Podcasts about instruments

This week, we're putting The Tonearm's needle on five-time Grammy-nominated composer Suzanne Ciani.Suzanne has spent decades innovating electronic music on the Buchla synthesizer, an instrument as intimate to her as any acoustic musician's.Suzanne has multiple projects out this year: CIANI/ORKEST, a live album with the fifty-piece Metropole Orkest, conducted by Simon Dobson; a collaborative live album with British electronic producer Actress; and the score for John Wilson's idiosyncratic new documentary, The History of Concrete.We talk about why an artist who's needed total control throughout her career said yes to an orchestra, a producer, and a filmmaker all in one year, what it's like hearing an instrument built for one pair of hands answered by fifty more, and her pet peeve about volume at live shows.(The musical excerpts heard in the interview are from Suzanne Ciani's CIANI/ORKEST)—Dig DeeperArtist and Album:Visit Suzanne Ciani at sevwave.com and follow on Instagram and YouTube; her catalog is on Bandcamp.Purchase CIANI/ORKEST on quadraphonic vinyl from AKP Recordings and digitally from Bandcamp or Qobuz. You can also listen on your streaming platform of choice.Collaborators:Metropole Orkest — the 50-piece orchestra behind CIANI/ORKEST.Simon Dobson — composer and conductor of the album.Actress and Suzanne Ciani, Concrète Waves (Werkdiscs) — on Bandcamp, with coverage from The Quietus.Instruments and Makers:Buchla U.S.A. — the modular synthesizer at the center of Ciani's work, designed by Don Buchla.Film:The History of Concrete (dir. John Wilson, 2026), which Ciani scored — film page on Letterboxd.Live and Catalog:Age of Reflections — the immersive concert series behind Ciani's cathedral performances.Seven Waves — on Bandcamp.—Dig into this episode's complete show notes at podcast.thetonearm.com—• Did you enjoy this episode? Please share it with a friend! You can also rate The Tonearm ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. • Subscribe! Be the first to check out each new episode of The Tonearm in your podcast app of choice. • Looking for more? Visit podcast.thetonearm.com for bonus content, web-only interviews + features, and the Talk Of The Tonearm email newsletter. You can also follow us on Bluesky, Mastodon, YouTube, and LinkedIn. • Be sure to bookmark our online magazine, The Tonearm! → thetonearm.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, we're putting The Tonearm's needle on five-time Grammy-nominated composer Suzanne Ciani.Suzanne has spent decades innovating electronic music on the Buchla synthesizer, an instrument as intimate to her as any acoustic musician's.Suzanne has multiple projects out this year: CIANI/ORKEST, a live album with the fifty-piece Metropole Orkest, conducted by Simon Dobson; a collaborative live album with British electronic producer Actress; and the score for John Wilson's idiosyncratic new documentary, The History of Concrete.We talk about why an artist who's needed total control throughout her career said yes to an orchestra, a producer, and a filmmaker all in one year, what it's like hearing an instrument built for one pair of hands answered by fifty more, and her pet peeve about volume at live shows.(The musical excerpts heard in the interview are from Suzanne Ciani's CIANI/ORKEST)—Dig DeeperArtist and Album:Visit Suzanne Ciani at sevwave.com and follow on Instagram and YouTube; her catalog is on Bandcamp.Purchase CIANI/ORKEST on quadraphonic vinyl from AKP Recordings and digitally from Bandcamp or Qobuz. You can also listen on your streaming platform of choice.Collaborators:Metropole Orkest — the 50-piece orchestra behind CIANI/ORKEST.Simon Dobson — composer and conductor of the album.Actress and Suzanne Ciani, Concrète Waves (Werkdiscs) — on Bandcamp, with coverage from The Quietus.Instruments and Makers:Buchla U.S.A. — the modular synthesizer at the center of Ciani's work, designed by Don Buchla.Film:The History of Concrete (dir. John Wilson, 2026), which Ciani scored — film page on Letterboxd.Live and Catalog:Age of Reflections — the immersive concert series behind Ciani's cathedral performances.Seven Waves — on Bandcamp.—Dig into this episode's complete show notes at podcast.thetonearm.com—• Did you enjoy this episode? Please share it with a friend! You can also rate The Tonearm ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. • Subscribe! Be the first to check out each new episode of The Tonearm in your podcast app of choice. • Looking for more? Visit podcast.thetonearm.com for bonus content, web-only interviews + features, and the Talk Of The Tonearm email newsletter. You can also follow us on Bluesky, Mastodon, YouTube, and LinkedIn. • Be sure to bookmark our online magazine, The Tonearm! → thetonearm.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president could still fire commissioners, as the Court now permits, but if those firings broke quorum, the agency would be unable to proceed until replacements were confirmed. The guardrail would

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.There was an issue with this only going to paid subscribers, so sending it again. Apologies to those who get it twice. I appreciate being paid so feel free to upgrade if you enjoy TWTW.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president

Imagine a dark warehouse. Racks and racks of devices with wires, tubes, and electronics sticking out. The next AI data center? No. This is Lila Sciences‘ dream for the future of science. A dark warehouse full of AI-guided robotics and lab equipment, cranking out new experiments 24/7, building toward a scientific superintelligence.Their automated lab is almost hypnotizing to watch. They have floating plates zipping around on Wall-E-esque tracks, used vision-language models to control Windows 95 boxes, and created the world's largest collection of voided warranties. In the process they've built a massive library of scientific reasoning tokens. Over 10 trillion of them, all experimentally validated.No warranties were voided in the making of this videoTo say Lila is ambitious is an understatement. Their goal is a scientific superintelligence wired directly into the wet lab. They are all in on the bitter lesson, and the thesis follows from it: a lab is an infinite token generator. Produce data at scale, and the synergies give you a general reasoner that can tackle any scientific problem. They are committing hard. Biology, chemistry, drug discovery, and materials science, all at the same time. Time will tell if it works, but it is an exciting hypothesis.In our latest episode we sat down with Lila's very own Andy Beam (CTO) and Rafa Gómez-Bombarelli (CSO, physical sciences) and went on a journey through the possibilities of AI-run science, almost as wide-ranging as Lila's goals.Did we mention they do both materials science and biology? In the same AI science factory? Same time, same lab, same AI. Finally a guest who can settle a long-running debate we've had amongst ourselves: is biology or materials science harder?Watch to find out!We discuss:* The internet is spent, science is next. Why Lila thinks the scientific method is the last untapped internet-scale dataset, and why they treat RL as a data generation mechanism with nature as the verifier.* The lab as a data center. Instruments as nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating “PCI bus” transport layer between them, orchestration as a slurm queue. Andy is not short on analogies.* Why Lila insists it is not an automation company. They optimize for flexibility and generalizability over raw throughput, which means humans stay below the API line wherever automating does not pay.* Your experiment has a runtime. We put Escalante Bio's question to Andy: if science is the token generator, what is the runtime of your data collection? His answer, in short, is that you cannot make the ribosome go faster. Why Lila bets on fast round-over-round iteration rather than big noisy multiplexed screens, and how Rafa's team rebuilt a gas sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500x faster.* What is actually in 10 trillion scientific tokens. Not sequences. Experimentally verified reasoning traces, a kind of data that Andy argues exists on the internet in quantities that round to zero.* Breadth as a path to depth. Small molecule chemistry priors transferring to metal organic frameworks for carbon capture, and the claim that the general model beats domain-specific models sample for sample.* If you have the data, what do you need the model for? Sri Kosuri's koan about the ML-for-drug-discovery business model, and Andy's answer: the coding model got better because it also read Shakespeare and carnitas recipes.* The serendipity they want to automate. Emily Whitehead survived the first pediatric CAR-T cure only because the doctor treating her happened to know, from pediatric arthritis, which antibody would blunt her IL-6 response. Roll that dice again and you probably lose her. Breadth is how you stop depending on luck.* Move 37 for catalysts. Model suggestions for platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that went from boring, to what a 40-paper expert called stupid, to the best performers they have made.* Six months to in vivo CAR-T data in non-human primates, and the zero-FTE virtual startup commercial model that fell out of it. For context on why that number is startling, AbbVie paid $2.1B for Capstan on the strength of preclinical in vivo CAR-T data.* You cannot have scientific superintelligence if you are just a good test taker. Ken Stanley, who wrote Why Greatness Cannot Be Planned, runs open-endedness at Lila. RL at scale gives you a ruthlessly Vulcan problem solver. Machine creativity is a different thing, and it is the part nobody has solved.* The chain of thought is an unreliable narrator. The model reasons in latent space and only emits tokens. Sometimes it skips the experiment entirely and is still right. So how much do you trust the reasoning versus the verifier?* Reward hacking when the rollout is physical. Chains of thought that collapse into repetition, and a model that got annoyed and swore at the scientist who kept asking it to redo a plate map. What happens when a pathological loop has a wet lab inside it?* The bittersweet lesson. Rafa's inversion of the bitter lesson: in AI, scaling is a roadmap. In materials, scaling is a filter, because only the things that scale end up mattering.* Not your typical Flagship company. Why a famously single-asset biotech incubator spun out a platform bet, and Andy's line that if Lila called itself a biopharma it would have a top-three GPU cluster.* Bottlenecks they would remove by fiat. Sim-to-real for physics-based simulation, and the fact that RL training runs at roughly 5% mean FLOP utilization.Watch on YouTube: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.latent.space/subscribe

