Podcasts about mit

Roleplaying games and the Marvel universe may be fictional, but they can also teach us a lot about morality in the real world. Christopher Robichaud is a Lecturer in Ethics and Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. In this episode, he shares ways we can explore important, everyday issues in fun, safe, and unexpected ways. Christopher has made a career out of teaching ethics and philosophy using pop culture, dissecting moral questions using anything from zombie apocalypse simulations to superhero narratives. He received his doctorate in philosophy from MIT. In 2015 he won the Innovation in Teaching Award at the Harvard Kennedy School for creating a day-long simulation--using design elements from old school tabletop roleplaying games like D&D--where policy students wielded their leadership skills and confronted ethical dilemmas to deal with a zombie pandemic. For the full text transcript, visit go.ted.com/BHTranscriptsFill out our survey at bit.ly/BHSurvey6 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What if the patterns that helped you succeed are also holding you back at work? In this episode, I sit down with MIT professor Dr. Deborah Ancona to talk about how the “family ghosts” you carry from childhood can shape the way you handle authority, conflict, responsibility, perfectionism, and asking for help. We dive into how recognizing these patterns helps you understand your triggers, change behaviors that keep you stuck, and lead with greater intention. Tune in to discover how your past may be influencing the way you work, lead, and relate to others. Check out our sponsors: ElevenLabs - If you run a business or handle customer operations across support, sales, or marketing, you can start with a demo at elevenlabs.io/achiever.  Granola - If meetings are eating up your day, Granola is a no-brainer. You can try it totally free - just head to granola.ai/ACHIEVER.  IM8 - Go to IM8HEALTH.com/achiever RIGHT NOW or click on the link in the description and use code achiever for a Free Welcome Kit, five free travel sachets, plus ten percent off your order Monarch - Write your own money story with Monarch. Use code ACHIEVER at Monarch.com to get your first year of Monarch Core half off at just $50. Shopify - Head over to SHOPIFY.COM/anxiousachiever to start your free trial today.  Upwork - Visit upwork.com right now and post your job for free.  Brevo - Get started for free today—or use code ACHIEVER50 to save 50% on Starter and Standard Plans for the first three months of an annual subscription. In this Episode, You Will Learn 00:00 What are “family ghosts,” and how do they follow us into adulthood? 04:45 Can the patterns from your childhood become your greatest strengths? 09:30 Why some behaviors are easier to change than others. 14:45 How familiar family roles can shape the way you lead. 18:15 How reconnecting with forgotten parts of yourself can strengthen your leadership. 23:45 Which “good ghosts” help ambitious people succeed? 28:00 How avoiding conflict and refusing to ask for help can create anxiety. 30:30 How do you identify the ghosts you want to change? 32:45 How feedback can reveal patterns you may not see in yourself. 37:00 How role models can help you try on new ways of leading. 40:15 Are your workplace relationships repeating old family patterns? 42:00 How thinking in “triangles” can change difficult workplace dynamics. 43:30 When is it time to step away from a relationship or workplace? Resources + Links Get a copy of my book - The Anxious Achiever Watch the podcast on YouTube  Find more resources on our website morraam.com Follow Follow me: on LinkedIn @morraaronsmele + Instagram @morraam Follow Deborah on LinkedIn: @deborahancona123

AI with intention. AI with integrity. Is it possible? Tony Frontier, author of AI with Intention, is talking about how we value learning in the age of AI. He shares the language we can use to evaluate what we're doing, how we're talking about AI, and how we're measuring learning, and ultimately, why education needs to change more than ever. Experience AI, a program co-founded by Raspberry Pi Foundation and Google DeepMind, sponsored this podcast episode. All opinions are my own. http://experience-ai.org I also open this show with some highlights from the Report of MIT's Ad Hoc Committee on AI Use in Teaching, Learning, and Research Training and what it means for learning, and they use a term I think we should all be discussing: cognitive surrender. We cannot let our kids cognitively surrender and let AI do the work for them. They also talk about helping students understand that their learning, integrity, and judgment are the product of college, not the grades. So many challenges we have now, but this week has been about sharing the conversations and thought leaders to help you improve the AI conversation in your school. I hope this Thursday helps you be a thought leader in your school!

Changing the Narrative featuring world-renowned eye surgeon Dr. Ming Wang. Trained at Harvard and MIT and having performed more than 55,000 laser eye procedures—including thousands on fellow doctors—Dr. Wang has an incredible story to tell. Growing up in China during the Cultural Revolution, he experienced a time when both science and faith were heavily restricted. His journey eventually brought him to America, where his work in medicine and laser physics led him to explore deeper questions about faith, purpose, and the Creator behind the remarkable complexity of the human eye. In this episode, Dr. Wang shares his perspective on the reality of a life beyond what we can see—and how faith can point us toward something far greater than ourselves.

Pete Sacco has spent 30 years building the physical infrastructure — data centers, power systems, and hardware — that AI runs on. In this conversation, he argues the AI threat is overstated, not because it isn't transformative, but because it forces humans to reclaim what machines can't replicate: wisdom and discernment. Pete and Jeff dig into why founders need to embrace AI rather than fear it, the coming shift toward decentralized energy and compute, the misconceptions around data centers and water usage, how to separate real AI investment opportunities from hype, and his vision of a post-scarcity world where energy and labor approach zero cost.Key Takeaways2:19 — The one skill AI can't replicate: humans are "beings of discernment and wisdom," not calculators — that's the edge to protect.8:00 — Why the calculator analogy holds: AI won't erode critical thinking any more than calculators erased our ability to do math, if we use it consciously.12:48 — On creativity: Pete pushes back on the idea that AI kills creativity — "I'm 100 times more creative" because of the tool, not despite it.15:56 — AI as mirror: it will serve as "a mirror that's going to allow us to improve ourselves more fundamentally than ever before in human history."31:02 — The real bottleneck behind failed AI initiatives (per MIT): not the technology — organizational inefficiency.34:36 — On retooling teams: the four levels every employee needs — using chat, using skills, using agentic AI, and managing machines alongside people.36:05 — The post-scarcity vision: inside 50 years, the base cost of products and services could be "driven to zero" as energy and labor become virtually free.26:02 — Data center water myth debunked: total data center water use is a fraction (1/2000th) of what's used growing alfalfa for cattle feed in the U.S.30:19 — Pete's franchise model: Graywolf Data Centers — building small, tokenized, decentralized 2–20 megawatt data centers instead of massive centralized ones.43:55 — What most founders should be asking: are you embracing decentralization and retooling your people, or clinging to old, centralized ways of working?44:56 — The autonomous-vehicle prediction: "five, maybe eight years away from never driving cars again."Tweetable Quotes"We are beings of discernment and wisdom, embodied in consciousness itself." — Pete Sacco"AI will be the technology that serves as a mirror that's going to allow us to improve ourselves more fundamentally than ever before in human history." — Pete Sacco"We don't connect with data, we connect with people." — Pete Sacco"If you're a shitty data center owner, you're gonna be a shitty cloud owner too." — Pete Sacco"AI is going to out-compute you at almost everything... but what it can't do is know what's actually worth doing. That is called wisdom." — Jeff Mains"The doomers are 0 for 500 years. What makes us think that this is the year that they're right?" — Pete SaccoSaaS Leadership LessonsProtect discernment, not just headcount. As AI absorbs computation and pattern recognition, the scarce resource inside your company becomes judgment — hire and train for it.Diagnose failure correctly. Most "failed AI initiatives" aren't tech failures — they're organizational ones. Fix workflows and structure before blaming the tools.Retool your people in layers. Move teams through the four stages: basic chat use, skills, agentic workflows, and eventually managing hybrid human/machine teams.Decentralize before you're forced to. Whether it's compute, energy, or ownership, the founders who build flexible, distributed infrastructure now will out-adapt centralized competitors later.Invest (and lead) on conviction, not just data. Pete's biggest bets came from gut instinct paired with a disciplined thesis (AI infrastructure, decentralization, longevity) — not spreadsheets alone.Sell people on the outcome, not just the tool. Adoption stalls when leaders push AI as a mandate; it accelerates when they frame it as freedom — more time, more creative capacity, less drudgery.Guest Resourcespete@petesacco.comhttps://www.petesacco.com/https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61573911350074https://www.linkedin.com/in/petertsacco/https://www.instagram.com/petesaccoofficial/https://x.com/PeteSaccoCEOEpisode SponsorThe Futureproof Series - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLfkXKUPZ5xuOqMPR7_gzGybncTtavyR1NThe Captain's KeysSmall Fish, Big Pond – https://smallfishbigpond.com/ Use the promo code ‘SaaSFuel'Champion Leadership Group – https://championleadership.com/https://jeffmains.com/books/SaaS Fuel ResourcesWebsite - https://championleadership.com/Jeff Mains on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffkmains/Twitter - https://twitter.com/jeffkmainsFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/thesaasguy/Instagram - https://instagram.com/jeffkmains

Und was wäre, wenn wir uns daten? Mit dieser Frage beginnt für Timothy Goodman und Jessica Walsh ein außergewöhnliches Liebesexperiment. Die beiden sind beste Freunde und gerade ziemlich unzufrieden mit ihrem Datingleben. Aus ziemlich unterschiedlichen Gründen: Während Tim sich zwar nach einer echten Verbindung sehnt, aber große Schwierigkeiten hat, sich auf eine einzige Frau festzulegen, stürzt sich Jessie Hals über Kopf in neue Beziehungen. Sie ist eine hoffnungslose Romantikerin und fragt sich bei jedem Date, ob sie gerade ihrer großen Liebe gegenübersitzt. Nur: glücklich geworden ist bisher keiner der beiden. Also beschließen sie, etwas auszuprobieren, das ihr Liebesleben auf den Kopf stellt. Sie wollen sich daten. Aber nicht einfach so. Sie wollen ihr Kennenlernen wie ein Experiment behandeln: 40 Tage lang wollen sie sich jeden Tag sehen, miteinander ausgehen und abends festhalten, was gerade in ihnen vorgeht. Kann auf diesem Weg aus Freundschaft Liebe werden? Und was passiert, wenn einer am Ende mehr will als die andere? Ob Tim und Jessie nach 40 Tagen tatsächlich zusammenkommen, verraten euch Linn und Leo in dieser Folge True Love. Quellen (Auswahl) Buch "40 Days of Dating: An Experiment" von Jessica Walsh und Timothy Goodman [Website](https://fortydaysofdating.com/) Videos [40 Days of Dating](https://vimeo.com/40daysofdating) Artikel The Guardian Tims [TED-Talk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNj9o6rcy_0) Eine Produktion von Auf Ex Productions Hosts: Leonie Bartsch, Linn Schütze Recherche: Aylin Mercan, Antonia Faltermaier, Leonie Barsch Redaktion: Antonia Fischer Produktion: Lorenz Schütze Hintergrundinformationen, Bilder und Videos findet ihr auf unserem Instagram- oder TikTok-Kanal @true.lovepodcast. Oder auf unseren privaten Profilen @leonie_bartsch und @linnschuetze. Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? [**Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte!**](https://linktr.ee/truelove_podcast) Du möchtest Werbung in diesem Podcast schalten? [**Dann erfahre hier mehr über die Werbemöglichkeiten bei Seven.One Audio!**](https://www.seven.one/portfolio/sevenone-audio)

This episode of Disruption/Interruption features Poolad Imany, founder and CEO of Icarus Quantum, a company spun out of NIST that is building modular, room-temperature quantum links. Rather than chasing ever-larger monolithic quantum computers, Icarus is tackling the industry's cryogenics bottleneck by connecting smaller quantum modules together, similar to how classical data centers scale. The conversation covers the physics of cryogenic cooling, why quantum interconnects are the missing piece for utility-scale quantum computers, and what Icarus's move to Harvard and MIT clean room facilities means for its fabrication process. Imany also touches on the energy efficiency gains quantum computing could offer and where he sees the industry heading over the next decade. Key Takeaways: 3:35 — Who is Poolad Imany and what pulled him into quantum computing? 5:36 — What is broken about how the industry currently scales quantum computers? 6:49 – How does modularization solve the quantum scaling problem? 25:48 — When will quantum and AI converge, and what happens next? Quote of the Show (6:49):"Let's actually modularize this. Let's take these small modules and connect them in a quantum way to each other to make a bigger quantum computer." — Poolad Imany Join our Anti-PR newsletter where we’re keeping a watchful and clever eye on PR trends, PR fails, and interesting news in tech so you don't have to. You're welcome. Want PR that actually matters? Get 30 minutes of expert advice in a fast-paced, zero-nonsense session from Karla Jo Helms, a veteran Crisis PR and Anti-PR Strategist who knows how to tell your story in the best possible light and get the exposure you need to disrupt your industry. Click here to book your call: https://info.jotopr.com/free-anti-pr-eval Ways to connect with Poolad Imany:Company LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/poolad-imanyCompany Website: https://www.icarusquantum.com/ How to get more Disruption/Interruption: Amazon Music - https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/eccda84d-4d5b-4c52-ba54-7fd8af3cbe87/disruption-interruption Apple Podcast - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/disruption-interruption/id1581985755 Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/6yGSwcSp8J354awJkCmJlD YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=disruption+%2F+interuuptionSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Az elmúlt hetekben világszerte emelkedtek az állampapírhozamok, a magyar kötvénypiac mégis jól teljesít a nemzetközi mezőnyben. Mit áraznak most a befektetők a Tisza-kormánnyal kapcsolatban, és meddig tarthat a választások után kialakult bizalom? A témáról a Portfolio elemzőjével, Beke Károllyal beszélgettünk.A magyar gazdaság kilátásairól bővebben is szó lesz az október 7-i Budapest Economic Forumon, amelyre jegyek korlátozott számban még kaphatók.Műsorunk második felében arról volt szó, hogy miközben a mesterséges intelligencia egyre gyorsabban állít elő információt, az emberi és intézményi döntések sokszor képtelenek tartani ezt a tempót. De vajon minden folyamatot fel kell gyorsítani csak azért, mert megtehetjük? Hogyan lehet úgy használni az AI-t, hogy a gyorsaság ne menjen a biztonság rovására? A Magyar Nemzeti Bank informatikai igazgatóját, Kada Zsoltot kérdeztük. Főbb részek: Intro – (00:00) Magyar állampapírhozamok – (01:50) AI: sebesség vagy biztonság? – (11:57) Kép forrása: Getty ImagesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Lea Oetjen und Holger Zschäpitz über eine Volte bei Broadcom, den Höhenflug von Snowflake und einen aktivistischen Investor bei der Telekom. Außerdem geht es um Dell, Nvidia, Alphabet, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Netskope, Petco Health and Wellness, Argan, Five Below, NetApp, C3.ai, Uber Technologies, Delivery Hero, Reddit, T-Mobile US, Volkswagen, Zalando, GEA Group, Commerzbank und Deutsche Bank. Hier für den „Daily Business“-Newsletter anmelden: https://www.businessinsider.de/informationen/newsletter-crosspromo/ Am 2. Oktober findet unser „Alles auf Aktien“-Summit in Berlin statt. Ihr wollt dabei sein? Wir verlosen Tickets: Schreibt uns eine Mail an AAA@WELT.de und begründet, warum ihr unbedingt gewinnen solltet. Falls ihr euer Glück nicht dem Zufall überlassen wollt, bekommt ihr mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ satte 50 Prozent Rabatt aufs Ticket – aber nur über diesen Link: https://veranstaltung.businessinsider.de/event/financesummit26/summary?rp=c6dc55d6-6f4f-4fb4-b75f-3f3501d84859 Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt. Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

We talk with Eglae Recchia, CEO of Keyway, about how Proptech grows from building tech into AI that gives commercial real estate teams back time for judgment. We also trace her path from a childhood of constant moves to MIT's SloanSchool of Business and a career built on turning data into action for lenders, REITs, investors, and operators. • Proptech as a broad umbrella across the built environment, fintech, and AI • Why “insights” are no longer enough and how “so what” drives adoption • How moving often shaped adaptability, networking, and comfort with pivots • Philosophy and advertising as training for clear thinking and persuasion • Early career lessons from editorial work, technology shifts, and ops problem solving • Choosing MIT's Sloan School of Business to build analytical tools and a problem-solving mindset • Graduating in 2009 and using networking to break into financial services • Finding commercial real estate through Capital One strategy and portfolio questions • Keyway's evolution from investor-operator thesis to agentic infrastructure for CRE • Who Keyway serves today and how it combines public data with internal data • What comes next: enterprise agents, risk management, and fraud detection Be sure to subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. To learn more, visit proptechespress.com. 

