, or back in the early two thousands. I don’t think it’s, it is not as widespread as it was back then. I’m certainly in the agencies that I’m talking with, seeing a lot of agencies that are struggling, most, not catastrophically, most just kind of, you know, sort of malaise is, is the word I would use. Yeah. It’s good for it. And there are still some that are actually doing quite well and, and even growing. So that, to me, that is a little bit different than what we’ve seen in, you know, in  08 or ’09, or during the pandemic. Certainly. You know, where it was pretty much… I guess even in the pandemic, we had pockets, right? The, the digital firms did well because everybody had to transition from doing things in person to doing things electronically. But it, it’s just… so, I, I think we’re in that general period of malaise, you know, sort of in, in my mind, I’m old enough, I, I think Jimmy Carter, right? You know, you just sort of think, ehhh, you know, and, and how America of the late ’70’s was. And so there’s some of that, at least within the economy and, and certainly in, in the agency space. So I think that that part of the, the challenge here is that it is not as simple an explanation as to how you get out of it. Right. I mean, back in ’08, ’09, it’s like, okay, well the economy just has to come forward. And in this case, part of it’s the economy, but part of it is the, the shifting nature of the relationships between agencies and brands, and other organizations. And so I, I, I think that one of the reasons why some agencies are struggling is because they’re not taking a fresh look. At what they do, how they fit into that picture. And I think there needs to be a lot more creative thinking. And I think AI is a big driver of it, not necessarily in the, in the way that people think, though I don’t, I don’t see AI as taking away agency work. Mm-hmm. I see it as agencies just haven’t figured out how to capitalize on it effectively. And, I think that there is tremendous opportunity for those agencies who are willing to adapt their service offerings with and without AI. And moving forward in a way where they’ll leave behind a lot of of other agencies that are more committed to just plodding forward and doing the same old, same old, and, you know, sprinkling in a little bit of AI here and there. Gini Dietrich: I read a really interesting article a couple of weeks ago and I’ll see if I can find it so Jen can include it in the show notes. I’m sure it’s in my history somewhere, but it talked about how, you know, we’ve seen all of these layoffs at all these large companies in the last couple of months, you know, thousands and thousands of people. And they’re telling, most of these companies are telling the teams that remain. There are two things that you need to focus on: upskilling. So, you know, using AI to help improve you, you know, understanding your own professional development, taking charge of new professional development, new skills. And the other piece is really using AI to help improve your, the work that you’re doing to make you more productive. And it went on to say. If you’re an agency that can help with one of those two things, or both of those things, you’re gonna be in better shape than an agency who does new media news releases and news conferences, and you know, social media. So if you can think about how you can provide professional development or help an organization implement AI from a marketing and communications perspective, you’re gonna be a lot further ahead than those that can’t do that. So I think that goes back to really thinking about how to freshen the services that you provide in a way that keeps up with what’s happening in the world. Chip Griffin: Yeah. I mean, look, I think that’s absolutely a piece of it, but I think a piece of it is also figuring out, you know, how can you use AI to help you do different things that are not necessarily even explicitly AI related. Or made more efficient by AI or it, I, I think it’s just a, it’s a opportunity to take a very fresh look at how we do everything. And, and I think we need to be careful, not just us as agencies, but also on the brand side. We need to be careful about how much we believe AI itself is changing things or can change things. And, and I, I saw in the last couple of days, a video that our friend Chris Penn put out, where he talked about how you need to change your vocabulary to get the most out of the various generative AI platforms. And I don’t disagree with what he’s saying. You do need to adapt your language to those models so that you get the results you want. But, but the flip side of that is, to me, that says AI has not come nearly as far as we think because we shouldn’t have to change for AI to be responsive to us. Right. Right. True AI would be adapting to us instead. And, and so we’re not quite there yet. And, and the progress has been absolutely amazing. I’ve, every time I try out the latest version of a model, I find new things that it can do and continue to get more and more impressed. But I also have ongoing frustrations with them. In part because of this vocabulary issue, but in part because, you know, we’re still, we’re still overestimating what the, the technology can do for us today as far as allowing us to, to replace work hours, et cetera. And so I see many brands laying off marketing and communications people thinking, well, we’ll have fewer people, but AI will help them do the same amount. Nope. And AI certainly makes you more efficient, but not, not that efficient. Gini Dietrich: Not that efficient. No. And you still need somebody with a brain to prompt it and ensure that it’s not hallucinating and ensure that it’s the right information. And that it’s been edited. Like you still need humans for those things. Does it help you get a start? For sure. But you still need the human beings to do the work. And make sure that it’s accurate because what it pumps out on first try, I mean, my favorite response is meh. I just write MEH meh, and it goes, okay, lemme try again. And then I write, meh. It tries again. Finally. I’m like, okay, that’s halfway decent. Chip Griffin: Well, that, that’s better. My habit is to actually get into arguments with it, which… Really serves no good purpose, but I just, I get, I get, I get frustrated when I explicitly ask it to do something and it doesn’t, Gini Dietrich: it doesn’t, right. Chip Griffin: And I’ll be like, well, why didn’t you do what? Yeah. Oh no, you’re right. I should have done that. Yes, because I specifically for it, right? Like, please help me, Gini Dietrich: please write a thousand words and it gives you 300. And you’re like, Hmm, right. Just do what thousand words. Chip Griffin: Just do what I ask, you know? Or, you know, please make the logo smaller in this image. And it doesn’t change it. No, don’t do that to me, that’s just, it’s very frustrating. Gini Dietrich: It’s very frustrating. I agree. Chip Griffin: But I think, you know, we need to be thinking how we can leverage some of these tools to help us adapt our service offerings. And I was, I was talking with someone recently who, they had shifted a, a process from humans to AI recently. And they were running into issues because it was some data analysis that was being done and, and it turned out that the numbers were wildly different between the humans and the AI. And so the first instinct was that the AI was wrong. But in fact, upon further review, it turned out that the AI was too good. And it was being in incredibly consistent in the way that it was doing the task. Ah, whereas humans. Sure. Inevitably we get distracted, we make a mistake, we, we hit the wrong key. You know, I mean, there’s all sorts of things that can lead to this, but because the AI was more consistent and the volume of data and such being analyzed by the humans and the AI was substantial, it, it made a real difference because the AI was actually better. And so, but to me that’s an opportunity. You’ve got a short term problem that you gotta deal with that, you know, you’ve been generating these historical reports that don’t look quite right now. But there’s a real opportunity there because you can actually improve the quality of what you’re doing, along with the quantity, along with reducing the, the labor hours involved and that sort of thing. So we need to be looking at, at how we can take that and take it to the next level, not just how can we use AI to do first drafts so that we only have to edit and so therefore we save, you know, 30% of our time or something like that. There’s, we have to be thinking much, much more creatively if we’re gonna be successful going forward. Gini Dietrich: Yeah, and I mean, I’m sure I’ve shared this before, but some of the work that we’ve done in my business this year, I’m not sure we could have done it without AI in the, in two years ago, like some of the work that clients have asked us to do. I’m not sure that we would’ve been capable of doing it without AI. So it, it does have the ability to make you more efficient for sure, but it also helps you think more strategically. And to your point, like, bringing in the, the consistency piece of it so that, you know, maybe the, the way that you reported on results in the past isn’t fully accurate, but now it’s more accurate. Like those kinds of things I think it has helped immensely with, and you know, I can think of at least three situations where I’ve been in a meeting with like big, big, big, big executives and they’ve thrown something out. Do you think your team can do this? And I’ve gone, sure. And then we come back and, you know, as a team, work on it and, and prompt AI. And it’s helped us get to where we need to be. And I don’t think we could have done that on our own two years ago. For sure. Chip Griffin: So, you know, we’ve been talking a bunch about how AI is impacting our businesses, but let’s talk a minute about how AI impacts the planning process itself. And so, you know, my question to you would be, as you’re doing your own 2026 planning with your team, are you using AI to facilitate that process at all? Gini Dietrich: Some of it, I would say I have a co CEO, GPT that I built. So it sits as my Co CEO and sometimes I just vent to it. It makes me feel better, but sometimes it will say things like it will point out things that I didn’t think of. And so, you know, when we, especially right now, ’cause we’re working on cash flow projections for next year with our CFO and I’ve, I’ve put in like… Not actual numbers, but percentages to, and said like, can you help me figure out if these are our goals, what we’re going need to do? What software do we need? What team members are we gonna have to add? Like that kind of stuff. And it help, it’s helping me and our CFO think through all of those different scenarios for sure. We haven’t gotten into like the nitty gritty planning yet