King Starbringer and Yoba learn of a messy new situation in lower city. Sophrosyne hatches an ambitious plan to get the support Astreus needs at the last minute. Chartrulean grapples with the revelation that Sophrosyne might be more than she seems, and what her dream visions might mean for him. This episode features an excerpt "The Wanderer" by an unknown Anglo-Saxon soldier. The poem "The Kiss of The Unmaker" was written by Aud Andrews and adapted for the story by H.M. Radcliff. Content warning: mental health episodes Get ad-free listening on Patreon Go ⁠⁠behind the scenes Transcripts Aud Andrews as Chartrulean Kathleen Klein as Sophrosyne Christian Collado as Havelion Nina Nikolic as Borsha Reginald West as Admiral Lapadine Angela Hochman as Cythaelia Magnus Carlssen as King Starbringer Adam Neill as Yoba Danielle Yonkers as Imsep Stacey Lightman as Shan Adrian Galley as Maldoro Rae Witte as Dr. Cullaway Heath Martin as Captain Aldibad Elizabeth Plant as Rankusha Al Foote III as Mystery Narrator // Written and produced by H.M. Radcliff With production assistance from Rae Witte Original score by Sean Renner, performed by Sean Renner and the Invoke String Quartet Edited by Will Fox Sound Design by Will Fox and H.M. Radcliff Mix by Edward Calvey and H.M. Radcliff Casting by Julie Cunningham and Aud Andrews /// Listen to the original soundtrack by Sean Renner Follow us on Instagram The Madness of Chartrulean is a part of the Fable and Folly Network. Find and support our sponsors at: fableandfolly.com/partners Chartrulean™ is the property of Packhowl Media © 2026, all rights reserved. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The whole gang is back together to catch up. Andy recaps his Field Notes–filled wedding, starts a new job, and falls down a serious wristwatch rabbit hole — from Bluetooth-modded Casio F-91Ws to a Draplin x Timex Scout. Johnny's loving a $30 Asvine piston-filler, a possibly haunted Cedar Pointe, and a Rhodia Goalbook in Peacock, while Tim is deep in World Cup fever and cheap-but-good Pen+Gear black pencils. Plus: Blackwing's 250 drop, Nahvalur's Fireworks Nautilus, and a locked-in promise that next episode is a Pencil Primer all about wood. For this episode, we recorded video, available to Patreon subscribers! If you're a patron, head over to see our faces and visual examples of many of the things we discuss. And if you're not a patron, join us at any level and you can see this and other supplemental content at any time!Show Notes & LinksMurchie's Tea (Victoria, BC) — Scottish breakfast blendForestChoice #2 pencil — still $5 a pack at Pencils.comField Notes Explore America: Northern California — Golden Gate National Recreation Area edition (with Big Sur and Muir Woods)Range Leather notebook coverBound to Be Beautiful by Bari Zaki — from Bari Zaki Studio in ChicagoNo Man's SkyAsvine P90 piston-fill fountain pen (~$30)Organics Studio Walt Whitman Leaves of Grass inkGeneral's Cedar Pointe #1Baron Fig x Caroline Weaver Archer pencilRhodia Goalbook in PeacockJames Corden's live after-match World Cup show on TubiThe Art of Simple Living by Shunmyo MasunoReplica J. Thoreau & Son pencil from The Shop at Walden PondMoleskine Cahier XL notebook — $9.99 at WalmartCasio F-91W and the Ollee Watch Bluetooth mod (~$60)Casio Vintage series — calculator, world-time, and the Alien wrist-communicator lookalikeTimex Weekender, Timex Expedition, and a Draplin Design Co. x Timex ScoutFitbit Air ($99) — strap-only tracker people pair with analog watchesPaper & Pencil (Chicago) custom Stationery Day Field Notes — including a stamp-collecting editionDelfonics Rollbahn Micro — the impossibly tiny new size, found at MaidoThe Blackwing 250 Collection — red, white, and blue pencils, plus the 250-box with a gold one (only 50 sets)Musgrave America250 Cedar Box Set — 2 dozen red, white, and blue Ceres pencilsField Notes: The Founding DocumentsNahvalur Nautilus Fireworks limited editionPen+Gear round black #2 pencils — back-to-school find at WalmartPanini World Cup sticker album — $2 packs, 450+ stickers

“Trust your instruments.” This mantra is repeated all through flight school. While flying, it's easy to get disoriented visually, especially in thick fog. Pilots must learn to trust their gauges, not their vision. Boys today are also “flying through fog,” so to speak. In the confusion of cultural relativism and gender fluidity, young men don't know where they are or where they are going. So they often choose their own course, or refuse to move at all. As parents, we must help our son gain a solid foundation and understanding of God's Word. Involve your boy in organizations that are founded on Biblical truth. Help him find a positive, godly mentor. And encourage your boy to memorize Scripture– the only “instrument” that will never fail him. To learn about raising boys to be godly men, visit Trail Life USA or RaisingGodlyBoys.com.

Gettysburg history is HOT this week. Once you dig deep into the Battle of Gettysburg, one thing leads to another. Today, we are led to WEATHER! ***A brief departure from Ask A Gettysburg Guide for the 163rd Anniversary week*** Was the Battle of Gettysburg even more miserable than we've been led to believe? In this episode of Addressing Gettysburg, we're joined by Jeffrey J. Harding, licensed battlefield guide, and Jon M. Nese, meteorologist, co-authors of The Weather Gods Curse the Gettysburg Campaign. Their book takes a fresh look at the Gettysburg Campaign through something every soldier experienced but most battlefield narratives don't fully explore: the weather. Heat, humidity, storms, mud, swollen rivers, brutal marches, and suffocating battlefield conditions all shaped what happened before, during, and after the fighting at Gettysburg. Using historic accounts, 19th-century weather observations, and modern meteorological reconstruction, Harding and Nese reveal how extreme conditions affected strategy, endurance, movement, morale, and survival during the campaign. From heat indexes that may have reached staggering levels to the torrential July 4th rains that complicated Lee's retreat, this conversation shows that Gettysburg's weather was not just background scenery. It was an active force in the campaign. Was Gettysburg hot as hell? Yes. But the real story is even more interesting.