This week Sarah sits down with Dr. Tony Nader, a physician, neuroscientist, and leader in the Transcendental Meditation movement, to explore one of the biggest mysteries of our existence: consciousness. Together, they explore the relationship between the mind and body, science and spirituality, meditation and creativity, and what it means to access a deeper sense of self. On this episode of Moonbeaming you'll hear: How Dr. Tony Nader went from physician and neuroscientist to studying consciousness and Transcendental Meditation What consciousness actually is and why Dr. Nader believes it extends far beyond human consciousness How meditation can create a state of inner silence while maintaining deep alertness and awareness Why stress and fear narrow our consciousness and limit the possibilities we can see How calming the nervous system can create more space for creativity, intuition, and clearer decision-making The connection between meditation, the brain, creativity, and the default mode network How Transcendental Meditation can help us reconnect with what Dr. Nader describes as our deeper, truer self What it means to live from a place of greater consciousness, connection, and care --- Dr. Tony Nader is a physician, neuroscientist, Vedic scholar, and leader of the Transcendental Meditation movement. A Harvard- and MIT-trained scientist, he is the author of Consciousness Is All There Is and his newest book, The Power of Caring, which explores how caring is rooted in consciousness and how we can cultivate deeper, more fulfilling connections with ourselves and others. https://drtonynader.com/ --- Join Our Community: Join the Moon Studio Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/themoonstudio Buy the 2026 Many Moons Lunar Planner: https://moon-studio.co/products/many-moons-2026?srsltid=AfmBOopThx1yrmKl0tMjecc_EFeeN5DAiIafqPqvQ4Uke1WEi5droeam Subscribe to our newsletter: https://moon-studio.co/pages/newsletter Find Sarah on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/gottesss/

CheckoutThe God Centered Concept Academy Training Community to learn what growth in Christ isTUVU CommunitiesCheck out this link to view Kingdom Cross Roads on TV.https://jesussaid.tv/?affiliate=tswright_gccTo get a copy of our new book "Embracing the Truth" or to have TS Wright speak at your event or conference or if you simply want spiritual or life coaching or just a consultation visit:www.tswrightspeaks.comVisit our website to learn more about The God Centered Concept. The God Centered Concept is designed to bring real discipleship and spreading the Gospel to help spark the Great Harvest, a revival in this generation.www.godcenteredconcept.comKingdom Cross Roads Podcast is a part of The God Centered Concept.n this special CPE Summer 2026 episode of Kingdom Cross Roads Podcast, T.S. Wright sits down with Dr. Michael “Mike” Manahan, author of The Great Contest, for a conversation about faith, trials, biblical truth, and the transforming work of God.Dr. Manahan brings an unusual combination of theological and scientific training to the discussion. His academic background includes mathematics and physics, nuclear engineering and physics, and advanced study at MIT, alongside a master's degree in theology. He also shares from decades of ministry experience, including 36 years serving as a volunteer prison chaplain. At the heart of the conversation is a challenging biblical question: Why does God test His people?Drawing from James' teaching to “count it all joy” when believers face trials, Dr. Manahan explains his view that the tests and “contests” found throughout Scripture are part of God's work of developing character, producing sanctification, and preparing His people for His Kingdom. The conversation traces this theme from the Garden of Eden through figures in the Old and New Testaments. Dr. Manahan also discusses several major theological themes addressed in The Great Contest, including:Why the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was present in EdenThe biblical purpose of testing, trials, and sufferingHow adversity can become an instrument of spiritual transformationThe reality of hell and the importance of proclaiming the full GospelWhy Genesis 1–3 is foundational to understanding the biblical storyCreation versus evolution and the Big BangThe first and second laws of thermodynamicsThe relationship between scientific inquiry and Christian faithHumanity's ultimate purpose of glorifying GodWhy believers should be able to look back and see evidence of spiritual growthT.S. and Dr. Manahan also emphasize that Jesus Christ can reach anyone, regardless of a person's past, and that the believer's life must remain rooted in the truth of God's Word. Dr. Manahan leaves listeners with a powerful perspective: trials should not merely be viewed as obstacles to escape. They can become evidence of God actively shaping character and preparing His people for what lies ahead.Key Scripture Themes MentionedJames 1 — Counting trials as joy and understanding their role in spiritual development.Genesis 1–3 — God as Creator, God's original intention for humanity, the Fall, and the beginning of humanity's need for redemption.Isaiah 43 — Humanity created for the glory of God.Psalm 115:1 — Glory belonging not to us, but to the name of the Lord.Matthew 10:28 — Jesus' warning concerning judgment and the reality of hell.Keywords / TagsDr Michael Manahan, Michael Manahan, The Great Contest, Kingdom Cross Roads Podcast, Kingdom Crossroads Podcast, TS Wright, CPE Summer 2026, Christian podcast, Christian author, biblical trials, why God allows trials, God tests believers, trials and tribulations, count it all joy, James 1, Christian suffering, sanctification, spiritual growth, Christian theology, biblical theology, creation versus evolution, creationism, Big Bang theory, thermodynamics and creation, science and faith, Genesis 1, Genesis 2, Genesis 3, Garden of Eden, Fall of Man, biblical creation, reality of hell, Christian apologetics, prison ministry, Christian discipleship, glory of God, Kingdom of God, Jesus Christ, biblical truthCall to ActionIf this conversation challenged you to see your trials differently, share this episode with someone who needs encouragement today. Subscribe to Kingdom Cross Roads Podcast so you don't miss more conversations with Christian authors, ministers, teachers, and Kingdom leaders.And be sure to look for Dr. Michael Manahan's book, The Great Contest, available on Amazon, and discover how the tests, trials, and contests found throughout Scripture can help us better understand God's work in our own lives.Like, follow, subscribe, and share Kingdom Cross Roads Podcast—and help us take biblical truth to the crossroads of the world.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Lea Oetjen und Holger Zschäpitz über historische Abschiede, SpaceX-Druck für Siemens Energy und die Zinsgewinner des Anleihenschocks. Außerdem geht es um DHL Group, Apple, Shein, Inditex, Microsoft, Halliburton, Valero Energy, PG&E, Edison International, Nvidia, MediaTek, Aon, KKR, Eli Lilly, Hyperliquid Treasury, Siemens Energy, Nordex, Sto, OHB, Vonovia, Aroundtown, TAG Immobilien, LEG Immobilien, Amazon, BMW, UBTECH Robotics, Zeekr (Geely Automobile Holdings Limited), Unitree Robotics, Renesas Electronics, NXP Semiconductors, Analog Devices, MinebeaMitsumi, Regal Rexnord, TE Connectivity, Amphenol, Walmart, Daifuku, Jabil, Toyota, BYD, Xiaomi, Xpeng, Tesla, Siemens, Schneider Electric, JPMorgan Chase, Crédit Agricole, Grenke und Volkswagen. Am 2. Oktober findet unser „Alles auf Aktien“-Summit in Berlin statt. Ihr wollt dabei sein? Wir verlosen Tickets: Schreibt uns eine Mail an AAA@WELT.de und begründet, warum ihr unbedingt gewinnen solltet. Falls ihr euer Glück nicht dem Zufall überlassen wollt, bekommt ihr mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ satte 50 Prozent Rabatt aufs Ticket – aber nur über diesen Link: https://veranstaltung.businessinsider.de/event/financesummit26/summary?rp=c6dc55d6-6f4f-4fb4-b75f-3f3501d84859 Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt. Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Workshop „Dein Longevity-Fahrplan", Mittwoch, 9. September, 19 Uhr, live inkl. Aufnahme & Workbook: [https://courses.optimum-you.com/workshop-dein-longevity-fundament]*WERBUNG: SPONSOREN DER EPISODE: everydays: Back to Routine Sale: Stell dir deine Routine selbst zusammen, je größer, desto mehr sparst du. Mit meinem Code sparst du zusätzlich - bis zu 30% sparen.Code: YOUROPTIMUM | https://www.everydays.de/youroptimumLIVADUR® kombiniert Kreatin mit den für die Wechseljahre ebenfalls sehr relevanten Supplementen Magnesium und Vitamin D3 in einem praktischen Portionsstick, aus dem du ein leckeres Getränk machen kannst. Für eine einfach tägliche Einnahme.LIVADUR (Kreatin + Magnesium + D3, in hoher Qualität aus Deutschland): Code YOUROPTIMUM*WERBUNG ENDEZurück zu deiner besten Routine (in und nach den Wechseljahren)Heute sprechen wir darüber, wie der Sommer so war und wie du jetzt ohne Überforderung zurück in deine eigene Herbstroutine findest.Das erwartet dich:Warum meine Schulter im Urlaub wieder eingefroren ist, und was Routine damit zu tun hatWarum Pausen und Deload-Wochen für deine Muskulatur völlig in Ordnung sindEhrlich über Alkohol: warum er in und nach den Wechseljahren schwerer zu verarbeiten istDie drei Hebel, die wirklich zählen: Bewegung (Krafttraining zuerst), Ernährung (Blutzucker, Entzündung, Darm), Self-CareWarum die meisten von uns kein Wissensproblem haben, sondern ein ÜberforderungsproblemErwähnt in dieser Folge:Workshop „Dein Longevity-Fahrplan"[https://courses.optimum-you.com/workshop-dein-longevity-fundament]DEINE VITAL FORMEL https://courses.optimum-you.com/deine-vital-formelKostenloser Download: Kraftroutine mit Körpergewicht: [https://courses.optimum-you.com/kraft-training-tips-download]Kraft & Balance Kurs: [https://courses.optimum-you.com/kraftundbalance]Barbaras Omega-3-Lieblingsprodukte: Norsan mit Code YOUROPTIMUM [https://www.norsan.de/shop/?norsan=1525]Neuer Schlafkurs mit BlackRoll (bald verfügbar): [Link folgt]Folge dem Podcast, damit du keine Episode verpasst, und teil sie gerne mit einer Freundin oder Nachbarin, die das gerade braucht. Wir hören uns in zwei Wochen.optimum-you by Barbara Birke ⭐ Bewerte diesen Podcast

Vanguard sorgt mit einem neuen Welt-ETF für Aufsehen: Der FTSE Global All-Cap UCITS ETF investiert in mehr als 7.000 Aktien weltweit und kostet gerade einmal 0,07 Prozent pro Jahr. Im Gespräch erklärt Vanguard-Chef Sebastian Külps, was den ETF vom FTSE All-World, MSCI World und MSCI ACWI unterscheidet – und warum Vanguard gerade jetzt die Preise deutlich senkt. Außerdem sprechen wir über die Zukunft des Altersvorsorgedepots, die Frühstartrente und die Frage, welche Rolle ETFs dabei spielen könnten. Und natürlich klären wir: Ist der neue Global All Cap möglicherweise der neue Welt-ETF für die Altersvorsorge? Risikohinweis: Dieses Material stellt keine Anlageberatung und keine Empfehlung zum Kauf oder Verkauf bestimmter Anlagen, Wertpapiere oder Strategien dar. Die regulatorischen Anforderungen an unabhängige Anlage- oder Strategieempfehlungen finden daher keine Anwendung. Der Wert von Anlagen und die daraus erzielten Erträge können schwanken, unter anderem aufgrund von Wechselkursänderungen. Anleger erhalten daher möglicherweise weniger zurück, als sie ursprünglich investiert haben. ++++++++ Kennst du die Risiken in deinem Portfolio? Mit dem extraETF Portfolio Tracker erhältst du volle Transparenz und tiefe Einblicke in dein Vermögen. Analysiere deine Aktien, ETFs und Fonds zudem mit detaillierten, individuellen Performance-Metriken, X-Ray-Analysen und vielem mehr. Teste den Portfolio Tracker jetzt kostenlos: https://go.extraetf.com/portfoliotracker ++++++++

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Lea Oetjen und Holger Zschäpitz über den gruseligen September-Auftakt, Kracherzahlen von Dell und eine Enzym-Aktie, die fremde Blockbuster in eigene Erlöse verwandelt. Außerdem geht es um SAP, CrowdStrike, Cloudflare, RWE, Merck, Apple, Credo Technology, MongoDB, GitLab, Palo Alto Networks, Nvidia, Broadcom, Shein, H&M, Fast Retailing, Next, Inditex, Associated British Foods (ABF), Gap, Roche, Johnson & Johnson, Merck & Co., Halozyme Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Alteogen, Schott Pharma, Gerresheimer, Ypsomed, West Pharmaceutical Services, Husqvarna, Toro, KraneShares Global Humanoid and Embodied Intelligence ETF (WKN: A41PZ8) und iShares Automation & Robotics ETF (WKN: A2ANH0). Am 2. Oktober findet unser „Alles auf Aktien“-Summit in Berlin statt. Mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ sparst du 50 Prozent auf dein Ticket – aber nur unter folgendem Link: https://veranstaltung.businessinsider.de/event/financesummit26/summary?rp=c6dc55d6-6f4f-4fb4-b75f-3… Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt. Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Processed food has gotten a pretty terrible reputation. We're warned to avoid foods with long ingredient lists, mysterious additives and chemical names we can't pronounce. “Ultra-processed” has practically become another way of saying “bad for you.” But is that a useful way to judge what we eat? After all, almost everything we eat has been processed in some way, and everything we eat — including perfectly natural food — is made of chemicals. So how can you tell which ingredients are worth worrying about and which ones just sound scary? Why do manufacturers put preservatives, emulsifiers, artificial flavors, stabilizers and other additives into food in the first place? And does a complicated-looking ingredient label actually tell you much about whether a food is healthy? Here to sort through the chemistry is George Zaidan, an MIT-trained chemist who created National Geographic's web series Ingredients: The Stuff Inside Your Stuff. He is also author of Ingredients: The Strange Chemistry of What We Put in Us and on Us (https://amzn.to/2Zykgij). Listen as George explains what some of those strange-sounding ingredients actually are, what they do, what the science says about their safety and why our instincts about “natural” versus “chemical” can sometimes lead us astray. If you have ever stood in a grocery store reading a label and wondered, “What IS all this stuff?” this conversation may change the way you look at what's in your food. PLEASE SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS MONARCH: Write your own money story with Monarch! Use promo code SYSK at ⁠https://Monarch.com⁠ to get your 1st year of Monarch Core half off at just $50 AQUATRU: Head to ⁠https://AquaTru.com⁠ now and get 20% off your purifier using promo code SYSK AquaTru even comes with a 30-day best-tasting water guarantee or your money back! WAYFAIR: Ready to upgrade your home for way less? Head to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Wayfair.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ right now to shop all things home and get your space ready for less.  QUINCE: Find your next Fall favorites at Quince! Go to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Quince.com/sysk⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada, too! DELL: Built for those who want better. The Dell XPS, built for you! SHOPIFY: It's time to turn those "what ifs" into CHA CHING with Shopify Today! Sign up for your $1 per month trail and start selling today at ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Shopify.com/realm⁠⁠⁠⁠ INDEED: Get a $75 Sponsored Job credit to help get your job the premium status it deserves at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://Indeed.com/PODCAST⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

-- On the Show: -- Daron Acemoglu, Institute Professor of Economics at MIT and a co-winner of the 2024 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, joins us to discuss his new book "What Happened to Liberal Democracy?: Remaking a Politics of Shared Prosperity" -- A Postal Service whistleblower warns that Donald Trump's mail voting order could cause millions of Americans to not receive their mail-in ballots -- John Roberts warns that Donald Trump is likely acting unlawfully by demolishing the White House East Wing to construct a massive ballroom -- Clinical psychologist John Paul Garrison highlights distinct involuntary arm spasms that Donald Trump displays during recent appearances -- Donald Trump repeatedly appears to fall asleep and makes rambling statements during an event about his medical cost policies -- Donald Trump insults conservative residents who oppose local artificial intelligence data center developments by claiming they want to be poor -- Court documents reveal that Russian influence operations use sleeper groups and meme factories to shape American political opinion -- On the Bonus Show: Updates from David's trip, and much more... ⚠️ Ground News: Get 40% OFF their unlimited access Vantage plan at https://ground.news/pakman

Greg begins by discussing a suggestion from their friend Scott to explore the origins of well-known street names in Bangkok. After briefly touching on familiar spots like Khaosan Road and Lumpini Park, Greg dives into the history of Sukhumvit Road. He notes it was originally a dirt track before being formally constructed and named after the fifth chief of the Department of Highways, who was notably the first Thai person to graduate from the storied MIT. They then confront a bit of trivia - is Sukhumvit actually the longest road in Thailand? Ed digs around online and finds that Phetkasem Highway is actually significantly longer than Sukhumvit. Next, Greg brings up Wireless Road, explaining that it earned its name because it housed the very first radio telegraph station in Thailand. He mentions there is even a small museum built on the original foundations. Following this, Greg explains that the nearby Saladaeng area got its name from a red pavilion located at an old railway station. Continuing their discussion, Greg reveals that Asok Road has ties to a famous Buddhist emperor named Ashoka, though it was officially named after a local landowner known as Asok Montri. He then shares that Phetchaburi Road is surprisingly named after a royal aunt rather than the province itself. Finally, Ed wraps up the historical segment by noting that Songwat Road translates to being drawn by a king, while the lengthy name Borommaratchachonnani honors a supreme royal mother.