because our 2025 plan is rolling over into Q1 a little bit. So we’re, we’re about a quarter behind from that perspective. But, from a cashflow perspective, it’s helping a ton and it’s helped me see things that I wouldn’t have seen on my own. Chip Griffin: Yeah. And and I think that’s a, that’s a real benefit that we ought to be looking at when we’re doing the planning process is using AI, not necessarily to give us all the answers, but to help us understand what else we should be looking at. So I love using AI to, to, to give it a list of questions that I may have about something and say, what, what other questions should I be asking? What other data points should I be looking at? Or putting in some raw data and saying, okay, you know, what are the gaps here? What, what should I be looking to… What additional data should I be looking for? Or how can I analyze this in a different way? So I think in the planning process, there’s a lot of ways that we can use the AI to help us. I think we just need to be careful about using it to give us the answers and instead help it to guide the conversations for sure. Yeah. That we’re having with our teams and with our clients, because it will inevitably help us find things that we are overlooking. And maybe we would still get to it halfway through the brainstorming session or the, the strategy meeting or whatever. But if we know it in advance, you know, it helps us prepare better. Gini Dietrich: Yeah, absolutely. And I, I do think, you know, to your point about the, the data and it being consistent, I think it does look at things more holistically and how, and I mean, it will say to me, have you thought about this or have you thought about that? Or, you know. Here’s an opportunity for you. Like with the PESO model certification in universities, we had an idea of how we were going to approach it in ’26 ’cause the certification is being completely revamped because of AI. And it actually gave me a couple of ideas that I was like… Huh, I hadn’t even thought about that. So like providing curriculum and grading rubric and things like that, that helps professors that I hadn’t even, ’cause I just don’t have that kind of experience. Right. But it helps me think through some of those kinds of things. So I think you’re right. And you know, I love the idea of, of a list of questions and asking what you haven’t thought of. I’ll put in and say, you know, we’re looking to do this, this, and this, and here’s what we’re thinking. What are we missing? And it, you know, it does come back with some ideas. Sometimes it comes back with things you’ve thought about and you’ve dismissed, and sometimes it comes back with things that you’re like, Hmm, okay, let’s, let’s explore that. Chip Griffin: Yeah, and I mean it, there’s, it’s not a replacement for human judgment. You still need to look at it and say, oh, yeah, that does make sense, that it’s something we look at. But, but my experience is more often than not, it does come up with things that, you know, that given the right amount of time I would have thought of, but Sure. You know, it, it’s, it’s, it’s good to have it reinforced that, it’s good to have it, you know, bubble it up higher on my list so that, again, I, I’m not finding it out, you know, halfway through the meeting when the light bulb goes off and it’s like, oh, right, I forgot about this. We should be, we should be looking at that. Right. You know, but I, I think this is the, the planning process is, is an opportunity for you as well to be thinking about challenging your own assumptions. And, and I do think more than ever continuing forward on the path that you’re on for the vast majority of agencies is not a good idea. I think most agencies require at least some modest course correction and some more than that. And so I think that we’ve already talked about, you know, what kind of services you can deliver and those kinds of things. But I think the other thing we all ought to be looking at in 2026 is the definition of our ideal client. Because, because we do need to understand better how our clients of today are being impacted by the economy, by AI, by all of the social change that’s going on. And understanding how is that impacting who we’re targeting, how we’re targeting them, what kinds of engagements we’re, we’re trying to set up with. And so I, I think really refining that ideal client profile is something that most of us ought to be taking a very close look at for 2026 in our planning process. Gini Dietrich: One hundred percent. I could not agree more. And you know, I’m a big, big, big fan of really understanding at a macro level what’s going on so that we know how it affects our businesses. And I think that the more that you can do that and understand how everything that’s going on in the world is going to affect your agency and you know, the sustainability and stability of it, I think are, is really, really important. And being willing to try some things and take some risks and see what works and see what doesn’t work, and then go move on to what works and try again. Chip Griffin: Right. And, and you need to, to look at the data that you’ve got in front of you, not data from three to five years ago, right? But, but data from 2025. And so whether you’ve had a great 2025, a mediocre 2025, or an awful 2025, look at what the data is telling you. And look at where you’ve had success. Success in terms of where you’ve had the best results for clients, which we often overlook. We, we often look at just, you know, what we’ve been able to sell, but you need to see what is producing results for clients. You do need to understand what you’re selling, where those leads came from, and, and look at those recent trends and lean into what’s working. And again, that doesn’t matter whether you’ve had a good year or a bad year. You still wanna lean into what you know is working today because it is a, a very different environment than it was 3 years ago, 10 years ago, and and beyond. So you need to be relying on that kind of analysis if you wanna make smarter decisions in your planning process. Gini Dietrich: Yeah, absolutely. And I think you’re right, like this is different than 2008, 2009, and 2020. It’s, it’s different. So be willing to take some risk. It’s uncomfortable for sure. Chip Griffin: You and I both love risk, so we’re always gonna preach risk. Calculated risk, not just reckless risk. Gini Dietrich: Calculated risk.Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yes. Please be calculated. Chip Griffin: Yes, have a reason for what you’re doing, and have a reason to believe that there’s a decent chance of success. Don’t just blindly walk out there and say, Hey, let’s try crossing the street now without looking and see what happens. That’s not the kind of risk we want you to take. Gini Dietrich: Please don’t do that. Please do not do that. Please, please do not do that. Chip Griffin: So with that, if you’re, if you’re listening and you’re driving or something, still pay attention ’cause we’re gonna wrap up now. Keep your eyes open. Keep your eyes open. If you, if you wanna listen to this again, wait. You, you can go back to the link. There’s resources that’ll be there. There’s the transcript there, all those things. So stay safe. Yes, yes. However you’re listening to us. And with that, that will draw to an end this episode of the Agency Leadership Podcast. I’m Chip Griffin. Gini Dietrich: I’m Gini Dietrich. Chip Griffin: And it depends.

In this episode, Chip and Gini discuss the importance of strategic planning for 2026. As they near the end of 2025, they emphasize the need for agencies to set themselves apart and adapt to the evolving landscape, particularly through the effective use of AI. Despite ongoing economic challenges, they highlight the potential for AI to enhance both efficiency and strategic thinking. Chip and Gini also stress the importance of refining the ideal client profile and taking calculated risks. They share their personal experiences with using AI to assist in planning and decision-making processes, pointing out both the benefits and limitations of current AI technology. Key takeaways Chip Griffin: “I do think more than ever, continuing forward on the path that you’re on for the vast majority of agencies is not a good idea. I think most agencies require at least some modest course correction and some more than that.” Gini Dietrich: “Really think about how you can set yourself apart and get in front of prospects now and in January so that you can be doing the things that will help you scale and grow and be sustainable for the future. And some of it’s not gonna be fun.” Chip Griffin: “I think really refining that ideal client profile is something that most of us ought to be taking a very close look at for 2026 in our planning process.” Gini Dietrich: “Be willing to try some things and take some risks and see what works and see what doesn’t work, and then go move on to what works and try again.” Resources The Ragan article regarding upskilling and improving AI skills Related Planning for agency growth Using the AIM-GET Framework to drive your annual planning How to involve your team in annual planning for your agency and its clients Look to your track record as you define your agency's ideal client View Transcript The following is a computer-generated transcript. Please listen to the audio to confirm accuracy. Chip Griffin: Hello and welcome to another episode of the Agency Leadership Podcast. I’m Chip Griffin. Gini Dietrich: And I’m Gini Dietrich. Chip Griffin: And Gini, I’m, I’m flipping through the calendar here, you know, ’cause I still have a paper calendar. Of course. I mean, who doesn’t? Gini Dietrich: Of course. Right. Chip Griffin: And it looks like we’re almost to the end of 2025. Gini Dietrich: We, we are. Which is crazy. Crazy. Chip Griffin: Which, which means that 2026 is right around the corner. Gini Dietrich: Yes. Yes it is. Chip Griffin: And what do we usually do near the end of each year? Gini Dietrich: We plan for the following next year. Yeah. Chip Griffin: And, and we have an episode talking about that. So when we have no other good ideas to bring to the table, we turn to the trusted proven stuff from the past Gini Dietrich: 2026. I mean, we could talk about 2026 trends. We could talk about 2026 AI things, but I think planning for our business growth is good. Chip Griffin: Yeah. That all goes into planning, right? So, I, and, you know, I, I’m, as long as we don’t do predictions, I’m fine. I hate predictions. Gini Dietrich: Oh, shoot. Let’s do predictions next week then. Chip Griffin: No, no, no predictions. No, that’s, that drives me up a wall. Gini Dietrich: Note to self. Note to self. Chip Griffin: And I, and I know we are just, you know, probably days away from the flood of Gini Dietrich: Yep. Chip Griffin: Articles and Yep. And podcast episodes and videos with