We are called to bring Christ's love and peace to all whom we meet in every situation. The Pallottine Fathers and brothers dedicate themselves, under the inspiration of St. Vincent Pallotti, to work for greater peace and charity in our world. This blogcast explores “Instruments of Peace and Love" from the Ad Infinitum blog, written by Fr. Jacob Nampudakam, S.A.C. and read by Jonathan Harrison.Homily for July 10, 2024“Grant us to be instruments of peace and love, reflecting the love of Christ in every situation” The theme for our reflection and prayer today is, once again, taken from the Prayer in Preparation for the UAC General Congress. It is a very sincere prayer from our hearts: “Grant us to be instruments of peace and love, reflecting the love of Christ in every situation.” Every Pallottine is called to be an instrument of peace and love, by reflecting the love of Christ in every possible situation.This prayer reminds of the famous prayer of the great Saint Francis of Assisi: “Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.” It is a timeless expression of humility, love, and service to others. The prayer captures St. Francis's commitment to peace, love and compassion, emphasizing virtues like forgiveness, understanding, and selflessness. It is also a reminder for all the members of the Union that they have to be genuinely involved in the affairs of the world. They have to be instruments of peace and love, fraternal communion and solidarity, through the exercise of forgiveness and compassion. They have to be healers and protectors of the widows and orphans. But all these things are to be done not on their own merit; they have to only reflect the love of Christ in every situation.The first reading from the book of Hosea reminds us that we can cease to be instruments of peace and love. Israel became like a luxuriant vine producing a lot of fruit. “The more his fruit increased, the more altars he built; the richer his land became, the richer he made the sacred pillars. Theirs is a divided heart; now they will have to pay for it. He himself will hack down their altars and wreck their sacred pillars.” (Hosea 10:1-2) God destroyed the arrogance and the symbols of immortality.“Sow saving justice for yourselves, reap a harvest of faithful love; break up your fallow ground: it is time to seek out Yahweh until he comes to rain saving justice down on you.” (Hosea 10:12) Hence the invitation is to reap a harvest of love. In the Gospel passage of today, we see Jesus empowering the twelve disciples to reap the harvest of love, and proclaim the Kingdom of justice and love. “He summoned his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits with power to drive them out and to cure all kinds of disease and all kinds of illness.” (Matthew 10: 1-7) Jesus gave them authority over unclean spirits, the source of division and conflicts. The Kingdom of God will be marked by the values of communion, justice and peace. In this context the words of Saint Pope VI in Populorum Progressio (n.76) are very appropriate:“When we fight poverty and oppose the unfair conditions of the present, we are not just promoting human well-being; we are also furthering man's spiritual and moral development, and hence we are benefiting the whole human race. For peace is not simply the absence of warfare, based on a precarious balance of power; it is fashioned by efforts directed day after day toward the establishment of the ordered universe willed by God, with a more perfect form of justice among men.”Speaking of the mission of the Union of Catholic Apostolate in cooperation with all people of good will, living images of charity itself, n.16 of the General Statute identifies a number of areas for our engagement with the world, such as: protecting the values of human life and the family, working for the promotion of justice, solidarity, peace and protection of creation, encouraging inter-religious dialogue, and caring for the poor and needy. We have innumerable examples of our commitment to the needs of the people of God in our Pallottine Family. What we do for the poor and needy will be most meritorious before God. Without genuine commitment to acts of fraternal charity, the Union will always remain just a concept without flesh and blood. I conclude with these words of hope expressed by Pope Francis in his Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti: “I invite everyone to renewed hope, for hope 'speaks to us of something deeply rooted in every human heart, independently of our circumstances and historical conditioning. Hope speaks to us of a thirst, an aspiration, a longing for a life of fulfillment, a desire to achieve great things, things that fill our heart and lift our spirit to lofty realities like truth, goodness and beauty, justice and love… Hope is bold; it can look beyond personal convenience, the petty securities and compensations which limit our horizon, and it can open us up to grand ideals that make life more beautiful and worthwhile.' Let us continue, then, to advance along the paths of hope.” (n.55) Amen. Author:Fr. Jacob Nampudakam, S.A.C. is the UAC President Resources:Listen to On Mission: Pallottine Fathers and BrothersRead and learn about Fratelli TuttiRead the Ad Infinitum blogLearn about St. Vincent Pallotti Follow us:The Catholic Apostolate CenterThe Center's podcast websiteInstagramFacebookApple PodcastsSpotify Fr. Frank Donio, S.A.C. also appears on the podcast, On Mission, which is produced by the Catholic Apostolate Center and you can also listen to his weekly Sunday Gospel reflections. Follow the Center on Facebook, Instagram, X (Twitter), and YouTube to remain up-to-date on the latest Center resources.

This is a spiritual reflection on the commissioning of the twelve apostles as described in the Gospel of Matthew. The author explains that Jesus bestowed his own authority upon these chosen men, tasking them with healing the sick and continuing his divine mission as His instruments in the Church. Listeners are encouraged to view themselves as modern-day laborers who must rely on prayer to receive specific instructions from God for their own apostolic work. The narrative emphasizes that effective outreach is rooted in genuine charity and recognizing the intrinsic dignity of every person, rather than seeking mere conquest. By following the historical example of early Christians who served others during times of plague, the author argues that selfless love remains the most potent tool for spreading the faith. Thus, the mission of the believer is to remain close to others with kindness and concern, ultimately serving as a bridge to Christ.

Peter Layton is a pioneering British glass artist and the founder of London Glassblowing, one of the most influential glass studios and galleries in the United Kingdom. He played a central role in the development of the studio glass movement, helping to establish glass as an artistic medium.Born in Prague to Jewish parents, he and his family escaped in 1939 and settled in Bradford, where Peter counted the artist David Hockney among his friends. A trip to the United States in the 1960s to teach ceramics led him to his first encounter with glassblowing, and when he returned to the UK he set up a studio called London Glassblowing. Its ethos of collaboration and openness remains the same 50 years after its founding, and members of the public are welcome to see Peter and his colleagues create spectacular pieces of art out of glass.Peter's work is influenced by many things: early pieces tackled political issues, and he finds clouds, pebbles and other natural forms particularly inspiring. Peter lives in London with his wife Ann. He has three children and seven grandchildren.DISC ONE: When I'm Cleaning Windows - George Formby DISC TWO: Kol Nidrei, Op. 4, composed by Max Bruch, performed by Jacqueline du Pré (cello) and Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, conducted by Daniel Barenboim DISC THREE: Take Five - Dave Brubeck DISC FOUR: Blowin' in the Wind - Bob Dylan DISC FIVE: White Rabbit - Jefferson Airplane DISC SIX: Lute Concerto in D Major, RV 93: II. Largo, composed by Antonio Vivaldi, performed by Paul O'Dette (lute) The Parley of Instruments conducted by Peter Holman DISC SEVEN: Suzanne - Nina Simone DISC EIGHT: Elegy for the Arctic - Ludovico EinaudiBOOK CHOICE: The Choice by Edith Eger LUXURY ITEM: A solar-powered digital picture frame CASTAWAY'S FAVOURITE: Suzanne - Nina Simone Presenter: Lauren Laverne Producer: Tim BanoDesert Island Discs has cast away many artists to the island over the years, including Peter's friend David Hockney, as well as the sculptor Anthony Gormley and Cornelia Parker. You can hear their programmes if you search through BBC Sounds or our own Desert Island Discs website.