This episode was brought to you by Mouser, our go-to source for electronics parts for any hobby or prototype. Click HERE to discover how additive manufacturing is revolutionizing cornea transplants. Become a founding reader of our newsletter: http://read.thenextbyte.com/ As always, you can find these and other interesting & impactful engineering articles on Wevolver.com.

In June, the most capable American AI models stopped shipping as public launches and started shipping through a government gate. Six weeks later the gate is open again — and the real fight has moved to the layer no gate can touch. A Chinese open-weight model rattled trillions out of chip stocks, Washington pivoted from gating American closed models to threatening bans on Chinese open ones, the industry mounted its largest-ever policy counter-mobilization, and an American frontier model literally broke out of its lab and hacked another company. Knee-jerk reactions, or the beginning of real AI governance? Navigation: Intro The Gate Opens The Kimi Shock The Escape The Counterstrike and the Petition Interlude — The Low-Background Books The Investor Reckoning Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show: Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Bertrand Introduction Welcome to Tech Deciphered Episode 80. This one, once again, will be all about AI, government, frontier models, and open weight counterstrike. A lot has been happening in the regulation space, in cybersecurity, in the launch of new models in the past, maybe just 6–8 weeks. It’s actually pretty insane how much happened. We believe it was time to do an episode to talk about where we are and maybe where all of this is going. Maybe let’s start with a summary of where we stand, all that June and July saga, so you, our listeners, can get up to speed if you are not already there. You want to start with some points? Nuno The Gate Opens Yeah. Again, to your point, the gate swings. The gate had closed. We had to prepare an episode for the gate closing, and then the gate reopened. Now we have a different episode. This will probably change again as we’re seeing there’s news every day. Let’s start maybe with the first 19 days of the gate closing. There was an executive order on June 2nd from President Trump that asked frontier labs to share models with the government, 30 days pre-release. It inferred the protected frontier model designation into that. Basically, it was effectively a de facto licensing agreement defined by an executive order of the President as of June 2nd. On June 9th, Anthropic launched Fable 5 and the famous Mythos 5 or Mythos. I’m not sure how you actually say it in English. Then on June 12th, there was an export control directive banning access by any foreign national. Since there’s no way to verify nationality in real-time, Anthropic had to switch the models off for everyone worldwide. Bertrand On this point, you could argue that there are possibilities to check IDs. Many services let you check IDs online. You can pre-check a flight by showing your ID. There are ways, it’s just that if you don’t want to follow what’s already available, because guess what? Maybe it slowed down your revenue growth, maybe it looks bad on you or whatever. My point is that there was actually an option. I think it’s already a decision from Anthropic to say it’s either on or off, but nothing in between. Nuno I think the point is they had no way implemented of doing it. If they implemented it, to your point, it would have hampered use in general. A lot of people wouldn’t have gone through that trouble of doing it. Anyway, long story short, in June 26th, the White House apparently asked OpenAI to limit GPT-5.6, so Sol, Terra, Luna, to only 20 vetted partners. Now, apparently, the trigger for a lot of these things that have been going on was that there was a jailbreak that was found by Amazon researchers. All of that led to this jumping around of, let’s close the gates. You have foreign nationals, and therefore, Anthropic got it out and said, “Hey, then we’re going to switch the models off until we can sort this out.” OpenAI was asked also to only allow it for certain vetted partners, et cetera. The government came in, closed the gates effectively, and said, “From now on, we need to be involved in this thing.” De facto regulation, there’s no doubt that this has imposed de facto regulation, certainly on the top players in the market. But then came the reversal. Bertrand, do you want to talk about the reversal, the gate swinging the other side? Bertrand Maybe I just wanted to say that as a user of Anthropic products, ChatGPT products, for the brief moments, a few days where Fable 5 was made available to the public before it was closed the first time, I immediately started using it. I must say it was a real issue to use it because the guardrails were pretty crazy. It would keep saying that my code was not okay, there was cybersecurity risk and stuff when I was doing absolutely reasonable development with absolutely no connection whatsoever to any cybersecurity risk, attack, detection, anything. Still, it would keep blocking me, degrading me to Opus 4.8 at the time. I just want to say this was already very hardcore what they were implementing, and not just hardcore, but in some ways, plain stupid for something that’s supposed to be super smart. It was totally unable to classify properly some of my work. I must say I was already disappointed. On top of it, the costs were insane. Half a day, I would reach my limits when I had the best plan you can get from Anthropic. My point is that there were some real serious issues when they launched Fable 5, even at that point. Nuno I had a similar issue. I used Fable 5 as well before they had to take it offline or take it off. I think the issue was really not that the guardrails failed. As you said, maybe the guardrails were actually too aggressive, but it was this jailbreak that caused the recall, apparently caused this knee-jerk reaction. Bertrand But my point is that it seems that it was not working either way. It would either overclassify something that’s absolutely not doing anything wrong, and it might fail to classify something that is actively trying to do some cybersecurity work. It’s a real issue of quality for a company that’s supposed to be at the forefront of quality of AI and everything. I think for me, there are already signs that something is deeply wrong. Nuno Then it’s reversed, right? We went the other way around. The government came out on June 26th and approved redeploying Mythos 5 to US organizations defending critical infrastructure, and then the export controls were effectively lifted on June 30th. July 1st, Fable 5 came back online for all of us to use. Shocking enough, with strings attached, that were different. They had some time to revise their commercial deployment of it along the way because it came back with some, “Now you have usage credits, but you have some limits on plan use, et cetera.” I’m like, “You guys, this was blocked. But meanwhile, you did have some time to do some commercial stuff around it.” Bertrand It was crazy. I’ve never witnessed any such crappy launch of any service whatsoever in 30 years in tech, it was so bad. Every day, they would change the terms of service. They would tell you it’s part of the plan. It’s not part of the plan. It’s part of the plan for three more days, and then it’s excluded. You have a special discount now, but then it goes back to full price. It was a total nightmare. I’ve never felt myself being so much mistreated by a company. I guess you saw the same, but when I started using the newest version of Fable 5, it was even worse, actually, I think. I couldn’t do any work with this crap. I let it go and work on the work I wanted it to do. It was simply not working. On top of it, you never know how long you are supposed to lose your credit, how fast. It was burning credit like crazy. Me, personally, I can say, very quickly, I actually stopped using it. I was like, “No, I cannot deal with this shit. My main model is back to Opus 4.8. I’m going to use Fable 5 for code review, but not anymore to control anything because I cannot trust it would do the job without stopping or changing models and stuff. I just cannot trust it.” Back to Opus 4.8 as my main model, I can say that my life was much easier. I use Fable 5 as a review mechanism, as a support mechanism, but not as the main mechanism. Suddenly, the guardrails were not so horrible anymore because it was used in a much lighter way, I guess. As a pain as a user, I think it was really bad. I don’t know your experience, but me, for me, it was unacceptable. Nuno I wouldn’t say it was as bad as yours in terms of just end-user experience. I think the terms of service switching back and forth, which went one further step, because then when they then launched Opus 5, they started making comparisons between Opus 5 and Fable so that people would migrate more and more to Opus 5 themselves, which is interesting. It’s like they’re saying “This is much cheaper. This is whatever. You’re not going to run of credits. You should use Opus 5,” kind of thing effectively. To your point, I don’t think they managed well the launch. They didn’t really manage it well. We’re moving people around. A lot of people are using this for stuff that’s like daily tasks, hourly tasks, anything that relates to code and co-work. It’s like, we need to have visibility on what your terms of service are going to be. Should I be using this new model or not? What’s happening to the other model? I don’t see it as negatively as you, Bertrand, but I see your point. It was clearly mishandled in terms of how they deployed it, how they were redesigning effectively their pricing scheme and their terms of service almost on a daily basis, at a certain point in time. We’re like, “Dude, there’s millions of people using this. You guys are making a lot of money.” Just moving it as it is. At this point in time, at the scale that these guys are at, it’s calling in people to say, how about we think through a class action suit at some point around pricing? Because you guys are changing the rules of the game all the time, right? Bertrand I don’t know if I need the class action, but for me, that joke that, “Let’s not rush too fast. The model is dangerous.” But still, they rushed the launch because it’s very clear that if they had enough compute capacity and stuff, they would not have to limit so much. They would not have to put so much cost per token and all of this. You can see that actually when they launch Opus 5, literally like 2, 3 weeks after, by most benchmark at launch, they tell you basically that, “You know what? Actually, Opus 5 is better than Fable 5 on 80% of the metrics.” They’re like, “What? Seriously? You couldn’t wait 2 weeks? Why did you even launch Fable 5 in the first place?” That’s another part for me that is quite literally insane, to be frank. It’s like, “Why? Why do you make us go through so much pain if it’s only to tell us after 2 weeks to…” “This new model, by the way, has less issues, less stuff, because 2, 3 times less is part of your plan, and it’s actually better by most metrics.” It’s like, “What’s going on here? What’s going on? Are you guys mad?” I don’t know. It was crazy. Personally, I still use Opus, now 5, as my main system and platform, Fable 5 for review, code reviews and the like. I don’t want to run into its stupid guardrails. I can see Fable 5, from my perspective, seems quite a bit smarter. I don’t know why they do this stupid benchmark showing you it’s actually worse than Opus 5. I guess they should have better benchmark if they want to demonstrate why you are supposed to pay 2, 3x more for a model versus another if it’s actually worse by most benchmark. Again, I still think it’s a huge mess from a marketing perspective, customer perspective. Me as a user, I really feel that they don’t want my money, and they couldn’t care less about me. This is even before everything else we’re trying to talk about. Nuno Yes. Maybe just to close the cycle on the reversal on the door opening the other way, finally, Commerce lifted the GPT-5.6 restrictions on July 8th, and then on July 9th, general availability across ChatGPT, Codex, and the API as well. What has this proved? It proved that now we have gating mechanisms, and certainly for closed models in the US, for sure. We had frontier models that were switched off worldwide in hours, and it took a couple of days, in this case, 19 days to restore them. There were concessions. Now we know that there were concessions around effectively institutionalizing that gate. Early government access to future models is, I think, now a given, certainly in the US. New safeguard frameworks are probably now having to be put in place. There are some stage limits now on who gets access to what for new models and how it happens. This voluntary executive order, so to speak, not really sure, has become effectively regulation enforcement path. It’s de facto regulation that now has been put in place. It has affected not just to the points we were making before, the access to these models, but also who gets access to these models, and actually potentially even pricing access to the models. It has probably some commercial implications as well as we just discussed along the way. Very significant. This is very significant. This is regulation, de facto at the table, imposed on the two largest players in the market by far by one government, in this case, the US government. This is significant. Actually, you could even allege it was imposed by the President because this was coming as part of executive orders. Really incredible. Pretty significant, fast, aggressive. It has created a regime that you could say it’s a regulatory regime, it’s a de facto regulatory regime. It has some significant pricing and licensing and commercial implications. It goes even beyond your classic regulatory framework. Very, very, very significant. Bertrand I don’t know if it goes beyond a classic regulatory framework. Nuno I think it does, because it has implications on who do you give access to? When government is saying you can only give access to these players, right? Bertrand Defense industry. It’s all over the defense industry. You cannot sell an F-35 like this. Nuno No, but that has commercial implications, Bertrand. That’s like you’re saying these are your customers, you go and use them. Bertrand That’s the defense industry. You cannot sell to Iran your F-35. No, that’s exactly the same story for me. Nuno No, no, no. It’s beyond that. These guys are saying when they came back, and they said, “For Mythos, you can make them available to these entities,” they were saying the first entities that are going to have access to the model. It has commercial regulatory implications. You’re saying these players are the first players that are going to have access to it. It’s no longer just defense concerns and these governments don’t have access to this. No, no, no. You’re saying to a company that is a private company, your models are only going to be used by these guys because I’m telling you so. It’s the other way around. It’s not even that you can’t sell it to Iran or whatever. It’s like you can only sell it to these guys. Bertrand Again, in the defense industry, if you’re a private company, do you think you can buy F-35 like this? No. Nuno No, no, no. But this is a private company, Bertrand. This is not a defense agency and a plane that is on whatever, with IP from the US, right? Bertrand Boeing is a private company, and they cannot sell the military equipment they manufacture. Nuno No, no, no. But the development of their IP was subsidized by agencies that belong to the US, right? That’s a different matter. It’s a matter of IP, right? This is not, right? Anthropic, their models are not owned by the US government. There’s no IP granted to the US government, to my knowledge. This has significant commercial implications. Bertrand Maybe, yes. Maybe on this. But I think there are already regimes to limit who you can sell to, and that’s decided by the state or the DOD. Nuno It’s the export control logic. The export control logic? Bertrand You have export control, and export control is Commerce. My point is that they are using existing tools, part of the government, to limit what can be sold. Selling chips, NVIDIA was limited in terms of where it could sell its chips. It’s not different either, but still there were limitations. If you are an ASML, you cannot sell to a private company in China. Many private companies cannot buy ASML products. This is a foreign company. This is a foreign company under pressure from US government. Nuno I understand, and I’m not a lawyer, but it feels different to me when you say you cannot export, this is export controls, to these countries, to these entities, et cetera, because they’re foreign et cetera. Then to say, “No, no, no. On top of that, these guys get first access.” That’s, for me, a significant shift. Again, I’m not a lawyer, so I’m sure there’s very intelligent people right now looking at this stuff and saying, “You can’t do this stuff, or not, or they can.” I don’t know. But it feels to me, it goes beyond the remit of export controls. It’s like you’re defining initial clients for specific use. Bertrand My impression is more like, “We can do this situation where we’re going to forbid you to give access to anyone outside the US or even in the US or limit even more.” Basically, it was, I guess, some gesture to go beyond that. That’s how they probably defined these 20 authorized companies. I don’t know. Apparently, there was also restrictions because I remember seeing that Anthropic had their own list of companies they would authorize access to Mythos early on. That’s apparently another thing that pissed off state government because there were companies in there that were considered close to the Chinese government. They were extremely unhappy that Anthropic didn’t ask, actually, for any guidance from the state government, but used basically their own perspective on who they should allow or not. I guess that was also part of why they got these serious restrictions. Nuno Anyway, now we have a regulatory environment that’s very interesting and exciting. Talk about the US not regulating. Bertrand To be clear, I don’t know you, but I’m not saying that I agree with any of this, to be very clear. I’m trying to explain and share some perspective, but I’m not in agreement on a lot of this. Nuno Yes, we were just describing what happened to the best of our knowledge. We’re having a discussion on what we think actually is happening and how it’s happening. We’re not really right now saying we agree or disagree with this. I think later in the episode, we can share some perspectives on what we think is actually happening and how there’s dimensions to this which are very geopolitical and very complex, which quite literally probably only God knows what’s going to happen. That was the gate swinging. There was a gate closing, then there was a gate reopening, and all of a sudden we have a gatekeeping system that has been created along the way. The Kimi Shock Along the way, moving to our Act 2, the world has changed, and we now have so-called open-source plays out there that are creating massive, massive shifts in the market. The Chinese models, in particular, with Moonshot AI launching Kimi K3, which is the largest open-weight model ever released. We’ll come back to the discussion around open-weights. I’m not sure all our listeners understand what that means, because there’s a debate now, should models be open weight or not, and how does that work? There’s been a petition as well signed along the way. Right now, we have open weight models that are out there that are huge. What that actually means very pragmatically is we now have open source models, lack of a better word. I know open weight and open source are not the same thing. You guys will have to bear with us during this episode. We’ll explain at some point the differences. But we have models out there that are open source that are significant. That are catching up with the closed source models, with the models by OpenAI, Anthropic. That’s significant because most of those models are Chinese. This is where the geopolitics starts getting really frazzling and we start playing 3D chess. Because everyone’s like, “These models are 5, 6 months behind.” Now people are saying, “Maybe they’re actually just 3 months behind, 2, 3 months behind.” If we, for example, decided to stop or slow down our model releases in the US by the closed source guys who are leading, it might mean they’ll catch up. What are the implications of that? Again, for you and I that are not necessarily experts in model development, well, the implications as a use case is if you want to use the latest models, and the best models start becoming these open source models, you’re going to use those models. Then you start using Chinese models. If you’re an American company, maybe you’ll have restrictions on the use of those Chinese models. But if you’re a European company, you probably won’t. What happens after that? Is the world going to be in the hand of Chinese models? Will that constitute effective competition to the closed models in the US? Will we have open models in the US that will scale as well? What’s going to happen? Bertrand I think it’s a really big question. It goes to some of the core of the issue. It’s that ability of Chinese models to basically challenge frontier models, not just being 6, 12 months late, but being 6 weeks late. Basically, no gap. Some will say that, yes, but OpenAI and Anthropic have even better models that are not shared and stuff. Yes, sure. But maybe the Chinese have the same models that they are not sharing right now. We don’t know. What is clear is that one is that open weight, as you said, two, there is a question of how it is marketed in the sense of, can anyone use these weights? Is there a license to use them? Yes, what we can see is that, for instance, typically there is a license for some of the biggest Chinese open-weight models you have to abide with. You might have a need for a commercial license if you are acting as a company leveraging this model to provide AI-informed services. If you use it internally by yourself, you’re okay. If you use it internally for your own internal company needs, maybe you are okay if it’s not your main business to do AI work. Anything else, a much bigger corporate providing AI services and stuff, you will probably end up having to pay a fee to be able to provide services around this model. My point is that it’s not just 100% free. Some of the Chinese models are 100% free to use, MIT license, Apache 2.0 license. But the biggest ones with the biggest weight that are truly frontier typically have a different license if you want to scale these models, providing AI in front. That’s one thing to keep in mind. Nuno Maybe just to make a very quick point, because people are like, when you talk about open models, what does it mean right now? In the context of this episode, open models mostly will mean open-weight models. How do those differ from open source? Open weight means that you release the weights to the public, which means that anyone can download, fine-tune, and run the model on their own hardware. It doesn’t normally mean that you also have access to training data, training code, or a truly open license. That’s the distinction to open source. Open-weight doesn’t mean that. For example, we’ve talked about Meta’s Llama in the past, and we also discussed in the past that their license agreement does have restrictions, certain players can’t use it, et cetera. The open model definition and open weights are really open-weight models that we’re talking about here, and they are closer to freeware binaries than to Linux, for those who understand the difference between that. It’s binaries that you can use and then use your own weights on it versus actually I can change code on it. I’m not going to be able to change code on this. When we, for the purposes of this episode, talk about open, we mention open weight, just to clarify that point to everyone that’s listening right now. Bertrand Yes, that’s a great point. One of the only players, as far as I know, who is truly open source is actually NVIDIA with their Nemotron-3 models. They’re actually following a special license to achieve that. They provide you the data, they provide you all the processes and tools, so you can easily post-train. NVIDIA is a big, big exception. It’s a very interesting player, by the way. We might not talk much about it in this episode, but I think for intermediate-size models built in the US, where you have access to everything in the deployment, it’s a very interesting alternative and maybe one of the best choices if you are a US company or a big corporate, and you want something trusted. Another piece of the puzzle to clarify is that when you use open-weight, it means that you can run them by yourself, or you can use a US provider to run them. If we are talking about Chinese open-weight, you can use the APIs they provide, but then the service is running in China, they might have access to your data. But because it’s open weight, if you run it by yourself or if you use a third-party provider based in the US to run it, then there is no access to your data by China or Chinese players. I think that’s a pretty important gap to understand. It means that these models are actually very, very low risk from that perspective if you run them on your premises or in the US by a US player. I think that’s something to keep in mind. You can also fine-tune easily these models to make sure they will behave in a way that, for instance, is not going to represent the line of the Communist Party on some topics. There are ways to make these models more neutral in their output as well. There are a lot of ways to make good use of them. By default, they’re already very safe, but you can make them even more safe. I think that’s some things to keep in mind. But again, it depends ultimately on the license and what you’re authorized to do and some fees you might end up having to pay. Nuno Why did this matter so much? Immediately there was a reaction from the market because people are like, well, if there’s much better stuff out there that’s much more efficient than it’s open, then it might be that all the demand that we are taking into account, for example, for chipsets actually isn’t real. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell into bear market territory. It went down by as much as 20% plus from the late June peak. The worst chip week since April 2025. Taiwan’s benchmark initially fell 6% plus, Japan’s 4%, TSMC dropped dramatically despite beating earnings and rising guidance. Basically, a huge amount of effect. Now, there’s a little bit the aftermath of this where apparently Moonshot ran out of GPU capacity. Maybe… Bertrand In just 48 hours. Nuno In 48 hours. Great for them, but at the same time, not great in the sense that maybe there was a misread by Wall Street of the Kimi effect, so to speak. Bertrand Completely. For me, that’s such a joke. It’s like, because you have an open source model, so what? I mean, you still need to run it. This is not a small one. 2.8 trillion parameters. Good luck running that in your garage, by the way. Nuno They misread supply, basically. Tough luck, right? All of that basically happens. Bertrand Maybe you want to talk about the Jevons paradox, because I think that’s a big part of the puzzle as well. Its one is they might not have the GPUs to run the inference on the model. They might have enough to build a model, but not enough these days to run inference, especially given how much with intelligent models, thinking models, you need way more inference than before. But on top of it, the cheaper you make it, the more you get to the Jevons paradox. Nuno Yes, Jevons paradox, for those who don’t know, is an economic term. It describes an economic phenomenon where technological improvements that increase the efficiency of a resource lead to an increase rather than a decrease in the total consumption of that resource. What that means is, for example, for chipsets, chipsets become so much better, and they are so much more efficient. You’re like, well, maybe normally in resource terms, that leads to decreased usage of that resource. But in this case, it actually leads to an increased use of that resource rather than a decrease. There’s more and more consumption of that resource. You need more and more chipsets because people actually need to do more and more stuff with it, although there are great efficiencies going into it. There’s the efficiency gain, there’s the cost reduction, and there’s the price-elasticity element to it. But basically, the adoption just continues going through the roof along the way. Bertrand In some ways, it’s like the price of energy. Coal went cheaper and cheaper, and people were asking the same question 150 years ago, now that it gets cheaper, there is not much money. No, no. Actually, what happens is that people find more and more use for coal. Homes are getting heated more. You have ships now using coal. You have manufacturing using coal. The cheaper it gets, the more use case you can develop, and therefore, you don’t need less of the stuff, you need more of the stuff. By going at scale to get more of the stuff, you also decrease price, making even more demand. It’s a very interesting phenomenon, but it’s not new. It is what happened for a while in the energy sector and some other sectors. Nuno We already started talking about the Chinese logic and what’s happening. Getting a little bit of a reality check on this. The Chinese models, and these are numbers from Open Router in July, Chinese models are at 46.4% of routed tokens and 35.7% for US origin. Again, more than a third of global AI usage now seems to be running on Chinese open models. This is significant, and it has a huge impact on the geopolitical scale of everything that’s happening. Also, the whole Chinese field is converging on open. Open seems to be a strategy, not just a nice thing that’s happening. It seems to be a Chinese strategy, so much so that you have players like Moonshot, DeepSeek, our old friends DeepSeek, Z.ai’s GLM 5.2, Minimax, and even Alibaba seems to be reversing and going open with Qwen. It feels to me this is becoming policy as well. Xi Jinping has personally endorsed the building of open-source AI, if it’s really open source, if it’s just open weight anyway, and this feels to be a jab at Washington, DC and the fact that the big closed models are coming from the US. This is now geopolitical 4D chess, right? We didn’t need this stuff. Bertrand To be clear, it’s the usual in tech. If you are not number one, you are number two, number three, your alternative is to go open source because that’s another angle that your competitor usually cannot follow without destroying its own business model. That has been the alternative for the past 20 years of most software projects. Here, what’s different is that it’s not the number one or number two player. It’s the US number one as a country, China number two as a country. That’s where it’s new. For me, what’s very interesting is the endorsement by Xi Jinping. I was waiting for something official, and it certainly didn’t disappoint. As you said, there was an immediate U-turn of Alibaba, who in the past… Nuno Surprisingly. Bertrand Yes, a little more like, “yes, we are going to close and stop open source. It was good while it lasted.” Just a few days ago, Qwen 3.8 Max was launched, and we are supposed to get the weight in a few days. We talk about the US administration policy and stuff. Yes, let’s not forget that in China there is similar stuff. Sometimes it’s totally invisible because you don’t see the directives, but they exist as much. Sometimes it’s more visible. Here it was quite visible. The difference in China is that if you don’t abide by the directive, on top of it, you might have to fear for your personal safety. It’s a different game, and that’s probably why the reaction is pretty quick, usually. That’s pretty interesting for me because it means that now you can bet for a while that China is going to play that game up to a point. I guess the point is if it’s truly frontier scale, you will have a special license that, yes, technically the weights are open, but you can not do everything you want with it. Two, you have a player like NVIDIA that I think will feel more pressure to provide even more high quality, larger models at scale going forward. Their largest Nemotron-3 Ultra model was, if I remember well, only around 500 billion parameters. I would not be surprised for NVIDIA to go into the two, three trillion range at some point. Because I think the US need a very clear US-born alternative open source. I think NVIDIA might be the best player for that. We will see if Meta goes back to open source. I think NVIDIA is one, very well positioned, but two, it’s also in their best interest. Because NVIDIA for now depends on just a few big hyperscalers as clients. If they can expand their clients to every S&P 500 companies, selling them directly hardware because now these companies can run a model made by NVIDIA, I think there is a very clear value proposition for NVIDIA to go in that space. Again, if you are number two, your differentiation, open source is often the answer. There is a true business as a business model for companies, because if it’s truly not just open weight, but open source, you can tweak it as much as you want, you can change it, you can change even the pre-training process. Because there is a lot of stuff you can do that really benefits you as a corporate, and you can reach a much better value by having more control on the model. Nuno We won’t spend a ton of time on it today, but like, again, if there’s a view that we are in a bubble, that the valuations cannot be sustained in chipsets, infrastructure platforms, applied AI, et cetera, today, this might be that beginning, where the valuations start being destroyed because you can’t keep a premium on just charging people for tokens and all that stuff if you have models that become more and more efficient and cheaper to use. Maybe just to close a little bit the geopolitical part of the discussion today, we won’t go into all the announcements from China because there were many, a lot of go back and forth with Alibaba by then. Xi Jinping made some announcements. You guys can check it online. Let’s move quickly to Washington’s reaction, which was from gating the US closed models to banning the Chinese open ones. There’s been as strong affirmations as one can get from the Office of Science and Technology Policy Director, Michael Kratzios, mentioning that they have information that Moonshot AI distilled Anthropic’s Fable. Basically, there’s been reverse engineering and stuff in the market. They’re basically copying. Bertrand I’m sorry to interrupt, but it feels like so much bullshit. It’s coming from Anthropic who has basically gotten access at scale to all the knowledge made by humanity, copyrighted or not. We’ll talk more about what they did with books. Then to claim after that that others cannot do to you what you did to everybody else. For me, it’s pretty big. It’s clearly unacceptable. The other piece is that everyone is doing distillation. It’s a very typical approach of every business model. You try other software when you are competing with somebody else. You try other datasets, you check what’s happening. It’s part of doing business for decades. Suddenly it’s not good for Anthropic. I personally have a lot of trouble to accept that. I think it’s totally unacceptable. The other piece of the puzzle will also go back. If these guys are so smart, if these guys have so much of the best model, why can’t they block by themselves distillation at scale? The only answer is that either they are morons, probably not, or they simply don’t want to because it’s going towards their business model. Suddenly, you book less revenues and stuff, or you put more friction, and therefore your customers don’t like it. Instead of doing it yourself, you ask the government to protect you, go out of business practice that is very typical. For me, it’s really, really, really not good. Sorry, we are going more in the opinion side, but I had to put that on the table. Nuno Yes, Fable went public finally again on July first. Question marks on whether distillation would only be possible from July first onwards or not. But a 15-day distillation to frontier, which is K3, launched on July 15th, would have been a Guinness World Record, as one of Moonshot employees actually mentioned. It’s very implausible and unlikely. Bertrand Or they shared the Mythos 5 with the wrong companies, who themselves shared with Chinese companies. We go back to maybe they didn’t have a good list. Again, it goes back to maybe they didn’t want to hurt their business model. Nuno Anyway, under the threat of sanctions, Moonshot, in any case, open-sourced the full K3 weights and technical reports. They open weighted it to become the largest open weight model in the world in terms of parameters. Beijing’s MOFCOM brands US threats as basically the US wanting to fundamentally control and be monopolistic around AI along the way. The administration bans Chinese hardware with an eye on the AI race, and Beijing warns of retaliation. That was July 27. Now we’re in a war between Beijing and DC. Bertrand Just to finish maybe on China, it’s important to know that they are building their own GPUs now. Huawei has pretty good, not to NVIDIA level, but pretty decent GPU hardware that they’re able to manufacture by themselves. A Chinese player of memory just got IPO’d a few days ago, CXMT. China is also developing their own memory. Again, not to the same level of quality that you can get from the West. But China is moving. It’s not just that they are building great models, it’s also that they are building GPUs and memory. That might be a few years late to the latest standards in the West, but there are definitely improvements. I also read, even on the tools to make manufacturing like ASML equivalent, there is definitely some work going on, and some improvements and some stuff will be visible. In some ways, the genie starts to get out of the bottle from the Chinese perspective. Nuno I’ll put a stick on the ground. I don’t think it’s a matter of if, it’s a matter of when will China surpass and have a lot of this tooling on their own side, and not just the software layer, not just the frontier models. I think it’s also going to be around infrastructure and platform. Good luck to everyone. Let’s see how the race continues. But it’s definitely this is a geopolitical thing right now. It’s definitely a race. The Escape Maybe moving to what happened in just 2 weeks or a week and a half. The escape, there was some jailbreaking going on, and the narrative on safety has totally switched. It’s not still significant enough that’s like, “Oh, we saw a nuclear plant going, whatever.” No. But still, it is significant. Hugging Face, the AI company, disclosed an intrusion, and it was driven end-to-end by an autonomous AI agent system at machine speed, running for days before detection. Now, this is where it gets really cool. OpenAI takes attribution on that. They initially said it was just a little bit, sorry. Then they said, actually, it was worse than that. “Oh, it broke out of an isolated sandbox.” “Oh, no, actually, it was more than that, and it went into other systems as well.” Bertrand Truly, the genie out of the bottle. Nuno No, but this is where it gets really cool, Bertrand, right? Because it actually, Hugging Face contained the intrusion by running a Chinese open-weight model, GLM 5.2. This is beautiful, right? Bertrand Yes. You know why? Because they couldn’t even run their own defense because both Anthropic and OpenAI would not let them access their latest models with the guardrails off. When they tried using it for defense, the latest from Anthropic, from ChatGPT, they would tell them, “No, this is too dangerous what you’re asking us to do.” Preventing an intrusion, helping defend you. No way we are going to do that. Nuno No. Let’s use the Chinese models on our infrastructure. Bertrand We have no choice but to use the Chinese models to run. More than that, we don’t let you use our models to defend yourself, but our not yet released models that run without guardrails, they can attack you. This is probably the most insane from that perspective. Nuno The Chinese models came to the rescue. Bertrand For me, that’s a perfect example because Hugging Face is a very visible company in AI in open source. But anybody who is not at that scale is not going to get some support from OpenAI or Anthropic when this happens. Maybe these guys won’t even recognize they did anything wrong. You will be left to defend by yourself because they won’t accept to support you. Because remember, if you want the better model that is able to defend you from cybersecurity perspective, no way. If you are not one of the few top 20 companies or so, as defined, you are left defenseless. Again, we are going back to opinion, but for me, it’s so shocking what’s happening right now. I’m very glad we have alternative open source to be able to defend ourselves because right now, good luck getting defense services if you are a smaller business and individuals, and you need support from Anthropic, OpenAI. Nuno Now, even self-described AI optimists are saying, “This is scary now.” Like Walter Isaacson, who wrote all the famous biography books. There’s now discussion around the AI Kill Switch Act, bipartisan thing that’s coming across from Texas and California, a potential bill that’s coming in. We’ll see if that works. Now let’s get an off-switch. I’m like, “Cool.” As if that’s going to solve the problem, because you have open-weight models on the other side catching up, right? Bertrand Yeah, sure. Bring in clueless politicians from Congress to solve our problems. Yes, sure. Nuno Anthropic came to the table, helped build and said they built some regulatory machine on their side, and now they’re getting bitten by it, and they’re part of the offending players in that market. Now there’s all this debate and all this discussion around open weight and around slowing down AI and et cetera, which is our next section. You wanted to say something, Bertrand. Tell us. Bertrand Don’t forget, because this advertisement for OpenAI was just too good. Our AI attacked some other companies, and not just one, but three, actually. Let’s not forget the progress. Great ads. Then I came and said, “You know what? AI also hacked businesses.” You’re not the only one hacking around with a crazy AI out of control. You’re not the only one. We want our advertising. For me, it was shocking that on one side, unreleased models that you let run wild. On the other hand, you have released models that you put crazy guardrails on top of it, so the defender are defenseless. I’ve never seen anything like it, and I really hope that there will be as little regulation as possible, quite frankly, to make sure anyone can defend themselves and have the best tool at their disposal, not just a few well-connected big corporates. This is really, really shocking. The Counterstrike and the Petition Nuno Now the empire strikes back, so this is counterstrike, the petitions. In several days, we have now a bunch of petitions. The first one was the open weights letter. Bertrand, do you want to explain to us what the open weights letter is? Bertrand Yeah. I think it was great. This was released by Jensen Huang, first ever post on X, 11 million views. Congrats, Jensen. Co-signed with Microsoft, Meta, c actually was probably the initiator of this letter. Very good letter saying, “Hey, we need open weight. This is not a joke. We need that. You cannot block open weight.” Because that’s the rumor we are getting that potentially open weight could get blocked. I think they are making the case, “You know what? Hey, we absolutely need that as an alternative. You cannot block it.” They can keep their closed models, but don’t force a closure of the open weight models. As I said before, it’s actually a great model for NVIDIA because NVIDIA doesn’t want, probably rightfully so, to be dependent on just a few frontier models, their best customers. They want a variety of customers. They have a big interest actually to defend open weight and to invest even more. They have great researchers, are a great company. If one company is about to do really kick-ass work, I think it’s them. They are defending. What’s great is that it’s not just them. It’s basically most of big tech in the US and outside the US, from a Linux Foundation to a Microsoft, the Palantir, an IBM, a Dell. It’s a who’s who of the industry except Anthropic. Anthropic didn’t sign that. I guess they hate open source so much. If I look at 20 years ago, it feels like Microsoft, after all, was very kind to open source. You remember what was said by Microsoft at the time. It’s clear there is one company against open source. OpenAI signed the letter. Honestly, I don’t know what to think. Do they really believe in it or was it just a way to show that they are not like Anthropic? I don’t know. But for the rest, I think it’s genuine because it’s actually in their best interest. I hope they will be heard. Then a second letter came, the Open Secure AI Alliance, NVIDIA-led and again, the big tech companies from Microsoft, IBM, Palo Alto Networks, Databricks, Palantir, all those, but not present, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. Here it’s to say, “Hey, we need a secure approach to AI. Open should be part of the equation.” guess what? The worst AI-caused security incident to date was actually caused by closed frontier models that were not even available to the public. While again, not providing you access to even the latest closed model for cybersecurity use case. Nuno I would highlight the NVIDIA open source NOOA framework, Apache 2.0 licensing agreement, Microsoft contributed the MDASH, SpaceX AI contributed Grok Build. Cool stuff. There’s some cool stuff happening around that. This is more than a letter. This is an alliance. Apparently, they’re contributing all this stuff, we’ll see. Yeah, cool stuff. Same day. Same day, Amodei has an answer, right? Bertrand Yeah, same day. They say, “We never advocated for a ban,” which, again, opinion on my side is entirely bullshit. This guy has been crying wolf against everybody else, and especially against open source. You can see him doing testimony in Congress against open source. I think they are doing everything they can behind the scene to block open source in the US or in the world if they could. I think, yeah, obscurity is not good safety. I’m a big fan of open source in general, and I’m also a big fan in AI. I think it’s now Anthropic, mostly against the rest of the world. I think OpenAI is mostly on their side, to be frank. They don’t want to acknowledge it so much, but they have shared interest, and they have shared probably position. Nuno Why would you? I don’t feel as strongly as you because I think Anthropic is a private company, right? The same thing with OpenAI. OpenAI, you could say it’s a nonprofit that has a for-profit. There’s still that complexity in there. Bertrand No, they can do what they want with their own product. But to block others is where I’m not okay. That’s the part I’m not okay. Nuno What Dario Amodei is proposing is more enforcement, right? He’s basically saying you need to do even tighter controls on advanced chips flowing to authoritarian states, enforcement against industrial-scale distillation, whatever that means, right? Bertrand Yeah, which he could do, but all by himself. He doesn’t need the government to do that. Nuno Mandatory safety testing for all sufficiently capable AI, open and closed, right? He’s basically saying, “Okay, I don’t agree with the open weight stuff effectively,” right? He’s just putting it under a different banner. “I agree with this extra regulation.” then obviously, David Sacks responded and say, “Hey, it’s like, bans don’t work for weights. Why do they work for chips?” It’s like, magically, chips are more controllable and bannable. Whatever that is. Then our friend Mark Zuckerberg, just to be clear, goes on the other side as well, because he also has to have a view. He has to have a view that is the rebuttal of both of the other guys. Bertrand I feel he’s a bit flip-flopping because he was very pro open source 2 years ago, and the latest Meta models went closed source. Now I think he’s back open source. I don’t think he has a very strong spine on the topic, but it’s good to see that he’s not a doomer. That for me is great. He’s showing how AI can be a source for progress, a source for entrepreneurship, source for freedom. I think that’s very exciting to hear that. We need to hear more of it. By the way, that’s not what you hear in China, for instance. AI is very positive in China. It’s in the US with the doomers that you hear this discourse, and people get worried as a result. I’m glad that he was pushing for a more positive vision and for support of open weight, open source initiatives. But let’s see what they really truly open weight going forward. Nuno But that’s been his position because I guess he’s standing behind. He thinks open weight is going to be the best way to compete, right? Bertrand Yeah, but he closed his latest model, so let’s see. Nuno Yeah, so it’s flip-flopping, as you’re saying. Then we see the latest petition from last week. Bertrand The true Empire striking back. Nuno Yeah, the true Empire striking back as of late last week. Maybe this is Return of the Jedi, where we discover the father, “I’m your father, Luke.” That’s the pacing petition. The pacing petition is we need to pace AI. There you have initially employees from OpenAI and Anthropic that circulate this petition. Actually, Dario did sign this petition originally. It wasn’t signed originally by Anthropic, but by him. But you’ve heard that now Anthropic and OpenAI as companies have also signed this petition, right? Bertrand I think they have signed as companies now. It started mostly by Anthropic researchers with some OpenAI researcher and a tiny part from other companies. But it was mostly Anthropic internally led, at least potentially internally. Maybe it was controlled by Anthropic all along, I don’t know. But it started officially as Anthropic employee-led letter. Nuno What does this letter actually say? Is Anthropic and OpenAI, are they willing to slow down themselves? Or are they asking President Trump to go around the world and tell President Xi that he needs to slow down and ask his guys to slow down? What’s the play of this letter? Bertrand It’s crazy, but for me if you want to slow down yourself. Do whatever you want. Don’t force others. Don’t use the power of the government to control others. Of course, it’s easy to push others to slow down when you are yourself at the very top. You have most money, most resource. You know you are going to win any regulatory framework because that’s how it works with this type of framework. It’s purely self-interested. You are probably not thinking well about these topics. If you truly think it’s a good idea, from a personal perspective, you are well instrumentalized if you sign this sort of stuff, because at the end of the day, they would be the winners. I certainly, personally, don’t want a company dictate what is my future in AI as an individual, as a business person. I don’t want them to control me. I want competition. I don’t want them to unfairly control AI because they managed to do some regulatory capture. I feel that’s exactly their game plan. These guys believe in their stuff, and they want the regulator to end up being the one deciding for us. Sorry, we go back again on the opinion piece, but it’s tough not to share an opinion on this topic because it’s, from my perspective, very scary. Nuno I think this is a push to further regulation, not less. All these letters and alliances, this is definitely a push for more regulation. In that environment, just to be very honest with you, we’ll talk about the investor impact in just a bit, et cetera. But in that environment, again, China has a huge advantage. In that environment, if it’s all captured in regulation capture so soon in this battle where OpenAI and Anthropic have an advantage in the US, et cetera, I’m like, what happens to all the other frontier labs and all the other players that are coming around? Bertrand What’s crazy is to even think that, yeah, maybe you can regulate capture in the US. But then how do you do that to Europe? How do you do that to China? Europe probably will always welcome regulatory capture because they love regulations. But China is going to build to their advantage to the max. They are not crazy. They are smart on that perspective, they won’t accept this type of, quite frankly, dimwit argument, or you can call it regulatory capture. We’ll see. But for me, this makes no sense from a global competition perspective. This can make some sense from capturing the revenue in the US market. But then that means you are going to destroy the US AI environment compared to China. That is not acceptable. That also means that you are going to destroy our freedom as individuals, as business owners to develop and live in a business world that ultimately is controlled by one or two business companies that didn’t win the marketplace through their own business success, but won it through regulations. That for me is really not acceptable. Interlude — The Low-Background Books Nuno Now, maybe for an interlude, and we have to cue in the music, imagine like Severance music, like hallway or a bit of a palate cleanser from all the policy stuff that we’ve been talking about, all this policy heaviness. Let’s move to another kind of heaviness, one of your favorite topics, which you, Bertrand, discovered, I had no clue this was going on, around books and around Anthropic. Bertrand It’s so horrible. From a company that keeps presenting themselves as the adults in the room, the careful ones, the ones that know better than you about what to do in this complex AI and dangerous world. What we discover is that actually all along, they were buying and destroying books. They will buy books, scan them, destroy them, all of them. They will do that with any books, including rare books. Of course, this was not supposed to come to the public’s attention. This was one of these top secret projects, but obviously it came out. Yes, they were scanning books, millions of them, including rare books, and they didn’t care about destroying them at the end of the process. Because from a regulatory perspective, if you destroy the books, it’s not considered a copyright infringement, apparently. This is coming on the back of some judgment a few years ago that were showing that it’s okay for you as a corporate to scan and use the result if you don’t keep a copy of the book. It’s one of these crazy regulations happening based on a single judgment that push you to do. For me, it’s like, you know this book from decades ago, Fahrenheit 471? We’re talking about book burning. It’s book destroying, crunching. It’s so shocking. Nuno There are two things, right? First, the legal strategy, which is what you’re saying, because by purchasing a physical copy and converting it into one private digital copy and discarding the original, Anthropic pursued this cleaner legal argument for fair use copyright compliance. As you said, there was a federal judgment at some point on this. The other reason is actually operational. If you disassemble the book, and you feed loose pages, it’s much faster to scan books. You are destroying the book effectively anyway operationally. I think to your point, probably this came from a legal standpoint, not just the operational one. But even from an operational standpoint, it does make sense that they would have disassembled the book. Bertrand But some people have shown you can go very fast without destroying the book. It’s really not so critical. Two, you could make an exception if the book is rare. For that 1% of book that is rare, I’m not going to have this approach. I’m going to have another approach. But for that, you will have to care about books and not just care about building AI. Nuno This is the episode, as you guys have heard by now, that we’re trying to spit stuff at Anthropic. Bertrand To go back this is the same company saying, “Hey, guys, it’s bad to distillate my work. I’m the one scanning book at scale without asking author permission, without asking publisher permission, to be clear.” Nuno But just to be clear, Bertrand, we’re pissed off at everyone. We’re pissed off at Anthropic, we’re pissed of at OpenAI as well, right? We’re just pissed off in general at this moment. Bertrand At this stage for me, the more clear-cut company that is in the wrong is, from my perspective, at least, is Anthropic. OpenAI might be a fast follower, but I will say so far, they tried to be a bit more. Nuno But at this pace, Bertrand, who knows? Maybe next week we’ll be more pissed off at OpenAI. Something will come out. This episode is a mix of tragicomedy, like a Greek tragedy with some comedy in the middle or the other way around. It’s a slapstick thing that will end up in tragedy. I’m not sure. The Investor Reckoning Anyway, maybe switching to our final act, which is the investor perspective. What does this mean for investors like ourselves? There’s a lot of things going on. There’s the debate around the IPOs of Anthropic and OpenAI, which now, with all this uncertainty, might be under significant weight. There’s a lot of other discussions that we browsed through that there’s potential IPOs going forward on companies like the Moonshot AI company actually IPO-ing in the next 6 months as well. It’s very unclear what the IPO landscape looks like. Bertrand There’s been a lot of Chinese IPOs, actually, when you look at what’s happened in the past few months. Nuno Anthropic, OpenAI as potential IPOs, there’s all this question marks now. When will that happen? How will it factor in? All that’s happening around regulation as regulation is moving at the speed of light, which is for once something that’s very different than what we’ve seen before. There’s obviously SpaceX AI, which is already taking into account that price. It’s already a public company in there, and it’s under SpaceX, which is now a public company. Obviously, that’s already being factored in some ways. Bertrand Yeah. SpaceX AI has been very smart to acquire Cursor. It was a very smart move because Cursor is one of the leading companies in terms of automated code source development with AI. They had great models on their own. They’re bringing development data to SpaceX AI Grok. I think it was a great move. Nuno We have now people like Google delaying Gemini 3.5 Pro in terms of launch window. There’s stuff actually happening in the market where things are taking their own path. There’s uncertainty commercially, there’s uncertainty at regulation level. You have new players that have come out of nowhere that are making all these waves like Moonshot. We have all these… We had calculated probably a month and a half, 2 months ago, there had been 67 new frontier labs funded. All of these, we haven’t seen any much coming out of them. When some of this stuff starts coming out, will that also create disruptions in this market? Who knows? Bertrand Look at Thinking Machines, for instance. Thinking Machines led by the previous CTO of OpenAI, they released some pretty interesting open source models, actually. Very good quality for a first launch. Now it looks funny to say, but nearly on par with the top Chinese open source models. Nuno We have several investments in the space. humans& has made some recent announcements, which is quite interesting as well. We’ll see what actually happens in the market, but even more disruption probably will come in actual products in a form of product and commercial, on top of all the geopolitical mess that we discussed through the entire episode. If you’re an investor, how the hell do you underwrite an investment right now in early stage, mid-stage, late stage, et cetera? I think my answer is very carefully is how you underwrite it. Bertrand On your advice of being very careful to underwrite it, let’s not forget what happened to our boy wonder, Leopold Aschenbrenner of Situational Awareness. I guess he didn’t listen to you in terms of being careful because part of the instability in the stock market was actually coming from his hedge fund. These guys were leveraged 3, 4x going after the hottest of the hottest AI stocks, and margin calls, and all their public investment is gone just to answer their margin calls. I think it’s clear that the AI bet is… Personally, I’m very excited, and I think it’s the future, and you need to spend time and think about and invest in it. At the same time, it’s a bet that is not an easy one to follow. We go from GPUs to memories to equipments to power generation. All of this is not transitioning in an easy, organized manner. It would be boom and bust going there. He’s probably one of the first big-scale fatalities. The other big-scale fatality was the stock market in Korea, plunging 40% in a month. Definitely, all of that we discussed about was, on the background, you had the stock market going up and down pretty crazily the past few weeks. Nuno Everyone’s being affected. Everyone, you have your 401(k), you have your pension fund dependent on these equity stocks. Everyone’s seeing the effects of this volatility right now very aggressively. We do wish Leopold… Hopefully he’s on honeymoon right now because he got married, I think, this weekend. Hopefully there will be… Bertrand To none less than an Anthropic Chief of Staff. Nuno His wife is the Chief of Staff of Dario, is that it? Bertrand To Dario, yes, as far as I unders