everybody making their predictions for the year ahead. Yep. Just stop it. Gini Dietrich: Yep. Chip Griffin: So my prediction is we will see lots of predictions. Gini Dietrich: That is a good prediction. I think you’re probably going to be right. Chip Griffin: It seems pretty likely. Gini Dietrich: I’d bet on it in fact. Yeah. Chip Griffin: Yeah. Mm-hmm. Alright, so as we start thinking about 2026 planning, let’s look at it for through the, the lens of, of what, what we might do differently in thinking about 2026 than we typically do. Right? Because we, there’s plenty in our archive where people can go back and listen to us generally talk about planning. I’m sure we’ll touch on some of that in the next 20 minutes. I don’t wanna disappoint listeners. We, we will, you know, reach back to the things that we’ve talked about before, but I think it’s helpful to, to think about, you know, what’s, what’s different about 2026, and I think you’ve already hinted at one of the key things. Gini Dietrich: Oh, AI for sure. Yeah. I saw a really interesting post on LinkedIn from Parry Headrick who was talking about how he used to work for Shift and he was the VP of the San Francisco office, I think, and he said, you know, this was during the recession and I was… Anybody who was in business during the recession knows all of your business went away. It was not a fun time to be in business at all. And he talked about how he went to the office every single day for months on end, and he made cold calls to tech firms and he, he would say, we can do like a PR plan for you, a PR 101 like, and he said one out of every 100 calls accepted the offer. And then they went all out and created a really strategic, as much as it could be, plan for these companies. And gave it to them for free so that they had, they could generate some business. And he said that that was one of the things that kept the office going during that time and how miserable it was. Like he talked about it was boiling the frog, like it was miserable and it was not enjoyable. It’s not why he was doing that job, but they had to keep the office open. And I think that, I read that and I thought, you know, that’s really interesting as we think about 2026 because the last couple of years for agencies have been miserable. We have been slowly boiling the frog for sure. And you know, I have a lot of friends who have laid people off, some have gone out of business, some haven’t gone outta business, but don’t have any clients. Like, it has been rough. And I’m not sure that 26 is going to be much better. So I think one of the things that I will be advising people is, and, and for us too, is really think about how you can set yourself apart and get in front of prospects now and in January so that you can be doing the things that will help you scale and grow and be sustainable for the future. And some of it’s not gonna be fun. It’s not. Chip Griffin: Well, you’ve, uh, certainly taken this on a depressing turn here. Gini Dietrich: I mean, we can talk about AI too, but Chip Griffin: I mean No, I mean, we can, we can talk about how miserable and awful things are for everybody. Uh, that’s, Gini Dietrich: it’s been rough. It’s not like it hasn’t been rainbows and unicorns. It hasn’t. Chip Griffin: No, it, it has, it has not been rainbows and unicorns. But I, but I would also, I would, I would push back a bit. I, I don’t think we’re as bad as ’08 or ’09, or back in the early two thousands. I don’t think it’s, it is not as widespread as it was back then. I’m certainly in the agencies that I’m talking with, seeing a lot of agencies that are struggling, most, not catastrophically, most just kind of, you know, sort of malaise is, is the word I would use. Yeah. It’s good for it. And there are still some that are actually doing quite well and, and even growing. So that, to me, that is a little bit different than what we’ve seen in, you know, in  08 or ’09, or during the pandemic. Certainly. You know, where it was pretty much… I guess even in the pandemic, we had pockets, right? The, the digital firms did well because everybody had to transition from doing things in person to doing things electronically. But it, it’s just… so, I, I think we’re in that general period of malaise, you know, sort of in, in my mind, I’m old enough, I, I think Jimmy Carter, right? You know, you just sort of think, ehhh, you know, and, and how America of the late ’70’s was. And so there’s some of that, at least within the economy and, and certainly in, in the agency space. So I think that that part of the, the challenge here is that it is not as simple an explanation as to how you get out of it. Right. I mean, back in ’08, ’09, it’s like, okay, well the economy just has to come forward. And in this case, part of it’s the economy, but part of it is the, the shifting nature of the relationships between agencies and brands, and other organizations. And so I, I, I think that one of the reasons why some agencies are struggling is because they’re not taking a fresh look. At what they do, how they fit into that picture. And I think there needs to be a lot more creative thinking. And I think AI is a big driver of it, not necessarily in the, in the way that people think, though I don’t, I don’t see AI as taking away agency work. Mm-hmm. I see it as agencies just haven’t figured out how to capitalize on it effectively. And, I think that there is tremendous opportunity for those agencies who are willing to adapt their service offerings with and without AI. And moving forward in a way where they’ll leave behind a lot of of other agencies that are more committed to just plodding forward and doing the same old, same old, and, you know, sprinkling in a little bit of AI here and there. Gini Dietrich: I read a really interesting article a couple of weeks ago and I’ll see if I can find it so Jen can include it in the show notes. I’m sure it’s in my history somewhere, but it talked about how, you know, we’ve seen all of these layoffs at all these large companies in the last couple of months, you know, thousands and thousands of people. And they’re telling, most of these companies are telling the teams that remain. There are two things that you need to focus on: upskilling. So, you know, using AI to help improve you, you know, understanding your own professional development, taking charge of new professional development, new skills. And the other piece is really using AI to help improve your, the work that you’re doing to make you more productive. And it went on to say. If you’re an agency that can help with one of those two things, or both of those things, you’re gonna be in better shape than an agency who does new media news releases and news conferences, and you know, social media. So if you can think about how you can provide professional development or help an organization implement AI from a marketing and communications perspective, you’re gonna be a lot further ahead than those that can’t do that. So I think that goes back to really thinking about how to freshen the services that you provide in a way that keeps up with what’s happening in the world. Chip Griffin: Yeah. I mean, look, I think that’s absolutely a piece of it, but I think a piece of it is also figuring out, you know, how can you use AI to help you do different things that are not necessarily even explicitly AI related. Or made more efficient by AI or it, I, I think it’s just a, it’s a opportunity to take a very fresh look at how we do everything. And, and I think we need to be careful, not just us as agencies, but also on the brand side. We need to be careful about how much we believe AI itself is changing things or can change things. And, and I, I saw in the last couple of days, a video that our friend Chris Penn put out, where he talked about how you need to change your vocabulary to get the most out of the various generative AI platforms. And I don’t disagree with what he’s saying. You do need to adapt your language to those models so that you get the results you want. But, but the flip side of that is, to me, that says AI has not come nearly as far as we think because we shouldn’t have to change for AI to be responsive to us. Right. Right. True AI would be adapting to us instead. And, and so we’re not quite there yet. And, and the progress has been absolutely amazing. I’ve, every time I try out the latest version of a model, I find new things that it can do and continue to get more and more impressed. But I also have ongoing frustrations with them. In part because of this vocabulary issue, but in part because, you know, we’re still, we’re still overestimating what the, the technology can do for us today as far as allowing us to, to replace work hours, et cetera. And so I see many brands laying off marketing and communications people thinking, well, we’ll have fewer people, but AI will help them do the same amount. Nope. And AI certainly makes you more efficient, but not, not that efficient. Gini Dietrich: Not that efficient. No. And you still need somebody with a brain to prompt it and ensure that it’s not hallucinating and ensure that it’s the right information. And that it’s been edited. Like you still need humans for those things. Does it help you get a start? For sure. But you still need the human beings to do the work. And make sure that it’s accurate because what it pumps out on first try, I mean, my favorite response is meh. I just write MEH meh, and it goes, okay, lemme try again. And then I write, meh. It tries again. Finally. I’m like, okay, that’s halfway decent. Chip Griffin: Well, that, that’s better. My habit is to actually get into arguments with it, which… Really serves no good purpose, but I just, I get, I get, I get frustrated when I explicitly ask it to do something and it doesn’t, Gini Dietrich: it doesn’t, right. Chip Griffin: And I’ll be like, well, why didn’t you do what? Yeah. Oh no, you’re right. I should have done that. Yes, because I specifically for it, right? Like, please help me, Gini Dietrich: please write a thousand words and it gives you 300. And you’re like, Hmm, right. Just do what thousand words. Chip Griffin: Just do what I ask, you know? Or, you know, please make the logo smaller in this image. And it doesn’t change it. No, don’t do that to me, that’s just, it’s very frustrating. Gini Dietrich: It’s very frustrating. I agree. Chip Griffin: But I think, you know, we need to be thinking how we can leverage some of these tools to help us adapt our service offerings. And I was, I was talking with someone recently who, they had shifted a, a process from humans to AI recently. And they were running into issues because it was some data analysis that was being done and, and it turned out that the numbers were wildly different between the humans and the AI. And so the first instinct was that the AI was wrong. But in fact, upon further review, it turned out that