Scripture Readings:Acts 9:1-15|1 Peter 2:2-10|John 15:13-17Website : glc.gracepocatello.orgStay Connected to us: facebook.com/glcpocatelloOnline offering can be done through our secure platform: https://glc.gracepocatello.org/give-online/YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/PocatelloGrace

El fil

All of God's people have a role to play in the good purposes of His providence. Today, listen as Sinclair Ferguson examines the way that God used Joseph to achieve reconciliation with his brothers. Read the transcript: https://ligonier.org/podcasts/things-unseen-with-sinclair-ferguson/instruments-of-gods-providence/ A donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Donate: https://donate.ligonier.org/ Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts

In this episode, CSI is cutting through the social media noise to bring you a vintage Chip Stock Investor breakdown of the semiconductor supply chain. Today, we are putting the spotlight on Oxford Instruments, a small-cap UK company that might be a critical bottleneck in the AI data center networking boom. We explore how the industry is scaling up production for compound semiconductors and specifically look at Coherent's breakthrough with six-inch indium phosphide (InP) wafers. From there, we map out the players making this transition possible and detail why Oxford Instruments' plasma deposition and etch systems are moving out of the R&D lab and onto the commercial manufacturing floor. Episode Chapters & Key Takeaways:The Indium Phosphide Breakthrough: The industry has long been stuck at two- to four-inch wafers due to manufacturing defects, but Coherent has successfully transitioned to six-inch InP wafers. Mapping the Supply Chain: A breakdown of the companies involved in this ecosystem, including Sumitomo Electric for substrates, KLA Corp and Onto Innovation for inspection, and Applied Materials for deposition. Oxford Instruments' Critical Role: Oxford Instruments supplies the plasma deposition and etch technology used by Coherent to create features like laser sources and waveguides. A Shift to Commercial Scale: Historically an R&D business spun out of Oxford University, the company is now seeing its advanced technologies group transition into early-stage commercial production. Strategic Divestitures: Oxford Instruments recently sold its quantum computing and cryogenics segment to Quantum Design to focus heavily on AI data centers and compound semiconductors. Financials & Valuation: Despite recent headwinds like tariffs and US R&D funding delays, the company holds a clean balance sheet and is expecting a return to growth in fiscal 2027. Special thanks to our sponsor, fiscal.ai! Get 15% off any paid plan using our special link: fiscal.ai/csi. Content in this video is for general information or entertainment only and is not specific or individual investment advice. Forecasts and information presented may not develop as predicted and there is no guarantee any strategies presented will be successful. All investing involves risk, and you could lose some or all of your principal.CSI doesn't own shares of Oxford Instruments.

Today we explore Romans 6:12-23, in which St Paul contrasts living under threat to living under grace. © Kate Heichler, 2026. To receive Water Daily by email each morning, subscribe here. Here are the bible readings for next Sunday. 

Nearfield Instruments mag nu officieel een unicorn genoemd worden, een bedrijf dat meer dan 1 miljard dollar waard is. Het Rotterdamse chipbedrijf heeft 380 miljoen dollar opgehaald met een investeringsronde, waardoor de totale waarde uitkomt op 1,6 miljard dollar. Met het opgehaalde geld wil het bedrijf vooral opschalen, laat topman Hamed Sadeghian weten. Niels Kooloos vertelt erover in deze Tech Update. Volgens Sadeghian staat er nu apparatuur van Nearfield, waarmee chipmakers de kwaliteit van hun chips kunnen controleren, in 'alle geavanceerde AI-chipfabrieken' op aarde. Het bedrijf zag de vraag in de afgelopen anderhalf jaar verviervoudigen. Wel lezen er zorgen om de uitbreidingsplannen bij Nearfield zelf. Sadeghian voorziet dat geopolitieke ontwikkelingen toekomstplannen maken uitdagend maakt. Verder in deze Tech Update: Apple zou zijn prijzen deze maand al kunnen verhogen vanwege de wereldwijde geheugenchiptekorten, denkt Apple-fluisteraar Mark Gurman van Bloomberg See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Exploration of how sacred geometry, ancient structures, and modern science intertwine to reveal the fundamental blueprint of our universe. Melissa Tittle, filmmaker and researcher, shares profound insights about reality, consciousness, and the importance of sovereignty in shaping our collective future. Unveiling Sacred Geometry, Consciousness, and the Hidden Structure of Reality with Melissa Tittle Main Topics: The spiritual and scientific significance of sacred geometry, including the dodecahedron in space and ancient structures The role of microtubules and relic sound waves in shaping reality How sacred numbers like 12 connect across religious texts, space, and consciousness The influence of ancient civilizations on understanding universal laws The relationship between sacred geometry, the Big Bang, and the structure of the universe The evolution of human consciousness and societal control through media and technology Modern implications of sacred geometry in chip design, architecture, and cultural dynamics The systemic shifts during major historical upheavals and their impact on collective awareness   Melissa Tittl is a leading voice in consciousness media, an investigative journalist, an award-winning filmmaker, and the creative force behind some of the most talked-about programming in science, spirituality, and human potential. Across a career spanning Hollywood and the world's biggest networks, she has created and written shows for Netflix, History, and Discovery, including Ancient Aliens and The Universe, and has hosted and led investigations on UFO witnesses for Discovery. https://www.hathorstudios.com/illusion/ https://www.melissatittl.com/ https://www.instagram.com/melissatittl/   To gain access to the second half of show and our Plus feed for audio and podcast please clink the link http://www.grimericaoutlawed.ca/support.   For second half of video (when applicable and audio) go to our Substack and Subscribe. https://grimericaoutlawed.substack.com/ or to our Locals  https://grimericaoutlawed.locals.com/ or Patreon https://www.patreon.com/grimericaoutlawed   Support the show directly: https://open.spotify.com/show/2punSyd9Cw76ZtvHxMKenI?si=ImKxfMHgQZ-oshl499O4dQ&nd=1&dlsi=4c25fa9c78674de3 Watch or Listen on Spotify https://www.simulationmaps.com/#products Disaster Maps, Volcano Sim, Asteroid Sim, Shipwreck Map, UFO Map etc https://grimericacbd.com/ CBD / THC Tinctures and Gummies https://grimerica.ca/support-2/ Our Adultbrain Audiobook Podcast and Website: www.adultbrain.ca Check out our next trip/conference/meetup - Contact at the Cabin www.contactatthecabin.com Join the chat / hangout with a bunch of fellow Grimericans  Https://t.me.grimerica grimerica.ca/chats   Discord Chats Darren's books www.acanadianshame.ca Sign up for our newsletter http://www.grimerica.ca/news InstaGRAM https://www.instagram.com/the_grimerica_show_podcast/  Purchase swag, with partial proceeds donated to the show www.grimerica.ca/swag ART - Napolean Duheme's site http://www.lostbreadcomic.com/  MUSIC Tru Northperception, Felix's Site sirfelix.bandcamp.com        Timestamps: 00:00 - Introduction to Melissa Tittle and the documentary "Illusion" 02:00 - Melissa's background in Hollywood and transition to esoteric filmmaking 04:00 - How sacred geometry appears in ancient and modern structures 06:10 - The significance of the number 12 in religious and space-time texts 08:45 - Microtubules as information receivers linked to space-time 12:00 - Space anomalies and the structure of the universe as a dodecahedron 14:20 - The Big Bang and relic sound waves shaping universe patterns 16:30 - Ancient importance of sacred shapes like the dodecahedron 19:45 - The changing perception of reality through science and sacred geometry 22:00 - Humanity's potential to shape reality and the role of sovereignty 25:15 - The influence of sacred geometry on chip design and technological evolution 28:00 - Historical societal shifts and the suppression of ancient knowledge 30:45 - The impact of the COVID pandemic on collective consciousness and freedom 36:00 - The fracturing and unity of conflicting societal narratives 40:10 - The grounding of spirituality without fluff, focusing on tangible universe principles 44:00 - The importance of individual sovereignty and collective agreement on reality 50:00 - Melissa's upcoming projects, including premieres and sports documentaries 55:00 - The state of Hollywood and independent filmmaking today 60:00 - The influence of digital manipulation on perception and consciousness 65:00 - The importance of consciousness sovereignty and respecting human expression 70:00 - Reflections on the societal and political shifts post-pandemic 75:00 - The rise of AI, deepfake technology, and the nostalgic return to human-made art 80:00 - How collective belief systems shape shared realities and the potential for creation 87:00 - Connecting with Melissa and supporting her ongoing work in exploring the unseen universe        

Darba vide kā konkurētspējas instruments, nevis tikai drošības prasības. Kas slēpjas aiz šī teikuma, par to plašāk saruna raidījumā Kā labāk dzīvot. Skaidro Latvijas Universitātes Ekonomikas un sociālo zinātņu fakultātes profesors Henrijs Kaļķis un SIA "HR Laboratory" vadītāja, konsultante cilvēkresursu vadībā Katri Vintiša.