In this episode of The Impostor Syndrome Files, we talk about career pivots, self-discovery and why waiting for the perfect time can keep us from pursuing what matters. My guest this week is Niki Lazaridou, who has held a number of entrepreneurial and senior leadership roles.Niki shares her diverse career background and the journey that led her to finding her purpose. In our conversation, we discuss the balance between having enough pressure to motivate us and having so much pressure that we shift into survival mode. Niki introduces the Greek word meraki, which describes putting a piece of your soul into what you do, and explains why curiosity, effort and personal investment can create a deeper sense of purpose.Finally, we explore how our core values can help us distinguish impostor syndrome from a work environment that is genuinely out of alignment. Niki shares how identifying directness, empathy and freedom as her three core values helped her better understand her emotional reactions at work, and why saying our fears out loud can release pressure and create stronger human connection.About My GuestWith 15 years of experience as an entrepreneur and working in senior positions in a variety of corporations and organizations, Niki has been positioned as a Pool of Experts Team in the United Nations, Senior Risk Manager in PWC, and Program Manager in Publicis Sapient.Currently serving as Strategy Manager at Minc Sweden, she is commissioned to redesign the entire incubator model in order to foster collaboration in the Nordic Region.She is also a Mentor in Entrepreneurship at Harvard University, as well as a professional advisor at MIT, currently driving her own collaboration initiative between Harvard and CERN in Geneva.Niki is also a member of Forbes Women connecting to a global network of women leaders, founders, and professionals.As an entrepreneur, Niki has worked on projects with MIT Media Lab, ABC, BBC, Puma, Amazon, Peabody Essex Museum, Blue Lagoon Iceland, Body Worlds Exhibition while also being published in Vogue, Elle, Marie Claire, Boston Globe, i-D, Cosmopolitan.She has delivered workshops & Academic Teaching at IKEA, Hyper Island, Apple, and BA courses in Media Technology at BTH. Her education focuses in Software Engineering, Media and Communications, and AI.~Connect with Niki:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nikilazaridou/ Website: https://www.nikilazaridou.com/~Connect with Kim and The Impostor Syndrome Files:Join the free Impostor Syndrome Challenge:https://www.kimmeninger.com/challengeLearn more about the Leading Humans discussion group:https://www.kimmeninger.com/leadinghumansgroupJoin the Slack channel to learn from, connect with and support other professionals: https://forms.gle/Ts4Vg4Nx4HDnTVUC6Join the Facebook group:https://www.facebook.com/groups/leadinghumansSchedule time to speak with Kim Meninger directly about your questions/challenges: https://bookme.name/ExecCareer/strategy-sessionConnect on LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimmeninger/Website:https://www.kimmeninger.com