the AI was too good. And it was being in incredibly consistent in the way that it was doing the task. Ah, whereas humans. Sure. Inevitably we get distracted, we make a mistake, we, we hit the wrong key. You know, I mean, there’s all sorts of things that can lead to this, but because the AI was more consistent and the volume of data and such being analyzed by the humans and the AI was substantial, it, it made a real difference because the AI was actually better. And so, but to me that’s an opportunity. You’ve got a short term problem that you gotta deal with that, you know, you’ve been generating these historical reports that don’t look quite right now. But there’s a real opportunity there because you can actually improve the quality of what you’re doing, along with the quantity, along with reducing the, the labor hours involved and that sort of thing. So we need to be looking at, at how we can take that and take it to the next level, not just how can we use AI to do first drafts so that we only have to edit and so therefore we save, you know, 30% of our time or something like that. There’s, we have to be thinking much, much more creatively if we’re gonna be successful going forward. Gini Dietrich: Yeah, and I mean, I’m sure I’ve shared this before, but some of the work that we’ve done in my business this year, I’m not sure we could have done it without AI in the, in two years ago, like some of the work that clients have asked us to do. I’m not sure that we would’ve been capable of doing it without AI. So it, it does have the ability to make you more efficient for sure, but it also helps you think more strategically. And to your point, like, bringing in the, the consistency piece of it so that, you know, maybe the, the way that you reported on results in the past isn’t fully accurate, but now it’s more accurate. Like those kinds of things I think it has helped immensely with, and you know, I can think of at least three situations where I’ve been in a meeting with like big, big, big, big executives and they’ve thrown something out. Do you think your team can do this? And I’ve gone, sure. And then we come back and, you know, as a team, work on it and, and prompt AI. And it’s helped us get to where we need to be. And I don’t think we could have done that on our own two years ago. For sure. Chip Griffin: So, you know, we’ve been talking a bunch about how AI is impacting our businesses, but let’s talk a minute about how AI impacts the planning process itself. And so, you know, my question to you would be, as you’re doing your own 2026 planning with your team, are you using AI to facilitate that process at all? Gini Dietrich: Some of it, I would say I have a co CEO, GPT that I built. So it sits as my Co CEO and sometimes I just vent to it. It makes me feel better, but sometimes it will say things like it will point out things that I didn’t think of. And so, you know, when we, especially right now, ’cause we’re working on cash flow projections for next year with our CFO and I’ve, I’ve put in like… Not actual numbers, but percentages to, and said like, can you help me figure out if these are our goals, what we’re going need to do? What software do we need? What team members are we gonna have to add? Like that kind of stuff. And it help, it’s helping me and our CFO think through all of those different scenarios for sure. We haven’t gotten into like the nitty gritty planning yet because our 2025 plan is rolling over into Q1 a little bit. So we’re, we’re about a quarter behind from that perspective. But, from a cashflow perspective, it’s helping a ton and it’s helped me see things that I wouldn’t have seen on my own. Chip Griffin: Yeah. And and I think that’s a, that’s a real benefit that we ought to be looking at when we’re doing the planning process is using AI, not necessarily to give us all the answers, but to help us understand what else we should be looking at. So I love using AI to, to, to give it a list of questions that I may have about something and say, what, what other questions should I be asking? What other data points should I be looking at? Or putting in some raw data and saying, okay, you know, what are the gaps here? What, what should I be looking to… What additional data should I be looking for? Or how can I analyze this in a different way? So I think in the planning process, there’s a lot of ways that we can use the AI to help us. I think we just need to be careful about using it to give us the answers and instead help it to guide the conversations for sure. Yeah. That we’re having with our teams and with our clients, because it will inevitably help us find things that we are overlooking. And maybe we would still get to it halfway through the brainstorming session or the, the strategy meeting or whatever. But if we know it in advance, you know, it helps us prepare better. Gini Dietrich: Yeah, absolutely. And I, I do think, you know, to your point about the, the data and it being consistent, I think it does look at things more holistically and how, and I mean, it will say to me, have you thought about this or have you thought about that? Or, you know. Here’s an opportunity for you. Like with the PESO model certification in universities, we had an idea of how we were going to approach it in ’26 ’cause the certification is being completely revamped because of AI. And it actually gave me a couple of ideas that I was like… Huh, I hadn’t even thought about that. So like providing curriculum and grading rubric and things like that, that helps professors that I hadn’t even, ’cause I just don’t have that kind of experience. Right. But it helps me think through some of those kinds of things. So I think you’re right. And you know, I love the idea of, of a list of questions and asking what you haven’t thought of. I’ll put in and say, you know, we’re looking to do this, this, and this, and here’s what we’re thinking. What are we missing? And it, you know, it does come back with some ideas. Sometimes it comes back with things you’ve thought about and you’ve dismissed, and sometimes it comes back with things that you’re like, Hmm, okay, let’s, let’s explore that. Chip Griffin: Yeah, and I mean it, there’s, it’s not a replacement for human judgment. You still need to look at it and say, oh, yeah, that does make sense, that it’s something we look at. But, but my experience is more often than not, it does come up with things that, you know, that given the right amount of time I would have thought of, but Sure. You know, it, it’s, it’s, it’s good to have it reinforced that, it’s good to have it, you know, bubble it up higher on my list so that, again, I, I’m not finding it out, you know, halfway through the meeting when the light bulb goes off and it’s like, oh, right, I forgot about this. We should be, we should be looking at that. Right. You know, but I, I think this is the, the planning process is, is an opportunity for you as well to be thinking about challenging your own assumptions. And, and I do think more than ever continuing forward on the path that you’re on for the vast majority of agencies is not a good idea. I think most agencies require at least some modest course correction and some more than that. And so I think that we’ve already talked about, you know, what kind of services you can deliver and those kinds of things. But I think the other thing we all ought to be looking at in 2026 is the definition of our ideal client. Because, because we do need to understand better how our clients of today are being impacted by the economy, by AI, by all of the social change that’s going on. And understanding how is that impacting who we’re targeting, how we’re targeting them, what kinds of engagements we’re, we’re trying to set up with. And so I, I think really refining that ideal client profile is something that most of us ought to be taking a very close look at for 2026 in our planning process. Gini Dietrich: One hundred percent. I could not agree more. And you know, I’m a big, big, big fan of really understanding at a macro level what’s going on so that we know how it affects our businesses. And I think that the more that you can do that and understand how everything that’s going on in the world is going to affect your agency and you know, the sustainability and stability of it, I think are, is really, really important. And being willing to try some things and take some risks and see what works and see what doesn’t work, and then go move on to what works and try again. Chip Griffin: Right. And, and you need to, to look at the data that you’ve got in front of you, not data from three to five years ago, right? But, but data from 2025. And so whether you’ve had a great 2025, a mediocre 2025, or an awful 2025, look at what the data is telling you. And look at where you’ve had success. Success in terms of where you’ve had the best results for clients, which we often overlook. We, we often look at just, you know, what we’ve been able to sell, but you need to see what is producing results for clients. You do need to understand what you’re selling, where those leads came from, and, and look at those recent trends and lean into what’s working. And again, that doesn’t matter whether you’ve had a good year or a bad year. You still wanna lean into what you know is working today because it is a, a very different environment than it was 3 years ago, 10 years ago, and and beyond. So you need to be relying on that kind of analysis if you wanna make smarter decisions in your planning process. Gini Dietrich: Yeah, absolutely. And I think you’re right, like this is different than 2008, 2009, and 2020. It’s, it’s different. So be willing to take some risk. It’s uncomfortable for sure. Chip Griffin: You and I both love risk, so we’re always gonna preach risk. Calculated risk, not just reckless risk. Gini Dietrich: Calculated risk.Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yes. Please be calculated. Chip Griffin: Yes, have a reason for what you’re doing, and have a reason to believe that there’s a decent chance of success. Don’t just blindly walk out there and say, Hey, let’s try crossing the street now without looking and see what happens. That’s not the kind of risk we want you to take. Gini Dietrich: Please don’t do that. Please do not do that. Please, please do not do that. Chip Griffin: So with that, if you’re, if you’re listening and you’re driving or something, still pay attention ’cause we’re gonna wrap up now. Keep your eyes open. Keep your eyes open. If you, if you wanna listen to this again, wait. You, you can go back to the link. There’s resources that’ll be there. There’s the transcript there, all those things. So stay safe. Yes, yes. However you’re listening to us. And with that, that will draw to an end this episode of the Agency Leadership Podcast. I’m Chip Griffin. Gini Dietrich: I’m Gini Dietrich. Chip Griffin: And it depends.