Au micro de Marie Saint-Laurent, Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu revient sur plusieurs dossiers qui secouent l'actualité judiciaire et politique, dont celui d'Amanda Joy Cooper. Cette dernière est une détenue transgenre incarcérée depuis 2001 comme délinquante dangereuse, qui demande son transfert dans une prison pour femmes. Elle a commis plusieurs agressions sexuelles violentes contre des femmes, dont au... The post 16 juin 2026 Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu, ISAAC Instruments et Marie Élyse Blais appeared first on Truck Stop Québec.

(109) Magic Island - Instruments Have FailedBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/harold-s-old-time-radio--4206392/support.

Marathon fundraisers for:ACTIVE CAMPAIGN:We are raising funds for 5 of 15 Vampire DronesSilicon Curtain for Kupiansk Vampires. Dzyga's Paw, together with Jonathan Fink, is joining forces to raise $40,000 to provide the Khartiia Brigade with Vampire Drones.https://dzygaspaw.com/silicon-curtain-for-kupiansk-vampiresThese heavy bombers are designed to destroy manpower and equipment, as well as for remote mining. The Vampire UAV, manufactured by Skyfall, has proven itself to be one of the most effective weapons in the Kupiansk direction. Skyfall is one of Ukraine's largest defense tech companies, producing Vampire bomber drones, various modifications of Shrike FPV drones, P1-SUN, Shahed drone interceptors, communication systems, and components.----------Easter Pysanky Trucks 2026https://car4ukraine.com/campaigns/easter-pysanky-trucks-2026Silicon Curtain for Kupiansk Vampireshttps://dzygaspaw.com/silicon-curtain-for-kupiansk-vampires?project=Jonathan%20Fink%20for%20Kupiansk%20Vampires----------SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/iwihttps://www.patreon.com/iwi----------TRUSTED CHARITIES ON THE GROUND:Save Ukrainehttps://www.saveukraineua.org/Superhumans - Hospital for war traumashttps://superhumans.com/en/UNBROKEN - Treatment. Prosthesis. Rehabilitation for Ukrainians in Ukrainehttps://unbroken.org.ua/Come Back Alivehttps://savelife.in.ua/en/Chefs For Ukraine - World Central Kitchenhttps://wck.org/relief/activation-chefs-for-ukraineUNITED24 - An initiative of President Zelenskyyhttps://u24.gov.ua/Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundationhttps://prytulafoundation.orgNGO “Herojam Slava”https://heroiamslava.org/kharpp - Reconstruction project supporting communities in Kharkiv and Przemyslhttps://kharpp.com/NOR DOG Animal Rescuehttps://www.nor-dog.org/home/----------PLATFORMS:Twitter: https://twitter.com/iwiInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/iwi/Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/iwiPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/iwiBuy me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/iwi----------

Preview for Later Today: Peter Huessy details Russia's focus on low-yield, tactical nuclear weapons designed for "tailored effects" on the battlefield. These weapons are viewed by Moscow as practical military instruments rather than just tools of mass destruction.MAY 1930

Andy's out this week for the best possible reason — he got married! (Congratulations, Andy and Erica!

Barton McGuire of Cosmodio Instruments joins us again for a long-awaited update, including a dazzling new release, Splinter Twin, and tales of what's next for Cosmodio.   Hosted by Todd Novak with Tony Dudzik   #guitarpodcast #electricguitar #pedaleffects #pedalfx #theguitarknobs #guitarknobs #guitarinterview #guitaramplifier #guitarpickups #guitarsetup #fuzz #overdrive #reverb #distortion #guitartips    Visit us at theguitarknobs.com Support our show on Patreon.com/theguitarknobs

reference: Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, The Psychic Being — Soul: Its Nature, Mission and Evolution, Section 3 Growth and Development of the Psychic, pg. 84This episode is also available as a blog post at https://sriaurobindostudies.wordpress.com/2026/06/06/the-psychic-being-works-to-gain-experience-and-independence-and-upgrade-the-instruments-of-body-life-force-and-mind/Video presentations, interviews and podcast episodes are allavailable on the YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/@santoshkrinsky871More information about Sri Aurobindo can be found at www.aurobindo.net  The US editions and links to e-book editions of SriAurobindo's writings can be found at Lotus Press www.lotuspress.com#Sri Aurobindo #The Mother #yoga #integral yoga #spirituality #Bodhisattva vow #soul #psychic being #rebirth

Psalm 71 | When believers feel forgotten by God amid suffering, they must remember their secure place in God's covenant through Christ and continue praising Him with confidence in His faithfulness and the hope of resurrection.Psalms | Michael Crosswhite

The gospel wasn't just spread. It was intentionally sent...In this next part of our journey through Acts, we see how the early believers move beyond their borders to carry the message of Jesus to the ends of the earth. From the shores of Antioch to the heart of Rome, they step into the unknown, navigating cultural barriers, trials, and shipwrecks along the way. What looks like a dangerous journey is actually God's direction. As the Church is sent, the gospel transforms the world, and that same mission is handed to us today.

You may wonder if your story is too messy, if the labels or wounds others have given you are just your lot in life. This message throws open the doors to all—no matter what you've carried or the battles you still fight.Pastor Kevin doesn't shy away from difficult topics. He's experienced brokenness and confusion firsthand. What changed everything wasn't wishing for a simple fix, but coming to the table with Jesus, again and again, embracing the daily process of letting His love wash away old pain and mistaken ideas about who you are.When life tries to stick you with labels and expectations, remember that your worth is given, not achieved. Nothing anybody else has said or done, no wound or mistake, can separate you from the wholeness and acceptance at Christ's table.Kids running wild? Past hurts? Questions about belonging? There's a place for you, just as you are. Here, you'll find people who understand that growth isn't instant, who walk with you as you discover that God truly doesn't make mistakes.Scriptures ReferencedGenesis 1:1, 1:27; 1 Samuel 17:38-40; Psalm 16:6, 139:14; Proverbs 3:5; Romans 8:38-39, 15:1-9; 2 Corinthians 5:17, 12:8-10Key InsightsJesus didn't die to fix you. He died to make you new.If you spend enough time around Jesus, you become like Jesus.Your identity is received, not achieved.Many of us want struggles removed from our lives. God wants maturity.God's grace is sufficient.ResourcesYou Are Special by Max LucadoKey Sections00:00:00 - Welcome and AnnouncementsJoin us June 6 for the Instruments of Joy benefit concert. Enjoy some excellent Nashville musicians and partner with Instruments of Joy in providing quality instruments to musicians in need all over the world.00:03:04 - Anchoring in God's LovePeople struggle with feeling like they are mistakes or not good enough, but God makes us new, and nothing can keep us away from His love.00:05:20 - The Power of Abide and AriseMany people work hard to do great things for God but forget to let Him change them inside. The real journey is about living as who we are in Christ, not just seeking constant outside success.00:10:10 - Owning Brokenness and Finding HealingChildhood trauma, broken families, or abusive experiences affect how we view ourselves. Pastor Kevin shares his honest story and invites us to stop listening to those old thoughts. Instead, we should let Jesus' words define us, bringing daily healing and freedom with Him.00:18:42 - Becoming Who You Spend Time WithThe people and places around us shape who we are. If we spend time with negative people or face criticism, we may become like them. But if we get close to Jesus, we start to show His love and truth instead of the hurtful labels from the world.00:21:19 - The Process of Forgiveness and Releasing BlameTrue faith means not letting past hurts or what others do control our present. Pastor Kevin shows that forgiveness is both a special gift and a helpful action. This helps those who hurt us to be free, so their choices don't shape or restrict our future.00:30:32 - Calling, Restoration, and New LifeEach person has a special calling from God and is given what they need. We should not try to take on someone else's problems or burdens. God's healing does not happen all at once; it is a journey. We find it by coming to Him every day for cleansing, accepting our weaknesses, and receiving the grace that helps us change and gives us hope.https://springhouse.captivate.fm/episode/arise-in-who-he-created-you-to-beSubscribe & Follow the PodcastDownload our appOur WebsiteOnline Tithes & OfferingsJoin our LivestreamGathering TimesSundays, 9:00 AMSundays, 11:00 AMThursdays, 6:00 PMContact InfoSpringhouse Church14119 Old Nashville HighwaySmyrna TN 37167615-459-3421CCLI License 2070006