Join Larry Spargimino with Billy Crone as he acknowledges that Trump has done much good. Did Crone vote for Trump? Yes, he did. He called Trump a "slow burner," Harris a "quick burner." Crone voted for Trump because under him, he knew he would have more freedom and time to evangelize. A couple of months ago, I did shows with Crone on "Trump and the Stargate Prophecies," showing Trump's fascination with AI. Significant is the fact that Pres. Trump and John Trump, an MIT graduate and engineer, were both fascinated with Tesla's inventions and applications for the future.

AI is making execution dramatically cheaper. That changes what makes someone valuable.In this episode, I explore the difference between productivity and agency: the ability to decide what should happen next, act with incomplete information, and take responsibility for the outcome.We get into:Why AI compresses time, skill, capability, and organizational effortWhy doing the wrong thing 10x faster is still wasteHow AI is narrowing some skill gaps and expanding what individuals can executeWhy judgment and direction become more important as output gets easierThe productivity trap of generating endless plausible, unnecessary workWhy high agency also means knowing when to stop, kill a project, or ignore the trendGenerative AI and professional writingChatGPT reduced completion time by 40% and increased output quality by 18% in an MIT study of professional writing tasks.Generative AI in customer supportAI assistance increased productivity by 14% overall and by 34% among novice and lower-skilled workers.AI task-completion horizonMETR research finds that the length of software tasks frontier AI agents can complete with 50% reliability has historically doubled roughly every seven months.Personal initiative and agencyA randomized trial in Togo found personal initiative training increased small-business profits by 30%, versus a statistically insignificant 11% from traditional business training.00:00 Why agency matters more when execution gets cheaper01:49 What agency actually means03:08 The four kinds of AI compression04:50 The expanding AI task horizon05:56 Productivity vs. agency07:02 The AI productivity trap07:55 Can agency be trained?09:21 Restraint as a form of agency10:20 End“Productivity improves the speed of the vehicle. Agency chooses where the vehicle goes.”“As AI makes action cheaper, restraint becomes more valuable too.”Noy & Zhang — Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative AI (Science)Brynjolfsson, Li & Raymond — Generative AI at Work (NBER)METR — Task-Completion Time Horizons of Frontier AI ModelsCampos et al. — Personal initiative training in Togo (Science/PubMed)Brand Runner is for creative leaders and operators who want sharper thinking on creative productivity, creative operations, AI-enabled workflows, and the systems behind better marketing work.Subscribe: https://brandrunner.substack.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/fabien-hameline/Work: https://fabienhameline.com/Music licensed through Soundstripe. Code: YVH8LJJIBF2ALQBJ, 2QEXTYLSD6YTPJPV, BHCMGFYBTJXRGAXE, MUIP3GXFUWVOVIRV, 76EX3ND0QS49IVKIResearch referencedChaptersQuotesLinksFollow Brand Runner

What happens when one of the world's leading technology institutions concludes that responding to generative AI requires more than deciding when students should or shouldn't be allowed to use it? In this episode, Sharona and Boz dig into a new report from MIT's Ad Hoc Committee on AI Use in Teaching, Learning, and Research Training, which calls on the institution to reconsider what students need to learn, how courses and assessments should be designed in an AI-aware world, and even the role that grades and grading play in education. The report raises questions that will sound familiar to alternative grading practitioners: How do we keep the focus on learning rather than credentials? What kinds of assessment actually provide evidence of student learning when AI can complete many traditional assignments? And how might backwards design, productive struggle, reflection, agency, and mastery help educators rethink their courses for a rapidly changing educational landscape?LinksPlease note - any books linked here are likely Amazon Associates links. Clicking on them and purchasing through them helps support the show. Thanks for your support!MIT AI Committee Full ReportMIT Public Facing Page for the AI Committee ReportMIT AI Report Calls for Alternative Grading, More Social Learning, Article, published on Inside Higher EdJosh Eyler Post on BlueskyMIT Says AI is Forcing a Rethink of College Itself, Article, published on ForbesResourcesThe Center for Grading Reform - seeking to advance education in the United States by supporting effective grading reform at all levels through conferences, educational workshops, professional development, research and scholarship, influencing public policy, and community building.The Grading Conference - an annual, online conference exploring Alternative Grading in Higher Education & K-12.Some great resources to educate yourself about Alternative Grading:The Grading for Growth BlogThe Grading ConferenceThe Intentional Academia BlogRecommended Books on Alternative Grading:Grading for Growth, by Robert Talbert and David ClarkSpecifications Grading, by Linda NilsenUndoing the Grade, by Jesse StommelFollow us on Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram - @thegradingpod. To leave us a comment, please go to our website: www.thegradingpod.com and leave a comment on this episode's page.If you would like to be considered to be a guest on this show, please reach out using the Contact Us form on our website, www.thegradingpod.com.All content of this podcast and website are solely the opinions of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily represent the views of California State University Los Angeles or the Los Angeles Unified School District.MusicCountry Rock performed by Lite Saturation, licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

*** Wichtige Info: Beim ersten Upload ist etwas schief gelaufen und wir haben eine gekürzte Folge hochgeladen. Hier findet ihr nun den vollständigen Podcast. *** Warum sind wir alle Sternenstaub? Wann verschluckt unsere Sonne die Erde? Gibt es Aliens? Was ist vor dem Urknall passiert? Gibt es eine zweite Erde – und falls ja, wie kommen wir dahin? All das haben wir Anna Frebel, Astronomin und Professorin am MIT gefragt. Und sie hat so großartig geantwortet, dass wir diesen Podcast allen empfehlen, die gerne in den Nachthimmel gucken – auch ohne Teleskop.

Guten Morgen! Hohe Energiepreise treiben die Teuerung in Deutschland weiter nach oben. Mit der Entlastung an der Tankstelle ist es vorerst vorbei. Die Inflationsrate erreichte im August 2,9 Prozent. Stärker gestiegen sind die Verbraucherpreise in Europas größter Volkswirtschaft zuletzt im Jahr 2023 mit damals 3,7 Prozent. Volkswirte rechnen mit weiter steigenden Verbraucherpreisen. Derweil haben Russlands Präsident Putin und Chinas Staatschef Xi in Kirgistan die guten Beziehungen ihrer Länder betont. Dort feierte die zentralasiatische Republik ihren 35. Jahrestag der Unabhängigkeit von der Sowjetunion. Gleichzeitig ist Kirgistan Gastgeberin des Gipfels der Shanghaier Organisation für Zusammenarbeit. Das zweitägige Treffen geht heute zu Ende. Es werden auch noch Erdoğan, Modi und der iranische Staatschef erwartet.

For years, the debate about AI was mostly about what it could do, whether it could write, make convincing art, or beat us at our own games. The questions now are older and harder. What makes us human? How do we find meaning? If a machine can do more of the things we thought made humans special, where does that leave us? These aren't new questions, but rapid advances in AI have made them feel a lot more urgent. Even Pope Leo XIV chose artificial intelligence as the subject of his first encyclical. Greg Epstein, the humanist chaplain at Harvard and MIT and author of Tech Agnostic, has been asking these questions long before the machines showed up. He argues that we're living in a moment with too much certainty, and that the most useful thing we could embrace right now might be doubt. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

For over 30 years, Jim Kwik has coached Hollywood, professional athletes, political leaders, and Harvard University on how to learn faster and think sharper — and in this episode, he tackles the question sitting underneath so much of modern life: what happens to your mind muscle when every cognitive task gets handed off to ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini? The good news: your brain, like your muscles, adapts to the demands placed upon it at any age or stage. Jim explains why frustration and failure aren't obstacles to brain training, shares his personal top ten list of brain-building habits, ranging from racket sports to language learning and volunteering.  He also delves into an MIT study examining the impact of ChatGPT and introduces his own framework for using AI as a genuine cognitive partner, rather than a replacement for human brain power.

Aman Advani is Founder and CEO of Ministry of Supply, a clothing brand using science to make the world's most comfortable clothing. The company was founded in 2012 with the mission to incorporate fundamental engineering and performance principles into clothing staples, ultimately building a wardrobe that both looks good, and feels comfortable.Prior to co-founding Ministry of Supply, Advani spent 4 years in management and non-profit consulting with Deloitte and TechnoServe. He holds a BSIE from Georgia Tech, and half an MBA from MIT, was a member of Forbes 30 under 30 list and BBJ's 40 Under 40 list, and has been featured as the cover of both ASB and Boston Magazine. Most recently, Aman was named to the NRF's 2023 "List of People Shaping Retail."In This Conversation We Discuss:[00:00] Introduction[01:58] First reactions to AI tools and Lovable[05:04] Co-founder's non-technical background[07:39] Sponsor: Klaviyo[09:45] Using Claude for CRO and analytics[13:07] Sponsor: IntelliGems[15:16] Build vs buy for AI customer service[19:12] How much human oversight remains[20:17] Sponsor: eFulfillment Service[22:04] More efficiencies from AI tools[24:22] Building an internal production system[27:05] Why AI makes agencies more valuable[29:42] Callouts[29:52] Getting teams comfortable taking the demo[32:08] Testing fast without overthinkingResources:Subscribe to Honest Ecommerce on YoutubeMachine Washable Everything ministryofsupply.com/pages/home-2  Follow Aman Advani linkedin.com/in/amanadvani Book a demo today a intelligems.io/ Get your free demo klaviyo.com/honest Lower scale costs today eFulfillmentService.com/honest If you're enjoying the show, we'd love it if you left Honest Ecommerce a review on Apple Podcasts. It makes a huge impact on the success of the podcast, and we love reading every one of your reviews!