“We need some sort of framework to say what is okay and what is not okay — and we need to revisit this when the technology changes..”The more we read, the clearer it gets — it's just another AI-pocalypse in the making. First its replacing the means of production, then its hallucinations no one can explain. People keep saying we'll get it under control… but we all know how that story ends. Inevitably the giant machines show up, humanity freaks out, and Judgment Day arrives — right on schedule.But what about what comes after? The silence, the guilt, the unfinished reparations. That's the world of DESCENDER, Jeff Lemire and Dustin Nguyen's haunting watercolor sci-fi graphic novel epic about creation, empathy, and fear — and its sequel ASCENDER, where the age of machines gives way to something older, stranger, and far more magical. Longtime FrieMMds of the Pod Paresh and Jieun — two bastions of humanity (and comics nerdery) — rejoin to unpack this meditation on the robot apocalypse and magical redemption of love, loss, and what it really means to be human. Also we solve the current AI problem. You're welcome.LEARN MOREDESCENDER ⁠goodreads.com/series/150905-descender⁠ASCENDER: ⁠goodreads.com/series/258771-ascender⁠⁠variety.com/2020/tv/news/descender-ascender-jeff-lemire-dustin-nguyen-nbcuniversal-1234635716/⁠See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

“We need some sort of framework to say what is okay and what is not okay — and we need to revisit this when the technology changes..” The more we read, the clearer it gets — it's just another AI-pocalypse in the making. First its replacing the means of production, then its hallucinations no one can explain. People keep saying we'll get it under control… but we all know how that story ends. Inevitably the giant machines show up, humanity freaks out, and Judgment Day arrives — right on schedule. But what about what comes after? The silence, the guilt, the unfinished reparations. That's the world of DESCENDER, Jeff Lemire and Dustin Nguyen's haunting watercolor sci-fi graphic novel epic about creation, empathy, and fear — and its sequel ASCENDER, where the age of machines gives way to something older, stranger, and far more magical. Longtime FrieMMds of the Pod Paresh and Jieun — two bastions of humanity (and comics nerdery) — rejoin to unpack this meditation on the robot apocalypse and magical redemption of love, loss, and what it really means to be human. Also we solve the current AI problem. You're welcome. LEARN MORE DESCENDER goodreads.com/series/150905-descender ASCENDER: goodreads.com/series/258771-ascender variety.com/2020/tv/news/descender-ascender-jeff-lemire-dustin-nguyen-nbcuniversal-1234635716/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last time we spoke about the Soviet-Japanese Border Conflict. The border between Soviet Manchuria and Japanese-occupied territories emerges not as a single line but as a mosaic of contested spaces, marks, and memories. A sequence of incidents, skirmishes along the Chaun and Tumen rivers, reconnaissance sorties, and the complex diplomacy of Moscow, Tokyo, and peripheral actors to trace how risk escalated from routine patrols to calibrated leverage. On the ground, terrain functioned as both obstacle and argument: ridges like Changkufeng Hill shaping sightlines, river valleys shaping decisions, and markers weathered by snow, wind, and drift. In command tents, officers translated terrain into doctrine: contingency plans, supply routes, and the precarious calculus of restraint versus escalation. Both nations sought to establish firmer defensive barriers against the other. Inevitably they were destined to clash, but how large that clash would become, nobody knew.   #176 The Changkufeng Incident Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. In the last episode we broke down a general history of the Soviet-Japanese Border Conflict and how it escalated significantly by 1938. Colonel Inada Masazum serving as chief of the 2nd Operations Section within the Operations Bureau in March of 1938 would play a significant role in this story. When the Japanese command's attention was drawn to the area of Changkufeng, consideration was given to the ownership and importance of the disputed high ground. Inada and his operations section turned to an appraisal of the geography. The officers had been impressed by the strategic importance of the Tumen, which served to cut off the hill country from North Korea. In the Changkufeng area, the river was a muddy 600 to 800 meters wide and three to five meters deep. Japanese engineers had described rowing across the stream as "rather difficult."  Russian roads on the left bank were very good, according to Japanese intelligence. Heavy vehicles moved easily; the Maanshan section comprised the Russians' main line of communications in the rear. To haul up troops and materiel, the Russians were obliged to use trucks and ships, for there were no railways apart from a four-kilometer line between the harbor and town of Novokievsk. Near Changkufeng, hardly any roadways were suitable for vehicular traffic. On the right, or Korean, bank of the Tumen, there were only three roads suitable for vehicular traffic, but even these routes became impassable after a day or two of rain. In the sector between Hill 52 to the south and Shachaofeng to the north, the most pronounced eminences were Chiangchunfeng and the humps of Changkufeng. Rocky peaks were characteristically shaped like inverted T's, which meant many dead angles against the crests. The gentle slopes would allow tanks to move but would restrict their speed, as would the ponds and marshes. In general, the terrain was treeless and afforded little cover against aircraft. Against ground observation or fire, corn fields and tall miscanthus grass could provide some shielding. Between Chiangchunfeng and the Tumen, which would have to serve as the main route of Japanese supply, the terrain was particularly sandy and hilly. This rendered foot movement difficult but would reduce the effectiveness of enemy bombs and shells. The high ground east of Khasan afforded bases for fire support directed against the Changkufeng region. Plains characterized the rest of the area on the Soviet side, but occasional streams and swamps could interfere with movement of tanks and trucks. The only towns or villages were Novokievsk, Posyet, Yangomudy, and Khansi. At Kozando there were a dozen houses; at Paksikori, a few. The right bank was farmed mainly by Koreans, whose scattered cottages might have some value for billeting but offered none for cover. On the left bank, the largest hamlets were Fangchuanting, with a population of 480 dwelling in 73 huts, and Yangkuanping, where there were 39 cottages. Shachaofeng was uninhabited. Japanese occupation of Changkufeng would enable observation of the plain stretching east from Posyet Bay, although intelligence made no mention of Soviet naval bases, submarine pens, or airstrips in the immediate area of Posyet, either in existence or being built in 1938. As Inada knew, the Japanese Navy judged that Posyet Bay might have another use, as a site for Japanese landing operations in the event of war. In Russian hands, the high ground would endanger the Korean railway. This line, which started from Najin in northeastern Korea, linked up with the vital system in Manchuria at the town of Tumen and provided a short cut, if not a lifeline, between Japan and the Kwantung Army and Manchuria from across the Sea of Japan. Even from relatively low Changkufeng, six or seven miles of track were exposed to Soviet observation between Hongui and Shikai stations. The port of Najin, with its fortress zone, lay 11 miles southwest; Unggi lay even nearer. It was not the danger of Japanese shelling of Vladivostok, at an incredible range of 80 miles that was at stake but the more realistic hypothesis of Russian shelling of the rail line, and Russian screening of the Soviet side of the border. Hills and questions were thought to have two sides. It was the consensus of Japanese that Changkufeng Hill's potential value to the Russians far outweighed its possible benefits to them, or at least that the Japanese had more to lose if the Russians took the high ground by the Tumen. Inada nurtured few illusions concerning the intrinsic value of the heights. Despite the fact that the high command always had good reasons for quiescence in the north, Inada believed that the latest border difficulty could not be overlooked. By mid-July 1938 Inada's thoughts crystallized. The Japanese would conduct a limited reconnaissance in force known as iryoku teisatsu in the strategic sense. Whereas, at the tactical schoolbook level, this might mean the dispatch of small forces into enemy territory to seek local combat intelligence, at the Imperial General Headquarters level the concept was far more sweeping. There would also be useful evidence of mobilization and other buildup procedures. The affair at Changkufeng was merely a welcome coincidence, something started by the Russians but liable to Japanese exploration. Inada had no intention of seizing territory, of becoming involved in a war of attrition at a remote and minor spot, or of provoking hostilities against the USSR. The Russians would comprehend the nature of the problem, too. If they were interested in interfering seriously with the Japanese, there were numberless better locations to cause trouble along the Manchurian front; those were the places to watch. The cramped Changkufeng sector, described as "narrow like a cat's brow," could too readily be pinched off from Hunchun to render it of strategic value to either side. The bog land to the north interfered with the use of armored forces, while artillery sited on the heights along the Tumen in Korea could as easily control the area as batteries emplaced east of the lake. It was Inada's professional opinion that the Russians could commit three or four infantry divisions there at most, with no mechanized corps—no heavy tanks, in particular. No decisive battle could be waged, although, once the Russians became involved, they might have to cling to the hill out of a sense of honor. The military action would be meaningless even if the Japanese let the Russians have the heights. For their part, the Japanese would ostensibly be fighting to secure the boundary and to hold Changkufeng peak, beyond which they would not move a step onto Soviet soil. There would be no pursuit operations. Troop commitment would be limited to about one division without tank support. Japanese Air Force intervention would be forbidden. Matters would be directed entirely by Imperial General Headquarters working through the Korea Army chain of command and carried out by the local forces. Calm, clear, and dispassionate overall estimates and instructions would be based on materials available only in Tokyo. The command would not allow the Kwantung Army to touch the affair. Inada foresaw that the Japanese government might also seek a settlement through diplomacy. Although border demarcation was desirable and should be sought, the command would not insist on it, nor would it demand permanent occupation of Changkufeng summit. As soon as reconnaissance objectives had been achieved, the local forces would be withdrawn. As Inada described it "In the process, we would have taught the Russians some respect and given them a lesson concerning their repeated, high-handed provocations and intrusions. If a show of force sufficed to facilitate the negotiations and cause the Russians to back