Pablo Picasso revendiquait ne pas aimer la musique. Il n'a pourtant cessé de peindre des musiciens, collaborant avec Satie, Stravinsky et Falla. Ses portraits d'instrumentistes sont souvent des autoportraits qui ne disent pas leur nom – ceux d'un homme hanté par ses obsessions.Picasso, figure incontournable de l'art moderne, a entretenu tout au long de sa vie une relation fascinante avec la musique. Franck Ferrand nous emmène dans les coulisses de cet artiste aux multiples talents, révélant une facette méconnue de son génie créatif.Dès son plus jeune âge, Picasso baigne dans un univers musical qui imprègne profondément son œuvre. De la zarzuela andalouse aux cabarets parisiens, en passant par les collaborations avec les Ballets russes, le peintre espagnol semble avoir été habité par une véritable passion pour les sonorités. Pourtant, lorsqu'on lui demande son avis sur la musique, Picasso n'hésite pas à affirmer qu'il ne l'aime pas. Une déclaration surprenante quand on constate à quel point elle transparaît dans ses tableaux cubistes, ses natures mortes et ses portraits d'instrumentistes. Franck Ferrand décrypte cette paradoxale relation, révélant la place centrale qu'occupe la musique dans la démarche artistique du maître.Des joueurs de flûte aux guitaristes cubistes, en passant par les collaborations avec des compositeurs comme Satie et Stravinsky, Picasso semble avoir cherché à retranscrire dans sa peinture les vibrations sonores qui l'habitaient. Une quête incessante qui l'a mené à repousser toujours plus loin les frontières de l'art, faisant de lui l'un des plus grands créateurs du XXe siècle.

Ever felt like you're following all the right steps but still missing something deeper?Many people walk through church doors confident in their faith yet quietly shackled to old habits, unhealed pain, or a fear of never “arriving.” Pastor Kevin describes this as the difference between getting wet and actually going swimming. Between being close to truth but not fully saturated by it.Pastor Kevin unpacks why so many well-meaning people settle for surface-level Christianity, never realizing how much God longs to set them free. He reminds us that real change, doesn't come from louder declarations or checklist spirituality, but from a daily, honest encounter with Jesus and his word.Whether you're brand new or wrestling with old doubts, you're invited to belong, to try again, and to ask, “Do I really want to be free?” There's space for your questions here, and a next step that's actually doable. You don't need to fix yourself first—just come prepared to move forward.Scriptures ReferencedPsalm 16:6; John 5:1-8, 5:14-15, 8:31-47, 15:13; Galatians 5:1; Ephesians 6:12; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 1 John 4:7Key InsightsSettling for spiritual “proximity” leaves us dry and unchanged. Full immersion in God's truth creates real transformation.True freedom is found within God's boundaries, not outside them.Excuses and busy schedules often mask the reality of spiritual bondage.Everyone is welcome to start small and step into God's freedom, no matter their past.Key Sections00:00:00 - Welcome & AnnouncementsJoin us for an upcoming Instruments of Joy benefit concert.00:02:09 - Owning Blind Spots and LoveIt's easy to mistake attempted faithfulness for true spiritual maturity, particularly in areas like love, where most overestimate their own growth and miss the lifelong challenge of loving as God does.00:07:29 - Exposing False FreedomMany Christians often parade around believing they are free while quietly living in bondage, highlighting the cultural confusion between worldly and godly freedom, and why God's limits are actually gifts that unleash joy and peace.00:12:26 - The Discipline of God's LoveWhy God disciplines those he loves, how our avoidance of authority affects spiritual growth, and the uncomfortable but freeing truth that discipline and freedom go hand in hand.00:14:37 - Lukewarm Living and Self-ExaminationLukewarm Christianity is where true transformation gets replaced by louder words or religious routines. The only real antidote is choosing daily to die to self and let God's truth saturate every area of life.00:17:49 - Do You Want to Be FreePastor Keven shares Jesus' direct challenge to the man at the pool of Bethesda, paralleling it with our own reluctance to truly seek freedom; excuses often feel safer than risking change, but Jesus calls us to “get up” and act.00:25:34 - From Proximity to Immersion in TruthKnowing about God is not the same as surrendering to his truth.. It's like moving from standing at the edge of the pool to being completely submerged, where God's voice finally becomes clearest and the old lies lose their volume.00:41:48 - Concrete Next Steps for Real ChangeImmersion in Scripture is not about religious head knowledge but letting Jesus' words shape every decision.https://springhouse.captivate.fm/episode/arise-in-true-freedomSubscribe & Follow the PodcastDownload our appOur WebsiteOnline Tithes & OfferingsJoin our LivestreamGathering TimesSundays, 9:00 AMSundays, 11:00 AMThursdays, 6:00 PMContact InfoSpringhouse Church14119 Old Nashville HighwaySmyrna TN 37167615-459-3421CCLI License 2070006

To help us understand how assisted births work, how this new technology compares to traditional tools, and whether South African mothers could benefit from it, John Maytham is joined by Dr Peter de Jong, obstetrician-gynaecologist in private practice in Cape Town. Presenter John Maytham is an actor and author-turned-talk radio veteran and seasoned journalist. His show serves a round-up of local and international news coupled with the latest in business, sport, traffic and weather. The host’s eclectic interests mean the program often surprises the audience with intriguing book reviews and inspiring interviews profiling artists. A daily highlight is Rapid Fire, just after 5:30pm. CapeTalk fans call in, to stump the presenter with their general knowledge questions. Another firm favourite is the humorous Thursday crossing with award-winning journalist Rebecca Davis, called “Plan B”. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Afternoon Drive with John Maytham Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 15:00 and 18:00 (SA Time) to Afternoon Drive with John Maytham broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/BSFy4Cn or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/n8nWt4x Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hey everybody! Welcome back to the second and final volume of The Loupe Guroo Musical Experience: The Collected Works! What does Loupe get up to in the second half of his WRYAT run, you ask? Welllllllllllllllllll... The King's crossing was the main attraction Dominoes falling in a chain reaction The scraping subject ruled by fear told me Whiskey works better than beer The judge is on vinyl, decisions are final And nobody gets a reprieve And every wave is tidal If you hang around you're going to get wet I can't prepare for death any more than I already have All you can do now is watch the shells The game looks easy that's why it sells Frustrated fireworks inside your head Are going to stand and deliver talk instead The method acting that pays my bills Keeps the fat man feeding in Beverly Hills I got a heavy metal mouth, it hurls obscenity And I get my check from the trash treasury Because I took my own insides out It don't matter 'cause I have no sex life And all I wanna do now is inject my ex-wife I've seen the movie And I know what happens It's Christmas time And the needles on the tree A skinny Santa is bringing something to me His voice is overwhelming But his speech is slurred And I only understand every other word Open your parachute and grab your gun Falling down like an omen, a setting sun Read the part and return at five It's a hell of a role if you can keep it alive But I don't care if I fuck up I'm going on a date With a rich wife lady Ain't life great? Give me one good reason not to do it (Because we love you) So do it This is the place where time reverses  And dead men talk to all the pretty nurses Instruments shine on a silver tray Don't let me get carried away Don't let me get carried away Don't let me be carried away Alright everybody, thank y'a-woooooooolllllllllll for listenin' and loopin' with the guru of loops himself, Loupe Gooru, or Loupothy Albus Severus Gooru for long, or DJ Loupothy Albus Severus Gooru-Coyote for slightly longer! We hope you enjoyed your experience with The Loupe Gooru Musical Experience in its entirety, because this is literally all there is and all there'll ever be. It's too late for us to change anything now, so if you had notes this whole time, you shoulda listened to us and let us know back when we were still on the air sometime during, I dunno, THE PAST SEVEN YEARS?! Loupe would never say this to any one of you ungrateful motherfuckers but you pieces of shit don't deserve him, or any of WRYAT for that matter. Seven fucking years and you couldn't be fucking bothered. Seven fucking years. The reason you think we never have to put up with any of your bullshit is because we make it look like we're not. It's because we care, and we thought you felt the same way. Trust us, we have had to put up with so, so, so much more from you than you could ever, ever, ever know.  Oh, don't try to explain yourself now. No excuses necssary. The goddamn show's over now anyway. And good news: you still never have to listen to it! Virtually nothing's changed for you, so sit back, relax and take a minute to just shut the fuck up. Just shut the fuck up. Shut the fuck up, and then howl, damn it! Howl and fuck off forever! (Unless, of course, you did actually listen to Loupe and WRYAT, in which case, thank you so much!)