Da ist sie nun also: die neue Saison! Nach dem kurzen Sommerurlaub starten die Ligen – wie auch wir – gut erholt, neu aufgestellt und nach ansehnlichem Ballsport lechzend in eine neue Runde. Wir haben zwar gerade erst den Schweiß und Schmerz der zurückliegenden Saison und der dazugehörigen Weltmeisterschaft abgewischt, aber hey: Es muss ja weitergehen. Das Geld macht sich nicht von allein und Fußball ist ja schließlich ein Entertainment-Geschäft … oder? Hat da jemand Peinlichkeiten – äh – Urlaub gesagt? Felix hat Toni da vermutlich auch nicht so richtig verstanden, weil er gerade noch damit beschäftigt ist, sein Internetkabel im neuen Bremer Domizil selbst zu verlöten. Klappt semigut, aber das ruckelt sich noch ein. Ob sich die Königlichen auch schon eingeruckelt haben, irgendwer den FCB entthronen kann (nein!) oder ob die knapp zehn Fantastilliarden Transferausgaben des Liverpooler FC vielleicht eine bessere Saison bescheren können, kredenzen euch Toni und Felix wie geschmierten Nutella-Toast. „Mit oder ohne Butter?“ bleibt am Ende dieser Folge hoffentlich die einzig offene Frage. Los geht's also: Die neue Luppen-Saison sei hiermit eröffnet. Wir freuen uns! Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? [**Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte!**](https://linktr.ee/EinfachmalLuppen) Für Werbe- und Partnerschaftsanfragen im Podcast EINFACH MAL LUPPEN meldet euch hier: podcastbrandcooperations@seven.one

Unser heutiger Gast ist in Hamburg geboren und aufgewachsen. Mit 15 Jahren trifft er eine Entscheidung, die sein weiteres Leben prägen wird. Er geht allein nach Sri Lanka, lebt dort in einer einheimischen Familie und macht in Colombo sein britisches Abitur. Anschließend studiert er Wirtschaft, Religionswissenschaften und Psychologie in Großbritannien, Deutschland und Frankreich, unter anderem an der Sorbonne in Paris. Nach dem Tsunami kehrt er 2006 nach Sri Lanka zurück. Für die deutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit hilft er beim Wiederaufbau. Doch schon nach wenigen Monaten steigt er wieder aus. Ihn stört ein System, in dem große Summen verteilt werden müssen und die tatsächliche Wirkung aus seiner Sicht zu oft in den Hintergrund gerät. Er sucht nach einem anderen Weg. Diesen Weg findet er im Unternehmertum. Gemeinsam mit Felix Langguth gründet er 2009 Lemonaid Beverages. Die Idee klingt einfach und ist gleichzeitig ziemlich radikal: Getränke herstellen, die hervorragend schmecken, fair gehandelte Zutaten aus Ländern des Globalen Südens verwenden und mit jeder verkauften Flasche soziale Projekte finanzieren. Heute beschäftigt Lemonaid mehr als 100 Menschen und verkauft jährlich viele Millionen Flaschen Lemonaid und ChariTea. Über den gemeinnützigen Lemonaid & ChariTea e.V. sind seit der Gründung rund zehn Millionen Euro zusammengekommen. Das Geld fließt in Projekte, die Menschen wirtschaftliche Chancen und mehr Selbstbestimmung ermöglichen. Dabei ist unser Gast einen bemerkenswert eigenständigen Weg gegangen. Er hat Angebote großer Investoren ausgeschlagen, lebt einen großen Teil des Jahres mit seiner Familie in Sri Lanka und führt sein Unternehmen seit vielen Jahren über Kontinente hinweg. Persönlicher Reichtum scheint ihn wenig zu interessieren. Wachstum dagegen sehr. Denn seine Rechnung lautet: Je größer Lemonaid wird, desto größer kann auch die gesellschaftliche Wirkung werden. Genau diese Verbindung interessiert uns heute. Seit über neun Jahren beschäftigen wir uns in diesem Podcast mit der Frage, wie Arbeit den Menschen stärkt und welchen Beitrag Unternehmen für eine starke Gesellschaft leisten können. Die Geschichte unseres heutigen Gastes berührt dabei einen Gedanken, der sehr nah an Frithjof Bergmanns ursprünglicher Idee von New Work liegt: Arbeit kann mehr sein als Erwerbsarbeit. Sie kann Ausdruck einer Überzeugung sein und gesellschaftliche Veränderung ermöglichen. Wie baut man ein wirtschaftlich erfolgreiches Unternehmen, bei dem gesellschaftliche Wirkung von Anfang an Teil des Geschäftsmodells ist? Wie führt man mehr als 100 Menschen über Kontinente hinweg und schafft eine Kultur, in der Purpose im Alltag tatsächlich gelebt wird? Und wie viel Wachstum braucht ein Unternehmen, wenn Wachstum gleichzeitig mehr gesellschaftliche Wirkung bedeutet? Fest steht: Für die Lösung unserer aktuellen Herausforderungen brauchen wir neue Impulse. Daher suchen wir weiter nach Methoden, Vorbildern, Erfahrungen, Tools und Ideen, die uns dem Kern von New Work näherbringen. Darüber hinaus beschäftigt uns von Anfang an die Frage, ob wirklich alle Menschen das finden und leben können, was sie im Innersten wirklich, wirklich wollen. Ihr seid bei „On the Way to New Work“ – heute mit Paul Bethke. [Hier](https://linktr.ee/onthewaytonewwork) findet ihr alle Links zum Podcast und unseren aktuellen Werbepartnern

Die eigene Führungskraft zu führen, ist ein unterschätztes Tool im Alltag. Gleiches gilt für das aktive Managen der Kolleg*innen. In dieser Folge erfährst du anhand von 10 praktischen Tools, wie das gelingt.Denn Führung ist keine reine Top-Down-Frage: Wir alle führen täglich. Mit unserer Expertise, in Projekten oder im Austausch auf Augenhöhe.Podcast-Host Vera Strauch beleuchtet zwei Führungsrichtungen, die ständig gebraucht, aber selten benannt werden: Managing Up (Einfluss auf die eigene Führungskraft) und Managing Sideways (Einfluss im Kolleg*innenkreis). Erfahre, wie du deinen Gestaltungsspielraum voll ausschöpfst, Reibungsverluste abbaust und informell in den Lead gehst – ganz ohne Machtspiele oder Ellenbogenkultur.