down, so much the better; the affair would be over and my point proved." The instrument for carrying out Inada's strategic design appeared to be ideal, the 19th Division, strenuously trained and high-spirited. It could be expected to perform very well if unleashed within defined limits. Colonel Suetaka was just the commander to direct local operations. Since he had been pleading to fight in China, an operation at Changkufeng might prove to be an excellent "safety valve." His staff was full of experienced, fierce warriors eager for battle. Until recently, the Korea Army commanding general had wisely kept the aggressive division away from Changkufeng Hill, but now Imperial general headquarters had its own overriding ideas and needs. How could the Japanese ensure that any military action would remain limited if the Russians chose to respond with vigor? Naturally, one infantry division, without armor or air support, could not withstand all of the Soviet forces in the maritime province. Inada answered that the mission to be assigned the 19th Division was merely the recapture of Changkufeng crest. If the Japanese side had to break off the operation, evacuation would be effected voluntarily and resolutely on Imperial general headquarters responsibility, without considerations of "face." At worst, the Japanese might lose one division, but the affair would be terminated at the Tumen River without fail. "Even so, we ought to be able to prove our theory as well as demonstrate our true strength to the Russians." In case the Soviets opted for more than limited war, the Japanese were still not so overextended in China that they could not alter their strategic disposition of troops. Although the Kwantung Army's six divisions were outnumbered four to one and the Japanese were not desirous of a war at that moment, the first-class forces in Manchuria could make an excellent showing. In addition, the high command possessed armor, heavy artillery, fighters, and bombers, held in check in Manchuria and Korea, as well as reserves in the homeland. There was also the 104th Division, under tight Imperial general headquarters control, in strategic reserve in southern Manchuria. Inada recalled "How would the Russians react? That was the answer I sought. Victory in China depended on it." By mid-July, the high command, at Inada's urging, had worked out a plan titled, "Imperial General headqaurters Essentials for Dealing with the Changkufeng Incident." Tada's telegram of 14 July to Koiso described succinctly the just-decided policy: the central authorities concurred with the Korea Army's opinion regarding the Changkufeng affair, then in embryo. Considering that Changkufeng Hill posed a direct threat to the frontier of Korea, Imperial General headqaurters would immediately urge the foreign ministry to lodge a stern protest. Next day, Tojo sent a telegram stating the Japanese policy of employing diplomacy; whether the Russians should be evicted by force required cautious deliberation in case the USSR did not withdraw voluntarily. On the basis of the guidance received from Imperial General headqaurters, the Korea Army drew up its own plan, "Essentials for Local Direction of the Changkufeng Incident," on 15 July. Intelligence officer Tsuchiya Sakae was sent promptly to the front from Seoul. At the same time, military authorities allowed the press to release news that Soviet troops were constructing positions inside Manchurian territory in an "obvious provocation." The government of Manchukuo was demanding an immediate withdrawal. Even then, those Japanese most closely connected with the handling of the Changkufeng Incident were not in agreement that everybody at command level was as ardent a proponent of reconnaissance in force as Inada claimed to be. Some thought that most, if not all, of his subordinates, youthful and vigorous, were in favor of the notion; others denied the existence of such an idea. Inada remained clear-cut in his own assertions. Everything done by the local Soviet forces, he insisted, must have been effected with the permission of Moscow; it was customary for the USSR not to abandon what it had once started. The Japanese Army never really thought that the Soviet Union would withdraw just as the result of diplomatic approaches. Therefore, from the outset, preparations were made to deal the Russians one decisive blow. Inada had recommended his plan, with its clear restrictions, to his colleagues and superiors; the scheme, he says, was approved 14 July "all the way up the chain of command, through the Army general staff and the ministry of war, with unexpected ease." The only real opposition, Inada recalled, came from the navy, whose staff advised the army operations staff, in all sincerity, to give up the idea of strategic reconnaissance. Inada adhered to his opinion stubbornly. He never forgot the grave look on the face of Captain Kusaka, the UN operations section chief, as the latter gave in reluctantly. The navy view was that the Changkufeng affair typified the army's aggressive policies as opposed to relative passivity on the part of the navy. Like Kusaka, Japanese Navy interviewees shared the fear that Changkufeng might prove to be the most dangerous military confrontation ever to occur between the USSR and Japan. In view of navy objections, one wonders where Inada could have drawn support for his concept of reconnaissance in force. If one accepts the comments contained in a letter from a navy ministry captain, Takagi Sokichi, to Baron Harada Kumao at the beginning of August, in the army and in a portion of the navy there existed "shallow-minded fellows who are apt to take a firm stand in the blind belief that the USSR would not really rise against us, neglecting the fact that the Russians had foreseen our weak points." Takagi also had violent things to say about "white-livered" Gaimusho elements that were playing up to the army. Although Takagi's remarks, expressed in confidence, were sharp, cautious injunctions were being delivered by the high command to the new Korea Army commander, General Nakamura Kotaro, who was about to leave for Seoul to replace Koiso. Nakamura's attitude was crucial for the course and outcome of the Changkufeng Incident. More of a desk soldier than a warrior, he characteristic ally displayed a wariness that was reinforced by the guidance provided him. This personal quality assumes even greater significance if one believes that the Russians may have initiated the Changkufeng Incident by exploiting the special opportunities afforded them by the routine replacement of the Korea Army commander, the temporary absence from Moscow of Ambassador Shigemitsu Mamoru, and the geographical as well as subjective gap between the Kwantung and Korea armies that was exposed during the Lyushkov affair. At 10:00 on 15 July Nakamura was designated army commander by the Emperor at the palace. Soon afterward, he was briefed by Imperial General headquarters officers. Hashimoto, the operations bureau chief, recalled that when he saw Nakamura off on 17 July, Hashimoto stressed prudence, limitation of any military action, and diplomatic solution of the problem. The new commanding general, Inada asserted, promised full cooperation. There was no mention, at this level, of Inada's concept of reconnaissance in force. When Nakamura reached Seoul, he found an Imperial order from Tokyo dated 16 July awaiting him. This important document stipulated that he could concentrate units under his command in Korea near the border against the trespassing Soviet forces in the Changkufeng area. Resort to force, however, was dependent upon further orders. This message was followed by a wire from Kan'in, the Army general staff chief. The Imperial order, it was explained, had been designed to support diplomatic negotiations. Simultaneous approval was granted for concentrating forces to respond swiftly in case the situation deteriorated. As for implementation of the Imperial order, discretion should be exercised in line with the opinion expressed earlier by Korea Army Headquarters. Negotiations were to be conducted in Moscow and Harbin, the location of a Soviet consulate in Manchukuo. Meanwhile, the command was dispatching two officers for purposes of liaison: Lt. Colonel Arisue Yadoru in Operations and Major Kotani Etsuo a specialist in Soviet intelligence. Inada advised Arisue that, apart from liaison flights inside the frontiers, particular care should be exercised with regard to actions that might lead to air combat. Nevertheless, although Inada stated that the Imperial order called for "a sort of military demonstration," he admitted that it meant preparatory action for an attack. The Korea Army senior staff officer, Iwasaki, recalled hearing nothing about secret intentions. Nakamura briefed his staff about the need for restraint, especially during this key period of the Wuhan operation. Koiso had disposed of speculation that he had issued an order to concentrate the 19th Division before Nakamura arrived, although he and Nakamura did have the opportunity to confer in Seoul before he departed for Japan. The Imperial order of 16 July, in response to Koiso's inquiry received in Tokyo on 14 July, had arrived in Seoul addressed to Nakamura; thereupon, the Korea Army chief of staff, Kitano, had the message conveyed to the division. By 21 July Koiso was back in Tokyo where, the day afterward, he advised the war minister, Itagaki, "to act prudently with respect to the Changkufeng problem." Why did the high command dispatch two field-grade liaison officers to Korea from the outset of the Changkufeng Incident? The Korea Army lacked operations staff. Its commander had been allotted prime responsibility, within the chain of command, for defense of northeastern Korea. At the beginning, the highest-ranking staff officer at the front was a major. Since there were no fundamental differences of opinion between the command and the forces in Korea, it was proper to send experts from Tokyo to assist. Imperial General headqaurters would observe the situation carefully, devise measures on the basis of the overall view, and issue orders which the Korea Army would implement through ordinary channels. It had not been the type of incident which required the army commander to go to the front to direct. This was the Korea Army's first test, and political as well as diplomatic problems were involved that the army in the field should not or could not handle. If Tokyo had left decisions to the division and its regiments, the latter would have been held to account, which was not proper. Imperial General headquarters had to assume responsibility and reassure local commanders of its full support. Imaoka Yutaka explained that operational guidance by Imperial General headquarters and line operations conducted by the 19th Division formed the core of the affair; the Korea Army, placed between, was "shadowy." Koiso had not been enthusiastic; this set the mood among the staff. Nakamura, who arrived with a thorough comprehension of AGS thinking, was basically passive. The Korea Army staff, in general, included no "wild boars."    