Msgr. Roger J. Landry Pontifical Missionary Union Webinar May 14, 2026   To watch a recording of today's webinar, please click below:    To listen to an audio recording of the webinar, please click below:  https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/catholicpreaching/5.14.26_Four_Pontifical_Mission_Societies_II.mp3   To download a copy of the slides of the presentation, please click below: 5.14.26 PUM MIssiology Lecture on […] The post The Four Pontifical Mission Societies as Instruments of Missionary Animation and Formation in the Local Churches for a New Missionary Movement in the Church, Pontifical Missionary Union Refresher Course in Missiology, May 14, 2026 appeared first on Catholic Preaching.

This episode is a breakout session from the Braveheart Summit in 2025, and it was titled The Gospel In Worship. In it, Aaron Tedeschi and Ashley Bailey give some keys on how to approach the Throne of Grace and how to lead a congregation into true worship to the Living God. Braveheart Summit 2026 registration is officially open!This November 4th through 6th we're joining together in sunny Miami with Bravehearts like you from around the world. These three days will be like no other. We will encounter the living God through His Table, worship, faith training, connection and commissioning.The Summit isn't a conference — it's a connect point for people who are hungry for MORE of God - more of His vision, His growth, His freedom and His abundant joy. Spots are limited, so don't wait. Get your ticket HERE. We can't wait to see you in Miami!GOSPEL HOMES TRAINING These trainings are meant to be gospel foundations for our own hearts as we experience the overflow of Christ in us. When the gospel expresses itself in us, it first expresses itself in love for one another - first to those we live with and then to those who come and go from our homes. If you want to join these trainings, email discipleship@braveheartministries.org. Send us Fan MailSupport the show

This episode of The Other Side of the Bell, featuring trumpet performer, composer and designer Thomas Gansch, is brought to you by Bob Reeves Brass. This episode also appears as a video episode on our YouTube channel, you can find it here: "Thomas Gansch Trumpet Interview" And, find the expanded show notes, transcript and more photos here From his groundbreaking Mnozil Brass to his original take on a rotary valve trumpet, the "Gansch Horn," Thomas Gansch has made an indelible impact on professional music. Thomas joins us today to share his musical journey from a young boy, surrounded by instruments in a musician's family, to becoming a prominent trumpet player in Austria and beyond. He opens up quite honestly about his struggles with classical music education, and family expectations, before eventually making his transition towards jazz, which he embraced as part of his wide-range of musical interests. Growing up as the son of renowned Austrian composer Johann Gansch, and as the much younger brother of Hans Gansch, a prominent trumpet soloist and professor himself (and principal trumpeter of the Vienna Philharmonic), there was a lot of push and pull as both brothers sought their own place of identity, creativity and freedom to pursue their musical dreams. It was through humor and originality that Thomas truly found his wings, particularly with the Mnozil Brass septet, considered the "Monty Python of the musical world." Going strong since 1992, Mnozil forms just part of Thomas' busy schedule that comprises all sorts of musical styles and groups. And he gives us a tour of the original Gansch Horn, a rotary trumpet that can be played with one hand, which gives it its distinctive arced bell shape. Thomas worked directly with the noted Austrian manufacturer Schagerl in the early 2000's to create the horn that has become his identity. From practice routines to juggling gigs, jamming with Wynton Marsalis and Jerry Hey to looking after your body and mind, this is a wonderful conversation of breadth and inspiration! About Thomas Gansch: Thomas Gansch, born in 1975, has always successfully eluded any categorisation. Whether in the formation "Mnozil Brass", which he co-founded and with which he has been performing around the world for thirty years, in the legendary "Vienna Art Orchestra", as a soloist with a large orchestra or as part of a family theatrical ensemble with his wife Theresia and the joint programme "Doppelgansch", whether as a composer, arranger, compere, pop singer, big band leader or brass band conductor, the native of Lower Austria does not allow himself to be confined to any musical genre. He likes to summarise all varieties of his art under the term "music" that "either touches him or doesn't touch him" in order to put all prejudices to one side and to give listeners an intuitive approach to listening. Various projects have taken Gansch to over 45 countries and his first musical experiences in the brass band of his father Johann Gansch S. (1925 - 1998), which he - in the spirit of the gifted improviser - always integrates directly into his work. Today, Gansch draws on his wealth of artistic experience and also brings his engaging personality to every project, from symphony orchestras to chamber music ensembles, from jazz to new music, from pop acts to musical theatre and comedy programmes, into his performances. There are no hierarchies in his understanding of art, and so he manages to inspire and "pick up" the audience again and again. Episode Links: Mnozil Brass: https://mnozilbrass.at/en YouTube: @ThomasGanschOFFICIAL Instagram: @thomasgansch  Facebook: @thomasganschofficial  Bob Reeves Brass Events and Appearances: Next Up! Concert Series: Watch the live streamed premier of Dan Rosenboom's special composition, "In a World Like This," with the Los Angeles Brass Alliance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xfR6Gwtyw4 And stay tuned for the fully HD version coming soon! William Adam Trumpet Festival July 9-12, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Ill. Podcast Credits: "A Room with a View" - composed and performed by Howie Shear Podcast Host - John Snell Photo Credits - ©Daniela Matejschek Audio Engineer - Ted Cragg

We kick off the Pencil Primer — a new series for anyone who wants to start at the beginning of pencildom. This installment traces graphite from the legendary Borrowdale lightning strike of 1564 to Nicolas-Jacques Conté's clay-and-graphite breakthrough during the Napoleonic Wars, plus the Thoreau family's role in standardizing the American pencil grade scale and a tour through HB-to-9B. Plus, Tim's into a Bill Frisell biography, Johnny's writing with a sparkly Narwhal "raspberry cheesecake" pen that looks like, uh, something else, and Andy debuts booklet.lol — a vibe-coded book tracker. Patreon subscribers can watch the video version.For this episode, we recorded video, available to Patreon subscribers! If you're a patron, head over to see our faces and visual examples of many of the things we discuss. And if you're not a patron, join us at any level and you can see this and other supplemental content at any time!Show Notes & LinksErasableRead a transcript of this episode at Erasable ScribeErasable PatreonErasable Facebook groupErasable Discord inviteEpisode referencesEpisode 57: “The F Bomb”Podcasts / mediaDrug Storyr/pencilsLetterkennyBooksBill Frisell, Beautiful DreamerExcellent Advice for Living by Kevin KellyAutomatic Noodle by Annalee NewitzA Psalm for the Wild-Built by Becky ChambersPencil / stationery / book artsCumberland Pencil MuseumNicolas-Jacques Conté (Britannica)Henry David Thoreau (Britannica)Guild of Book WorkersGeneral's Layout PencilSTAEDTLER WOPEXDerwentPhotography / camera stuffMicro Four NerdsPetaPixelApps / sites / companiesbooklet.lolPeople / artists / companiesWillie NelsonCharlie CrockettBill FrisellJHS PedalsYour HostsJohnny GamberPencil Revolution@pencilutionAndy WelfleWoodclinched@awelfleTim Wasem@TimWasem