There was an urgent need to monitor developments. Not only was the Korea Army unfamiliar with handling this type of incident, but many hitches occurred. There had been no practice in emergency transmission of coded wires between the Korea Army and Tokyo. Now telegram after telegram had to be sent; most were deciphered incorrectly and many were not decoded at all. Another problem centered on the lack of knowledge in Tokyo about the situation on the spot, which only visual observation could rectify. As a result, the two Army general staff experts, Arisue and Kotani, arrived in Korea on 16 July. Kotani recalled that he was to collect intelligence and assist the local authorities. One of the first duties that he and Arisue performed was to disseminate the principle that use of force required a prior Imperial order. Also on 16 July, Japanese newspapers reported that the USSR was still concentrating troops, that the Manchukuoan government was watching intently, "decisive punitive measures" were being contemplated by the Japanese-Manchukuoan authorities, and there were signs of a worsening of the crisis. Despite good reasons for this gloomy appraisal, the Japanese press had not yet given the incident page-one treatment. More alarming news was being disseminated abroad. Domei, the official Japanese news agency, reported that the situation would probably become worse unless Soviet troops were withdrawn. The position of the Japanese government impressed foreign correspondents as unusually firm. Informants characterized the Changkufeng Incident as the most serious affair since the clash on the Amur River in 1937. Irked by the Korea Army's timidity and eager for first-hand information, the Kwantung Army dispatched two observers to the front: from Intelligence, Ogoshi Kenji, and from Operations, Tsuji Masanobu. If you listen to my pacific war week by week podcast or echoes of war, you know I highlight Tsuji Masanobu as one of the most evil Japanese officers of WW2. No other way to describe this guy, he was a shithead. In his memoirs, Tsuji asserted that he and Ogoshi climbed Changkufeng Hill, discerned Soviet soldiers digging across the peak in Manchurian territory, and concluded that "probably even Tokyo could not overlook such a clear-cut case of invasion." Although his account aligned with the general thrust, Ogoshi contended that Tsuji could not have accompanied him. According to sources with the 19th Division, when Koiso learned that Tsuji and Ogoshi were disparaging the Korea Army's ability to defend Changkufeng, he ordered "those spies" ousted. Ogoshi replied that the army staff was not angry, but Koiso did become furious and ordered Ogoshi "arrested for trespassing." Ogoshi surmised that Koiso's concern was that emotional outsiders such as Tsuji could provoke trouble, perhaps even war, if they visited Changkufeng. This view was widely shared. Inada stated that he made a practice of keeping away to maintain the degree of detachment and impartiality required of high command authorities. One sidelight to the "fraternal" visit to the Changkufeng area by observers from Hsinking was provided by Lt. Colonel Katakura Tadashi, chief of the Kwantung Army's 4th Section, which handled Manchukuo affairs, primarily political direction. When Katakura visited the Operations Section, Tsuji and Ogoshi told him that an intrusion had been confirmed and that the Kwantung Army staff was studying ways to evict the Soviets. Katakura consulted Maj. General Ishiwara Kanji, acting chief of staff, who was already in possession of the draft of an operations order calling for offensive preparations by the Kwantung Army against the Russians at Changkufeng. Katakura asked for reconsideration of the order. This was not a matter to be handled solely by the operations staff. Borders and international affairs were involved; hence the 4th Section, along with the Manchukuoan government, the Gaimusho, and other agencies, were concerned. Field observers were expressing exaggerated personal opinions based on having seen Soviet sentries on a hilltop. If the matter fell within the Korea Army's defensive prerogative, that army ought to handle it. Apparently the Kwantung Army commander and Ishiwara agreed with Katakura, for the draft order was not approved. The so-called private message dispatched by a Kwantung Army staff officer just before Koiso's departure may have been provoked by this rejection of direct participation by forces under Kwantung Army command. Staff officers in Tokyo believed that Hsinking could not see the forest for the trees. In the high command's view, the Kwantung Army's deliberate escalation of a negligible frontier incident undoubtedly stemmed from a failure to grasp the strategic requirements of national defense—pursuit of the campaign in China, the nurturance of Manchukuo, and the buildup of operational readiness for the ultimate solution of the Soviet problem. The high command felt obliged to remind the Kwantung Army that, in dealing with the Changkufeng Incident, the central authorities pressed for a Russian pullback through diplomacy. Consequently, the Korea Army had been instructed to be ready to concentrate troops near Changkufeng as a "background." Meanwhile, it remained the Imperial will that utmost prudence be exercised. The Kwantung Army commander accordingly issued cautious instructions to subordinate units, especially those on the eastern border. The high command's injunctions did not end the discontent and recrimination at the lower levels of Kwantung Army Headquarters, nor did they quiet the concern felt in Tokyo. A former war minister told Baron Harada repeatedly in late July that the Kwantung Army was "no good," while the superintendent of police added that the Kwantung Army was embarrassing Foreign Minister Ugaki. Nevertheless, the Kwantung Army did exert self-restraint. For its part, the Korea Army naïvely sought to achieve entente with an antagonist who considered the case nonnegotiable. First, the government of Manchukuo was asked to lodge a formal protest with the USSR. The commissioner for foreign affairs at Harbin phoned V. V. Kuznetzov, the acting consul, on the night of 14 July and saw him on the 18th. Basing its contentions on maps, the Haensing regime demanded Soviet withdrawal from Changkufeng. The Japanese government was lodging similar protests within the framework of Japanese-Manchukuoan joint defense agreements. On the spot, the situation inflamed. During the afternoon of 15 July, a Japanese military police patrol from Korea reconnoitered at the foot of Hill 52, southeast of Changkufeng. The party came under Soviet gunfire and was driven back, abandoning the body of Corp. Matsushima Shakuni. Japanese sources claimed that a Russian ambush had been set inside Manchuria. The Russian side insisted that it was the Soviet frontier that had been violated by thirty meters. Kuzma Grebennik, the colonel commanding the 59th BGU, which covered the Posyet sector, asserted that Matsushima's effects included a notebook containing reconnaissance results and a camera with film of Soviet-claimed terrain, particularly Changkufeng Hill. According to Maj. Gilfan Batarshin, a subordinate of Grebennik, two Russian border guards from Podgornaya opened fire when the Japanese fled after being challenged. Japanese protests to the USSR about the death of Matsushima and the taking of his body were added to the negotiations concerning the disputed border and the alleged trespassing. Charge Nishi Haruhiko lodged a vigorous complaint in Moscow on 15 July but was answered by a counterprotest. Ambassador Shigemitsu underwent an identical experience during a conversation with Foreign Commissar Maxim Litvinov on 20 July. Shigemitsu retorted that the murder tended to exacerbate the negotiations. In his memoirs, he stated that the killing of Matsushima provoked the local Japanese border garrison unit. The shooting occurred as the Soviet military buildup continued, according to Japanese sources. Mechanized units were reported moving in the direction of Kyonghun from Barabash and Posyet Bay. Biplanes were reconnoitering the Hunchun Valley, within Manchurian territory, from the afternoon of 16 July. To the local Japanese authorities, it seemed that the Russians were adopting a challenging attitude. Although the Japanese-Manchukuoan side remained willing to negotiate—that is, to take no forceful actions if the Russians would withdraw, the latter appeared not to share such an intention. The Soviets were not only misinterpreting the Hunchun treaty to their advantage but were encroaching beyond what they claimed to be the line; they "lacked sincerity." Decisive use of force might have been imperative to secure the Manchurian border, which was Japan's legal responsibility. As far north as Tungning on the eastern Manchurian frontier, two Soviet ground divisions and considerable numbers of tanks and aircraft were reported massed in full view. At Changkufeng, Russian soldiers fortified the crest. Mountain guns were now seen with muzzles pointed toward Manchuria, and Japanese intelligence estimated that Soviet troop strength near Changkufeng had grown to 120 or 130 by the evening of 18 July. As Sawamoto Rikichiro, an Imperial aide, noted in his diary, "It would seem that settlement of the affair had become increasingly difficult." Korea Army staff officer Tsuchiya sent two emissaries bearing the notice to the Soviet border. The pair, "blazing with patriotic ardor,"set out on 18 July, carrying a message in one hand and a white flag in the other. From Kyonghun came the report the next day that there had been an urgent, well-attended Soviet staff meeting at BGU Headquarters in Novokievsk all night, and that the Russian side had been discomfited by the Japanese request, which had been transmitted to higher authorities. Still, the emissaries did not return, while a stream of reports indicated a Soviet buildup along a dozen frontier sectors. Russian authorities had reportedly forced the natives to evacuate an area twenty miles behind their borders. From Japanese observation posts, Soviet convoys of men, guns, and horses could be sighted moving toward Novokievsk after being unloaded from transports originating at Vladivostok. Japanese Army Intelligence reported that on 18 July a regimental-size force had arrived at Novokievsk; artillery displacements forward were particularly visible by night east of Khasan. A confidential Gaimusho message indicated that Soviet truck movements between Posyet, Novokievsk, and the front had increased since the 20th. Russian intrusions, kidnappings, and sniping incidents were reported along the Manchurian borders, from Manchouli on the west to Suifenho on the east, between 18 and 25 July. Aircraft on daytime reconnaissance were detected as far as three miles inside Manchurian territory in the Hunchun area. Although the Japanese asserted that their forbearance was being tested, Izvestiya charged "Japanese militarists" with manufacturing an affair at Ussuri as well as at Changkufeng. The Japanese themselves received reports from the Changkufeng front that by 20 July the Soviets had 250 soldiers, armed with field pieces, trench mortars, howitzers, and light and heavy machine guns, on the southern slopes. The Russians were putting up tents capable of holding 40 men each; officers could be observed for the first time. On the evening of the 20th, the Soviets lobbed illuminating shells toward Manchurian territory. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Inada Masazum, studying maps and mud, saw Changkufeng Hill as a prize with peril, a test of nerve rather than a conquest. Tokyo's orders pulsed through Seoul and Harbin: guard, probe, and deter, but avoid full-scale war. Across the border, Soviet units pressed closer, lights and tents flickering on the hillside. The sea within sight whispered of strategy, diplomacy, and a warning: a single misstep could redraw Asia. And so the standoff waited, patient as winter.

The Cinematography Podcast Episode 329: Ula Pontikos, BSC The psychological thriller The Man in My Basement is about Charles Blakey (Corey Hawkins), a Black man in Sag Harbor, New York, who is down on his luck, unemployed, and facing foreclosure on his ancestral family home. In a desperate financial situation, Charles accepts a bizarre and extremely lucrative offer from a mysterious, wealthy white businessman named Anniston Bennet (Willem Dafoe). Bennet proposes to rent Charles's basement for a hefty sum—enough to clear his debts—for a few months. To translate director Nadia Latif's four-year vision from film to screen, cinematographer Ula Pontikos, BSC, chose to root the story firmly in Charles Blakey's viewpoint. Ula and Latif meticulously planned the camera movement and character staging, choosing when characters would enter the frame together or remain distant to explore themes of togetherness and division. The Man in My Basement was shot in Wales, standing in for Sag Harbor, New York. Ula's experience shooting in both the UK and the East Coast was a huge benefit. Though she had her doubts about filming in Wales for Sag Harbor, she found that the light in Wales was surprisingly similar to that of the eastern United States. Ula used light and color to reflect Charles's state of mind, trapped in a house he can't afford, with a man literally caged in his basement. A feeling of oppression was created both inside and outside the house with yellow-orange sodium vapor lights enhancing the film's claustrophobic and uneasy atmosphere. The house was a set with a greenscreen in the windows to show the outdoor scenery from inside. Charles's nightmare sequences and scenes in outdoor locations were lit with cyan and greens. The film ultimately builds to a climax steeped in red. The most intimate and thematically crucial scenes took place in the basement. Ula chose to shoot these sequences in order, allowing the light story to progress. The lighting shifts from somewhat dim and shadowy with shafts of daylight to completely dark once Charles covers the windows to prevent people from seeing a man caged in his basement. The basement's color palette was created with yellowy, tungsten lights mixed with LED lights. Ula also acted as camera operator, with a single camera for the basement sequences. To maintain tension for the camera, actors Corey Hawkins and Willem Dafoe rehearsed the basement scenes separately. For Ula, the most challenging aspect of the movie was the technical difficulties of shooting through the bars of the cell in the basement. The camera's field of view and depth of focus constantly shifted. Ula had to change lenses frequently, adjusting between showing more of the actors' faces and showing more of the bars. “Shooting characters and the bars is very hard,” Ula explains. “Inevitably, somebody is going to lose an eyeline and somebody is going to go strange-eyed. It's super restrictive. It's very technical and at some point all of us were swearing about the bars.” Her solution required meticulous technical work: careful blocking and making sure both the camera and the actors hit their marks precisely. She was greatly impressed by the results: “It's a testament to extremely technical, professional actors like Willem and Corey.” See The Man in My Basement on Hulu. Find Ula Pontikos: www.ulapontikos.com Instagram: @ulapontikos The Cinematography Podcast website: www.camnoir.com YouTube: @TheCinematographyPodcast Facebook: @cinepod Instagram: @thecinepod Blue Sky: @thecinepod.bsky.social

What does it mean to write the kind of poem that saves your life? In the first half of our two-part conversation on lyric poetry, we're joined by Gregory Orr to explore that urge to capture private emotion in a single, shining moment. We read and unpack Orr's poems and look to the past to tracing how feeling becomes a form in itself. Join us as we ask what lyric poetry can do in a noisy world—and why it keeps calling us back. Inevitably, Katie brings up haiku again!At the Table:Gregory OrrKatie DozierTimothy GreenDick WestheimerBrian O'SullivanJoe Barca

This episode of Living Myth begins with a description of psychological projection as the necessary process through which people project their power on to others in order to see it and become more conscious of it. Modern mass media causes unprecedented amounts of power to be projected onto popular figures including political figures, tech leaders and “influencers.” Inevitably, the condensation of wealth and power causes an activation of their darker, shadow side which inevitably leads to misuses of power that are detrimental to both collective society and the Earth.     The oldest meaning of the word king is “to sacrifice” with the inherent meaning that those elevated to the heights of power should become willing to sacrifice their own desires for the benefit of the people as a whole. The classic symbol of the misuse of power appears in stories where a ruler acts out the shadow side of the archetype of the king. The shadow king symbolizes leadership reversed, nobility perverted, and sacrifice used in the wrong way. Instead of practicing self-sacrifice and serving other people, the shadow king requires the endless sacrifice of others to satisfy his own desires.     Michael Meade uses a series of mythic tales to depict the dangerous arc of descent that can lead from the heights of wealth and power to the depths of tyranny, oppression and brutality. What begins with an inflated sense of self-importance and a false sense of omnipotence inevitably devolves into delusional states of denial, along with an increase of cruelty and a growing taste for violence.     And in these dark times when fear and intimidation are in the air, when we can feel lost and isolated at any moment, it becomes ever more important to know that cruelty comes from weakness and that the will to power comes from an inner abyss of emptiness that cannot be satisfied. But also that we are each the inheritors of the gifts and the powers of our own souls and that becoming fully grown involves reclaiming our power by living out the meaning and purpose of our own lives.     An old meaning of the word soul is “the light found in darkness.” We are here to find the light within our own souls which knows, not just how to survive the dark times, but also how to bring creative energy out of darkness that can be used to offset the misuses of power and to reset the core values of humanity. The importance of truth, the wisdom that keeps mercy at the heart of justice and the necessity of love are part of the endowment of each soul born that cannot be denied or be deported, but rather are always on the verge of awakening more deeply in the hearts of the people.     Thank you for listening to and supporting Living Myth. You can hear Michael Meade live by joining his new online series “Finding Calling and Purpose in Uncertain Times” beginning on Thursday, September 18.   Register and learn more at mosaicvoices.org/events.      You can save 30% on this new series and further support this podcast by becoming a member of Living Myth Premium. Members receive bonus episodes each month, access to the full archives of over 700 episodes and a 30% discount on all events, courses and book and audio titles.   Learn more and join this community of listeners at patreon.com/livingmyth     If you enjoy this podcast, we appreciate you leaving a review wherever you listen and sharing it with your friends. On behalf of Michael Meade and the whole Mosaic staff, we wish you well during this challenging and uncertain times and thank you for your support of our work.

This Episodes Questions: Brians Questions Hey guys, appreciate you answering several of my questions in the past, so I thought of a few more. Feel free to separate as they are not related: 1: What do you do, if anything, to maintain furniture you have built? What would you tell a client if they were to ask you. I have always heard Murphy's oil is a good restorative, but when I looked at a bottle at the store I discovered it's just mineral oil. I would never recommend that. Or should I? Lemon Pledge Furniture Polish. Joking, but seriously, what is a good answer? Paste wax? Or just wipe the dust off and let it be? Peter Downing I'm building a dresser and have built the carcass out of cherry plywood. I've glued up a panel out of solid cherry that I want to use as the top. I want to attach the solid panel to the top of the carcass. Would you recommend using screws from the inside/underside of the plywood top and allowing for wood movement or is it ok to glue the solid wood top to the plywood carcass top? Eric Guys Questions Domino vs beadlock set up from rockler?   Same principle...and , in my experience...same outcome.    Thoughts? Crafted Carpentry Tampa When I wanted to learn how to apply shellac, I did a search and found a Youtube video of Guy from the late 70's when Youtube first came out demonstrating his technique involving a balled up rag and a mason jar with a lid to keep it in so it doesn't dry out between coats.  That video is fantastic and I learned a lot than just the rag and jar business. Inevitably, when I'm done shellacking for the day, I leave the rag Guy's Jar.  Because you never really know when you are done applying shellac to something until you arrive at that destination, I end up leaving that rag in the jar for a few weeks.  It's amazing how well it keeps even weeks later.  HOWEVER, on more than one occasion, when I pull Guy's Rag from the jar, it is moldy.  This surprised me the first time because I assumed that the amount of alcohol in the shellac would prevent anything from growing. Does this happen to y'all or is indicative of something amiss.  I just toss it and get a new rag. Additional data points: Shallac is < 2 months old, made from flakes, sourced from Oregon's shellacshack.com I'm using Platina colored shellac usually I'm using "Finishers Edge Shellac Reducer" instead of denatured alcohol because is way more expensive so it must be better right? Jar is a resealable mason jar with a rubber gasket Cloth is from the "bag of t shirts" you can buy at your local woodworking store Shellac still has a strong odor of fresh shellac I reuse the same jar to store my rag Because I'm not a proctologist, there is a chance I've misdiagnosed the mold so I attached an image of the rag. Robert Huys Questions Gents, there is a question here, but I wanted to share some info with you first. In a recent episode there was a bit of a discussion of using Tung oil and how to thin it, etc.  I recently made a  walnut desk inspired by the Nakashima style. I've had the good fortune to get my eyes and hands on some of his pieces for inspiration - they are amazing.  Anyway, on the Nakashima website they discuss the care of their furniture, mentioning how they use Southerland Welles Tung Oil Wiping Varnish. https://sutherlandwelles.com/product-category/wipingvarnish/ It is really easy to apply and looks fantastic, especially on walnut.  I used the Sealer and High Lustre Polymerized Tung Oil finishes. I highly recommend them. (this is not a paid ad!) Finally, here is my question: Have you ever taken a technique, tool, or finish that is used in another craft for your use in furniture making? An example might be Tru Oil used on gunstocks as a furniture finish? Or a technique used by luthiers that helped you in furniture making? Thanks again for a great podcast! Regards, David V. Hi guy I have a question or re3ally looking for advice. I noticed the tension on the v-belt of my delat 14 inch band saw was lose. It looked like freely wabblying when spinning the balde and I could come reaelly close to touching the two sides together when pinching the belt. Anyways I found the manuel online and it says there should be 1 inch deflection. asuming the maker knows what they are talking about I never seen a belt with that much allowance after being tight, so what do you think? Also Wen mention how much a pain replacing the tires or wheels were, how do you do that (i know google will answer my questions too, but we like hearing you guys talk)? Last part, are these upgrades really worth it, sometime I buy into something that really is not an improvement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpDA2X6L9Y4) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FOa9EJf91g) Paul Miotchell