The Rolling Stones confirm the artwork & artist guest list of their 25th studio album titled ‘Foreign Tongues' after revealing a social media puzzle with their fans, Ozzy Osbourne had a secret cologne he used for 30 years and now it's getting a limited edition release that benefits his Parkinson's charity, Dave Grohl reveals he changed the name of the latest Foo Fighters album after the initial title was too similar to the blockbuster musical ‘Wicked: For Good' that was released last November, and some good news as lots of rare stolen instruments found their ways back home this week as Richie Sambora was finally reunited with his stolen 1976 Gibson Explorer after 41 years, and Korn's Ra Diaz recovered all 15 different custom basses that were stolen from him right before Korn's upcoming South American tour & more… PLUS ‘This Week in Rock & Roll History Trivia', Rock Birthdays, ‘The Best & Worst Rock Album Artwork of the Week' & much more!All of our links are up at www.rocknewsweekly.com every Monday, where you can check out the full episode on 8 different platforms (including Amazon Audible & Apple/Google Podcasts)Watch us LIVE, chat with us & more…Every Sunday around 2pm PST @ https://www.twitch.tv/rocknewsweeklyWatch all of our videos, interviews & subscribe at Youtube.com/@rocknewsweeklyFollow us online:Instagram.com/rocknewsweeklyFacebook.com/rocknewsweeklyTwitter.com/rocknewsweeklyTikTok.com/@rocknewsweekly#ForeignTongues #No88 #YourFavoriteToy #RichieSambora #RaDiaz#Rock #News #RockNews #RockNewsWeekly #RockNewsWeeklyPodcast #Podcast #Podcasts #Metal #HeavyMetal #Alt #Alternative #ClassicRock #70s #80s #90s #Indie #Trivia #RockTrivia #RockBirthdays #NewMusic #NewMusicReleases

Does God's infinite grace mean we have a "license to sin"? In this Sunday evening study, our guest speaker Parker Reynolds dives into **Romans chapter 6** to answer the question Paul poses: "Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?".While it's true that where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, Paul is clear that this is not an invitation to live an unrepentant life. We explore the transformative power of the gospel, the symbolism of baptism as a death and resurrection, and why true grace leads to a life of radical obedience rather than a "crook's admirable arrangement" of sin and easy forgiveness.**Key Topics Covered:****The Debt We Can't Repay:** Why good deeds alone cannot tip the scales of our guilt or atone for our sins.**The Beauty of the Gift:** Exploring how justification comes as a free gift through the redemption found in Jesus Christ.**The Meaning of Baptism:** How being buried with Christ in baptism allows us to rise and "walk in newness of life".**Grace vs. License:** Deconstructing the flawed logic that "I like sin and God likes forgiving," and why sin remains destructive to our lives and relationships.**Instruments of Righteousness:** The call to renounce worldly passions and align our will with God's purpose as "zealous for good works".

Instruments of God's Grace Guest Speaker Steve Zarrilli Acts 9:36-42 Our world celebrates the loud. We chase after famous people on bright stages, quote authors and podcasters we've never met, and take on the agendas that shout the loudest. Yet something in us still longs for the quiet – the soft wind, the lapping waves, the songs of birds at dawn. Jesus celebrates that quiet place. He lifts up the humble and the lowly. He honors the unseen, the overlooked, and the ordinary. He Himself entered the world not with applause, but as a baby in a manger. This Mother's Day, join us as we explore how Jesus views humble, natural servanthood within His supernatural kingdom and discover what a life of gospel faithfulness truly looks like. 

You run a borescope through an instrument, and something doesn't look right. Is it debris? Damage? Or has it always been there? On this episode of Beyond Clean, we're joined by William Filipponi to break down one of the biggest challenges teams face after implementing borescopes: knowing what you're actually looking at. From telling the difference between debris and manufacturing artifact to building reference tools that help your team make confident calls, Bill walks us through how to make sense of what you're seeing inside your instruments for the first time. Whether you're new to borescopes or looking to strengthen your process, this episode brings clarity to one of the biggest learning curves in SPD. After finishing this podcast episode, earn your 1 CE credit immediately by passing the short quiz linked here: https://www.flexiquiz.com/SC/N/episode32-05 Visit our CE Credit Hub at https://www.beyondcleanmedia.com/ce-credit-hub to access this quiz and over 350 other free CE credits. #BeyondClean #SterileProcessing #Podcast #Season32 #SPDFactCheck #Borescopes #InstrumentInspection #SurgicalInstruments #Debris

Valentina Ciardelli , double bass professor at Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance and an active performer/educator, returns to the podcast to talk about a project that goes way beyond the practice room: fixing the chaos of traveling with large instruments. Check out Valentina's work and latest updates on her website . We dig into Valentina's advocacy work to create clearer, non-discretionary standards for transporting professional musical instruments, sparked by real-world experiences (including those "crying in the airport" moments many traveling musicians know all too well). Jason shares a few horror stories from the bass-travel trenches, and Valentina describes the progress being made through dialogue with airlines, airports, and policymakers, including her recent speech in Brussels and why signatures matter even outside the EU. You can sign the petition here , follow Valentina on Instagram and Facebook , and visit her YouTube channel !   Connect with DBHQ Join Our Newsletter Double Bass Resources Double Bass Sheet Music Double Bass Merch Gear used to record this podcast Zoom H6 studio 8-Track 32-Bit Float Handy Recorder Rode Podmic Sony Alpha 7 IV Full-frame Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM Lens Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM Lens   When you buy a product using a link on this page, we may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting DBHQ.   Theme music by Eric Hochberg

Today's guest lives at the intersection of craft, sound, and story. If you've ever wondered what happens when making the instrument becomes part of the art — and when music leads before meaning — this conversation will invite you to slow down, listen deeply, and sit inside the mystery.Martin Maudal is a renowned luthier, songwriter, and producer, and a graduate of Berklee College of Music. Raised in Claremont, California at the foot of Mount Baldy, and shaped by years in the New York music scene, Martin blends West Coast soul with East Coast grit.He is the founder of Maudal Musical Machines, where he hand-builds electric resonator guitars—functional sculptures and vessels of sound that he also performs and records with. What began as a way to showcase these instruments evolved into Baldy Crawlers, a deeply expressive musical collective blending Folk, Americana, Jazz, and social commentary.Martin on YouTube@maudalmusicalmachines on InstagramMartin's Facebook pageFollowing critical acclaim for “Bring Me a Flower,” Baldy Crawlers return with the haunting new single Boy, released January 9, 2026—an intuitive, open-ended work that invites listeners not to solve the song, but to sit inside it.1) When Craft Becomes the MuseMartin, Baldy Crawlers began as a way to showcase your handmade guitars—and then became something much bigger. At what point did you realize this wasn't just a marketing project, but a true artistic calling of its own?2) Music Before MeaningYour new single “Boy” started not with a concept, but with a feeling. You've said, “This one was music before it was words.” What happens creatively when you let sound lead before meaning—and how do you know when not to force interpretation?3) Instruments as StorytellersYou build the very instruments you record and perform with. How does handcrafting a guitar—its materials, weight, resonance—shape the stories that come out of it? In what ways does the instrument itself become a collaborator?4) Leaving Space for Mystery“Boy” lives in a dreamlike space where silence speaks as loudly as sound. In a world that pushes clarity, content, and explanation, how do you protect ambiguity—and why do you think listeners crave that space now?5) Empathy, Myth, and the Human PulseFrom “Bring Me a Flower” to “Boy,” Baldy Crawlers' music feels rooted in empathy and shared humanity. What themes keep returning in your work—and what do you hope listeners discover about themselves when they sit with these songs?“Before we wrap up, Martin, where can listeners explore Baldy Crawlers' music, your instruments at Maudal Musical Machines, and keep up with upcoming releases?”For creatives listening who feel pressure to explain, optimize, or over-define their work—what would you say about trusting intuition and letting the art reveal itself in its own time?Music tracks are copyrighted, provided by the artist, and used with permission."Bedlam""Boy""Bring Me A Flower""Orbelin"

April 23rd, 2026 Follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X Listen to past episodes on The Ticket’s Website And follow The Ticket Top 10 on Apple, Spotify or Amazon MusicSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.