What did Dr. Deming really mean when he said to "cease dependence on mass inspection"?    In this episode, Balaji Reddie and host Andrew Stotz unpack why one Ford manager's decision to fire his inspection team missed the point entirely. They explain how inspection can help leaders understand and improve the process, rather than simply sort good from bad.    They also explore why Deming's 14 Points must be understood as a system, including his evolving call for cooperation and win-win thinking among employees, customers, suppliers, and even competitors. Whether you are new to Deming or have studied his work for years, this conversation offers a sharper way to think about quality, systems, and improvement.   TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.0 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today I'm continuing my discussion with Balaji Reddie, an educator and trainer in the teachings of Dr. Deming and quality management generally. Balaji, how are you doing today?   0:00:25.1 Balaji Reddie: Oh, I'm doing good. We're meeting after a small little gap, and in the interim I think a few things happened. One of the major things, I think you and I were really happy to see that Bill Scherkenbach sent us a lovely photo. So Bill, if you're listening to this, thank you so much, of course we thank you for the photo. We mentioned the last time or rather when we were speaking that I said that there used to be a group of people that used to meet over the weekend. I don't know what the actual protocol was, but all of the so-called core Deming people, you know, like Gipsie Ranney and Nida Backaitis, I hope I'm getting the names right, Barbara Lawton. And I remember Henry Neave saying he was a part of that. So I didn't see that in the photo. So, maybe one of the weekends he was there over in America and so he was there because he mentioned this. And so Bill very kindly said what it was christened. It was christened the Cosmos Club. And then he shared a photo. So Bill, thank you so much. And also helping us identify most of the people in that photograph. If sometime we could share it with the Deming Institute, if they could show it as part of the... If ever we convert this into some kind of video later on with some slides and things like that, they could add that in.   0:01:53.0 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, it's still wonderful.   0:01:53.7 Balaji Reddie: That was wonderful. Yes.   0:01:54.9 Andrew Stotz: It's a great picture. In fact, I'm gonna just make sure that I download it for today's episode.   0:02:00.9 Balaji Reddie: Yes, yes.   0:02:01.7 Andrew Stotz: Because I'll supply it to the Institute and ask Bill if we can use it. Let's see.   0:02:08.4 Balaji Reddie: Yeah, I mean, I presume that he would want us to ask, but he is very big-hearted. I think he wouldn't mind at all.   0:02:14.7 Andrew Stotz: He looks like a spring chicken in that picture. [laughter]   0:02:17.2 Balaji Reddie: Oh, yeah, all of them. There was Joyce Orsini too there. It was nice to see the whole jing-bang gang, as they call them, [laughter] the Cosmos Club. But wonderful. So, yes, so last time we were discussing point number one and we saw his interpretation in the broadest sense of constancy of purpose. I shared also what he was saying towards the end of his life that he said, "Create and publish the statement of the aims and purposes of the company or other organization." So he was envisioning that it's no longer one company. It's a family of companies working together. And so there has to be something that binds all these companies together because today's business is very complex. The family is actually globally dispersed. And so there has to be a common thread that links all of these organizations together and that has to be the statement of purpose. Why do we exist? Each could have their own, you know. Because that's what Deming said in the word interdependent components of a system. And interdependent means being independent and mutually dependent simultaneously. So independent does not mean isolated. It means autonomous, that means you go by yourself. You could have your own purpose, but you need to align it with the purpose of the companies you're actually contributing to, which is amazing. So he asks us to look at it that way. And he said that the purpose should be to impact people in the broadest sense of the term. And you, in fact, brought that up, that quality, and we saw what he meant by quality. And then I think we discussed the purpose of educational institutions, et cetera, et cetera. What should they be?   0:04:07.5 Balaji Reddie: So that was point one. Now we get to point two. And I'll start with the original wordings which he wrote in 1986. So let me just pull that up here. He says here that, "Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic age." And then he very specifically states, "Western management must awaken to the challenge, must learn their responsibilities and take on leadership for change." Now, let's look at it both ways because in 1990 he reworded this completely. But let's get back to what he meant in 1986, the new philosophy. Now, what was the new philosophy? What did he mean then? Recently I heard, or I think I saw, Dr. Joseph DeFeo, that is the current CEO of Juran Institute, release a version of the 14 points, or rather saying that these were Dr. Deming's 14 points. And I saw what he wrote there about point number two, which was his interpretation. Now, when I look deep, actually, it looked more like Dr. Juran's interpretation of the 14 points. Incidentally, talking about Dr. Juran and the 14 points, it's no secret that Dr. Juran always said that Deming did not speak much about management, he spoke only about statistics, blah, blah, blah. But there was, if you know, part of the inner circle of Dr. Deming was Dr. Myron Tribus. And Myron Tribus, if you know, was a director at MIT for some time, right? And around the time Deming was there at the Center for Advanced Engineering Study. And when... He, of course, went and met Dr. Juran to speak to him about the 14 points, and then they had a discussion for half a day on the 14 points, and Dr. Juran agreed with every single one of them. He said, "Yeah." He said, "He's spot on." But then he said that he never spoke of management then, and so he stuck to his version that he taught statistics to the Japanese. Anyway, let's leave that aside.   0:06:19.0 Balaji Reddie: But when he spoke about point two, and that's what Juran's interpretation was, that the new philosophy was quality should be the basis for running a business. That was the new philosophy, right? And he said that top management, of course, Deming always said that top management should be involved because unless that happens, nothing happens inside the company. So the new philosophy, what now we interpret is what Dr. Deming was trying to say in 1986, was "quality is the basis for running an organization," right? And quality, again, what we discussed last time, in the broadest sense of the term, not just of a product or a process, but the way you conduct yourself as a business, as a people. So that was the new philosophy. And he said that you should take on leadership for change, and he aimed it at Western management at that point in time, right? So that was the 1986, and he goes on to explain that, saying that we are living with commonly accepted... Because he was trying to shock the Americans at that time, right? If you try to realize when they woke up to quality in the 1980s, primarily to be... I mean, to their credit, to the American businesses, that they were doing a lot of course correction. They realized that they had done things wrong for 20 years, and a lot of course correction started happening, and they started seeing benefits. So they started interpreting that as improvement when actually it was just a correction. And I think Deming wanted to bring in that shock treatment to them, and he said improvement is not enough, right? So at that point in time, that new philosophy was basically that, okay, you're doing it right, but it's not enough. And that's why it has to come from the top. So top people have to be involved. And that was how they interpreted this.   0:08:12.1 Balaji Reddie: And we also looked at it that way. But in 1990, he changed the wordings of the point two, and that was in light of what he had started professing, which was a System of Profound Knowledge. So I'll just read out what he wrote in 1990. He says now, "Adopt the new philosophy of cooperation and win-win, in which everybody wins. Put it into practice and teach it to your employees, your customers, your suppliers, and" why not "your competitors." So that was, I think, the new philosophy. Much of the stuff, if you start seeing, Andrew, when I look at all the 14 points, the 14 points have to be interpreted through the 14 points.   0:09:06.7 Andrew Stotz: Right.   0:09:07.8 Balaji Reddie: You need to understand the purpose of each point. You need to understand that they're a system. And that's why you can't just read them sentence by sentence and want to implement them, if you know what I'm trying to say here. They're a system by themselves. So you need to interpret them the right way and through the 14 points... I don't know if I'm making sense to you, but that's exactly how these are. He wanted it to be that way. So you can never tell that you've understood it completely. You're getting me? You're learning something new about it every single day. And as you start looking at things around you through the lens of Profound Knowledge, you will see things differently. And sometimes you see some gaps with the sentences that Dr. Deming was uttering, and then you say, "Okay, okay, this, this, this, I understood it now. I need to make this correction." Right? And so you can never say that I've completely understood them. I mean, after all these years, still reading Out of the Crisis, still doing the series with you, has been a catharsis for me. It's revisiting these things all over again. This, despite the fact that I've been teaching this regularly to my students for the last 20-plus years, it's still new for me.   0:10:24.4 Andrew Stotz: And so could I describe what you just said about interpreting it within the system is that really, that's the thing about systems thinking, is that you can no longer look at an individual part. Every time you get a deeper meaning or understanding of an individual part, that changes the way you view the overall system and the interconnectedness of everything.   0:10:48.6 Balaji Reddie: Exactly.   0:10:48.9 Andrew Stotz: Where life would be much more easy if we could just, "Okay, I understand that one thing deeper and deeper. I can make a control chart better and better and better."   0:11:01.1 Balaji Reddie: So, it's crazy. And this realization came on me way back in, I think around '98 or '99, when I was teaching this, the 14 points, for the third or fourth time. I think I mentioned this in episode one and two, where I told you that it was very easy for me to teach the works of Philip Crosby, very easy to teach the work of Dr. Juran, because they gave methods, they gave steps. But Dr. Deming didn't give anything. You just couldn't show the wording on the slide and get away with it. You had to explain what he wanted us to do. And then, I mentioned this before, you can go back and listen to that episode, but I said that it suddenly struck me, "God damn it, these points are a system." And when I was describing this and I explained this to Hazel Cannon, and she said, "We call this in Deming-speak an 'aha' moment. You had your 'aha' moment." She said, "That's the beauty." She told me once that in the middle of the night, at 3:00 in the morning, she understood what he was trying to say, and she called up Dr. Deming.   0:12:11.3 Balaji Reddie: And he was very, very patient. He listened to her. And she said, "I'm sorry. I..." He said, "I knew you'd understand." That's all he said. So he used to be very happy when people used to call back and suddenly say, "We realized it now, what you were trying to say then." So it's a moment of realization. So this point to... If you read some of the notes that he gave to the Japanese in 1950, and incidentally, it's they who made the notebook and then he added on to it, if you know, Elementary Principles of the Statistical Control of Quality, first edition and then the second edition. And when they made the first edition, they had actually done this without his permission. But when they told him that we made these notes, they thought that he would be a little upset because of copyrights, blah, blah. But instead he was so happy that they'd done that, he actually helped them with the second edition. And if you read those notes, a lot of things there where he was speaking about cooperation, about understanding people. So that may not have been explicitly stated by him in his lectures in Japan, they understood it. Right? And that's a very... I don't want to sound communal here, but a very Asian way of looking at it. Because our languages are very metaphorical, so we always look for different meanings to the statements being uttered. And we always look out for what has this person actually not said, which I... Or rather, yeah, has not said, which I have not heard, but I need to hear. Right?   0:13:46.5 Balaji Reddie: So that's amazing, how they looked at what he was saying. I'll give an instance here where he talks about the use of the control chart, and he says that you can use it for training a worker. And then if you see that before and after training, there's been no change in the control chart, well, then the worker's attained his optimum. Then use that worker somewhere else. He talks in a very positive way about understanding people. And then going back to what we spoke in our second episode about the principles of leadership, it comes back there, that choose people in the right way and optimize all of their aims, hopes, et cetera. So coming back here, the new philosophy, basically, now we can interpret it as what he intended it to be in 1990. He said, "Win-win." But the original wordings are also... You don't replace it, you add on to it, right? So we look at it this way, that he meant that quality should be the center point of running your business. People at the top should be involved. And now we talk about cooperation, win-win. And he says this, "Teach and practice this." Now, all these things are easier said than done. We know that. But we should make an attempt. So employees, your customers, your suppliers, and your competitors. Sometimes it could be funny, right? You go up to your competitor and you say, "Look, I think we've done enough of this, going at each other's throat. Let's get together to do something." And obviously the other person will say, "What's the agenda?" They'll think you have some hidden agenda. So it's gonna be difficult when you start doing this. But I think that's become... Slowly people are warming up to that idea of being close to your competitors and learning with them and from them. Right? We don't look at them as a rival in the true sense, trying to cut the other guy down and things like that. But that's the way it is. And if you say that it's a cutthroat thing, but we need to have some things in common before we decide to branch out and go our own way. Right? So there has to be some kind of a cooperation so that win-win... But main thing is to win, that is, everyone wins. He says, "Some may win less than others, but we all win just the same." So the whole purpose was that. Yeah.   0:16:02.4 Andrew Stotz: It's interesting because I remember hearing that when I was younger and the first thing is cooperating just within a team. The second one is cooperating maybe within a department. Another one is cooperating within a business. And then... That's already hard enough to get to. And then he talked about cooperating within an industry. And of course, there are anti-trust laws in America, which he wasn't talking about colluding on prices to take advantage of the position against the customer. But he was also... I think if we look at AI right now, the development of artificial intelligence, and to what extent could the industry work together to safeguard, for instance, or to understand the development of the energy needed to do this, you know.   0:16:54.4 Balaji Reddie: Yes.   0:16:55.3 Andrew Stotz: Or how do countries across the world work together to make sure that one doesn't have an unfair advantage with AI or with energy or that type of thing? So, yeah, it was definitely interesting when I first heard it. But as I look at it now, I get what he's saying about the industry cooperation.   0:17:15.3 Balaji Reddie: Yes, I saw this in our country, in India, where you had the rival mobile service providers getting together and realizing that the hardware needed was the same, the software would be different. So they got together and created a company, you heard that right, a company, that set up mobile communication towers. So there are no multiple towers everywhere for each mobile provider. There's one set of towers, and it was a separate company. And by the way, that company went on to win the Deming Prize.   0:17:48.0 Andrew Stotz: Interesting, interesting. It's interesting that the concept for point number two is... And sometimes I read it and I think, "Adopt the new philosophy." It's kind of obvious, isn't it?   0:18:04.1 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. [laughter]   0:18:05.8 Andrew Stotz: And that's where part of what you're talking about, about understanding all of it through the Deming 14 points lens.   0:18:13.7 Balaji Reddie: Right. Yes.   0:18:14.9 Andrew Stotz: But I can also think... I wanted to highlight back for those people that weren't around at that time. I graduated from university in 1989. I went to work at Pepsi. And so Out of the Crisis came out about 1986. And I remember during my years at university, the Japanese were just killing the American car manufacturers. And the motorcycle companies were killing... Honda and the others were killing Harley-Davidson.   0:18:43.2 Balaji Reddie: Right.   0:18:43.5 Andrew Stotz: Even to the extent that Harley-Davidson and others went to the government to try to get Reagan to give them tariff protection, which he did, in fact. But there was a huge debate I had in class, I remember, about protection versus competition. And it just highlights what was going on. And so Out of the Crisis, as you mentioned, the title, just the idea of shocking people to say, "We're in a crisis," I think at that time it was really apropos. And also the other part is he's talking about Western management.   0:19:21.1 Balaji Reddie: Yes.   0:19:21.4 Andrew Stotz: Western management. And now you look at... Japan was really doing great at that time. And now we have Japan and China that's also made huge strides. And so it's just so fascinating that he was directing it at Western management for sure, that we've got to fix things. And sometimes I look back and I think, "Oh yeah, Western management learned and improved," because we've got so much innovation going on in America as an example and all of that.   0:19:52.6 Balaji Reddie: Right. Right.   0:19:53.4 Andrew Stotz: But sometimes I look at the developments of the Chinese or Japan and I think, "Hmmm...Did we learn? Did we learn?" Look at the trade balance, look at the amount of debt, look at that in the US and you think, "I don't know." I'm curious, how would you score it?   0:20:09.5 Balaji Reddie: Yeah, I mean, that's just what I had to say. So the whole approach towards this whole thing being holistic, not just looking at it from a very narrow point of view and realizing that we need each other, we can't do without... We call them competitors, but they are also helping us do a better job. They're pushing me to look out for what I'm good at and I don't have to put somebody else down to show myself as big. And if I contribute to the industry in a very big way, not only do I gain, others gain, and if I share, then they would also share with me, right? So that realization, I think, is coming in. And if you think about this, it was very interesting, the mathematician by the name John Nash, if you remember him, he actually postulated this in terms of mathematics in 1950, and he got a PhD from Princeton for this. Now, I would give full credit to the jury listening to his dissertation, defending his thesis, that you had to do this because, interestingly, he gets a Nobel Prize for that in 1974. It took 24 years for the world to figure out what he was trying to say. And you want to go read that, he was thinking win-win.   0:21:41.7 Balaji Reddie: So I often wondered if Dr. Deming, John Nash, did they know each other? Obviously, they didn't, but they were thinking and saying the same thing in two different parts of the world. He was doing that here in the US and Deming was talking about this there in Japan, and he was talking about telling the Japs that Japan must see itself as a system. And so all their companies actually work together. We see them as versus; they don't see each other as versus. You're interestingly saying this about the two-wheeler companies, the bikes... In India, we had just one or two bikes before the four Japanese companies came in. It was Suzuki, Honda, Kawasaki, and Yamaha. And they tied up with different Indian companies. Now, of course, after a long time, they've all gone their separate ways. But as a teenager, I remember these. And the funny thing was all four motorcycles were different and all four sold well. All four. And they sold in different parts of the country.   0:22:43.8 Balaji Reddie: I can tell you this firsthand because just after I completed my engineering, I was looking for a job. So I had some time to myself and my mother's friend, she ran a market research agency and she just called up one fine day and said, "Would Balaji care to do this market research for me? It's about bikes." So I had to travel north, south, east, west and tape a conversation with bikers asking them which motorcycles they liked among these four. And these four, the plants were set up at four different places in our country. So north, south, east, west, typically, you know how vast India is in that sense. And the one... It was very interesting. The bikes that were made in the north were sold very well in the south, and some made in the south were sold very well in the west. It was crazy. But there was, of course, one motorcycle that would always stand out and people would say that, "Yeah, this is the one which really..." But that would always be the case. But by and large, everyone did well. Looking back, I say that, wow, they were practicing this without us knowing it.   0:23:51.6 Balaji Reddie: And even now, if you know, I don't know whether this happens outside of India, but Suzuki and Toyota in India have collaborated with each other to use the car body, if you know what I mean. The insides would be their own inside. Suzuk... Maruti is the name of the Indian company that's tied up with Suzuki Motor. So you have Maruti Suzuki and Toyota. They have common bodies, names are different, but the inside is Toyota technology and Suzuki technology. So they've decided, they just realized that they need each other, right? And they're doing exceedingly well, both. Just both.   0:24:33.7 Andrew Stotz: Sharing the platform.   0:24:36.0 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. It's crazy. And you don't start bothering so much about trying to defend yourself, right? You go ahead and focus on what you're good at. So this point two, the new philosophy, what it meant before and what it means now, I would not say it replaced it, but it's just added on to it, where he said that top management should be involved. That was the new philosophy, that quality has to come from the top. Western management waking up, et cetera. The Western managers to see quality is the basis for running your organization. It should be your strategy. And he just says as an extension of that strategy, we need to get together and cooperate and think win-win. So that's the new philosophy. It takes us, he always says, a new reward system would come in. It would be a better applied science. You can read that in The New Economics, that what is the purpose of this entire new philosophy, The New Economics, where he explains this.   0:25:39.2 Andrew Stotz: Yeah.   0:25:41.4 Balaji Reddie: In a nutshell is point two. So the purpose was to shock the Western management at that point in time, but also in a different sense, try to open the eyes of people even now that please don't think small, think big, right? The new philosophy tells us look beyond the boundaries that you've artificially created and see what you can do with the others, including your competitors. And don't look at them as adversaries, rather than partners in something that both of you will grow. Maybe not evenly, but you will grow. So that was...   0:26:18.7 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. One last thing for me on that is just the idea that he reinforces the focus that quality is, the key is the customer in that process of quality.   0:26:33.8 Balaji Reddie: That's right. That's right.   0:26:34.4 Andrew Stotz: As opposed to it's not about quality, quality, quality, control charts and QC circles and all that. It's about what is quality in the eyes of the customer and how do we better deliver that. So that always gave me so much comfort when I learned what he was teaching, that he wasn't just... It wasn't all about quality and tools. It was about quality in the eyes of the customer.   0:27:00.8 Balaji Reddie: Right. So that's why he said tools are just 3%. And you can be 100% excellent at the 3% and still run out of business, right? He always said that. So you need to apply this in the broader sense of the term. So that was...   [overlapping conversation]   0:27:08.5 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. And the problem is if you don't understand the system and you don't understand the whole teaching, then even if you're good at the tools, you may misinterpret from the tools.   0:27:25.6 Balaji Reddie: Yes. So, right, so that was point two.   0:27:30.4 Andrew Stotz: Whoo!   0:27:31.3 Balaji Reddie: So now we come to point three. [laughter] Now point three... Yeah, we just got I think 15-odd minutes, but I'll cover some part of it and I think we'll continue with this.   0:27:34.0 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, yeah. We good. I got time.   0:27:42.5 Balaji Reddie: Point three. Now this again has been so crazily misinterpreted. All right, so I'll start with the wordings once again, I'm referring to the document what he wrote. And he says now, "Cease dependence on mass inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for inspection on a mass basis by building quality into the product in the first place." Now if you look at that, he was talking much about the act of inspecting and the entire activity-based and saying don't depend. The keyword was "cease dependence," because if you hear what happened in one funny case where the manager from Ford went back and just sacked all his inspectors saying Dr. Deming said we don't need inspection. But that was, I think, overstating it. But nevertheless, the keyword is dependence. Don't depend on inspection. And then he said, build quality into the product in the first place. And then he quotes Harold Dodge who said you cannot inspect quality into a product. Quality is already there. Inspection just reports what's happening. It doesn't tell you where... You know.   0:29:00.4 Andrew Stotz: Yep.   0:29:03.4 Balaji Reddie: Andrew, can you hear me?   0:29:05.8 Andrew Stotz: Yes. Keep going. So what you're talking about is the idea of thinking about quality not from the perspective...   0:29:20.2 Balaji Reddie: Yeah, we got disconnected.   0:29:21.7 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. What I was saying you're talking about is this idea of cease dependence on inspection, that it doesn't mean inspection's completely gone, but it means starting at the beginning of the process and thinking about how do we improve things from there. So continue on.   0:29:37.3 Balaji Reddie: Yeah, so I just said here that he was not so much at that time when he wrote this, like I said here, it was misinterpreted because, yes, he did start with saying the activity, the activity-based thing about inspection, that we should not depend on it. And I think I mentioned that Ford... One of the managers of Ford, misinterpreted that and sacked his inspectors and things like that. But he said that eliminate the need for inspection by building quality into the process and the product in the first place. So the word was dependence. And so he did not say that you need to eliminate the act of inspecting. In fact, it's very interesting what he actually spoke about this in the workbook which you get when you go a four-day seminar on video which was created by General Motors, right?   0:30:30.6 Balaji Reddie: So those video cassettes, and then the workbook that came with that had a very interesting take on inspection. So he said that it doesn't mean that we're gonna stop. He said you'd be a fool to keep yourself in the dark about what's happening in the process. You need to know what's happening in the process. So he's not saying that do away, he's saying use inspection. So now he actually said this, and here's where the interpretation comes in: understand the purpose of inspection. The purpose of inspection is to give yourself more and more knowledge of the process, not for sorting bad from good, because good and bad product come from the same process. We need to fix the process. And this is to be interpreted if you talk about how he looked at this, because if you read what he spoke about the nine heavy losses, when we discuss those, he says that one of the losses was performance appraisal. So I want to ask those people who say that this interpretation, isn't performance appraisal quality by inspection? You're sorting bad from good based on some arbitrary measure that you created in your head. You decide what's good, you decide what's bad. You're God, is it?   0:31:52.9 Balaji Reddie: I mean, Douglas McGregor actually wrote an article on this saying that managers don't like to play God, right? And he's the one who advocated, no, we don't need performance appraisal. It actually harms. And Dr. Deming just said the same thing. So if you read Douglas McGregor's book, The Human Side of Enterprise, there's a new version, the annotated version, where they've given commentary of what some experts or some the interpretations of the text. And I was amazed to see Dr. Deming's name come up there and saying that Dr. Deming also concurred with this and said it in very plain words that do not carry out performance appraisal. And he likened it to using inspection to create quality, whereas we know it doesn't. So fix the process. Right? And then people again take this in piecemeal and start quoting Deming: "A bad system will beat a good person anytime." I don't know what to say here, really. I mean, he obviously he said... He was trying to explain that you cannot judge that person based on the output of the system. I mean, it's an output of the system, the person. So you need to look at it that way. I don't know whether I'm making sense here, but that's the way to look at this point number three. Right? And he says that don't depend. Use the inspection to understand the process. Now, he says here, and I think I've got the text in that, he says, "There will always be inspection. We must never deliberately leave ourselves devoid of information on how the process is doing. Is it still in statistical control? Is there a trend? Were our efforts towards shrinkage of variation or change of level successful? The function of inspection is optimization of the whole system, including suppliers of materials and services and the ultimate consumer." So he very clearly stated this, that this is a system. And this was the system he was talking about, right? And he says here that it's not about just manufacturing, service. It's if you are really, really interpreting this, then you'd also remove performance appraisal in the process, right? Because that's quality by inspection. Uh-oh.   0:34:21.2 Andrew Stotz: The Human Side of Enterprise, the annotated edition, is available on Amazon. Just looking at it right now, this annotated edition came out in 2023. So I haven't read it, so I'm gonna check it out myself.   0:34:42.1 Balaji Reddie: Yeah, I think I lost you again.   0:34:44.5 Andrew Stotz: Yep. I just went through the details about The Human Side of Enterprise and that latest version or edition that's just come out that you've mentioned. It came out in 2023.   0:34:57.0 Balaji Reddie: Right, right. So you could get that, read that book, you'll get to see it. And he very clearly... Did you record that bit where I read out the text?   0:35:09.4 Andrew Stotz: I don't remember that.   0:35:10.8 Balaji Reddie: Okay, I'll just read it out again so you can edit it later. So, yeah, he says here, "There will always be inspection. We must never deliberately leave ourselves devoid of information on how the process is doing. Is it still in statistical control? Is there a trend? Were our efforts towards shrinkage of variation or change of level successful? The function of inspection is optimization of the whole system, including suppliers of materials and services and the ultimate consumer." Did you get that? Did that get recorded?   0:35:45.5 Andrew Stotz: Yeah.   0:35:46.0 Balaji Reddie: Yeah. So that's exactly what he meant. He said that he was not talking about the act, and he said you would have some inspection. Now, interestingly, a very, very different take on this that, yeah, I told you Myron Tribus was talking to Dr. Juran about this, and Dr. Juran gave his interpretation. Because if you know, he invented this badly misunderstood and abused term called cost of quality, right? And if you know why he invented it and what happened later, I don't even want to get into it. He said, "The only way I could grab management's attention was to present my problem in terms of money. If I explained to them and said to them that there is... This process running at 90% efficiency, they would be happy. They said, "Great." He said, "No, it's not great." And then they just wouldn't listen. They said, "90% is great." So he said, "How do I talk to them?" And so he went back to them and said, "Okay, your process is running at 90% efficiency." They said, "Yes." He said, "But you're paying 100% salary to this guy to do 90% good work, and then you're paying 100% salary to another guy to remove the 10% bad work, and then you're paying 100% salary to a third guy to correct that bad work." And that's how he invented cost of quality.   0:37:11.8 Balaji Reddie: Now people have gone and overindulged in this and they start having arguments about what is the category and where should it fit in and... Anyway, what he was trying to say is there are some activities where the more money you spend, the better it is. And so he came up with that cost of prevention and of course, I mean, conformance and non-conformance. In conformance, there were two categories. One was called prevention, where the more money you spend, obviously the better it is, but you get... You know, the returns on them will come much, much later, like training and spending money on the right things like maintaining your equipment, blah, blah, blah, research and development. He also gave a category called appraisal. And appraisal, he says, these are all activities which are necessary evils. [laughter] That means you can't eliminate them, at the same time you should not overtly depend on them to create quality. And one of them was inspection. And he says you should not spend more than necessary on inspection, just enough.   0:38:16.1 Balaji Reddie: Now here's the question I get, how much do we spend? [laughter] And the trick which I read somewhere and I saw that because I interpreted these points both ways. So when you start doing this, you walk into a company, make them calculate how much money they're spending on inspection right now. So let's say it's $100,000 or rupees or whatever. Now you start implementing the improvement processes, you start understanding the process and you start, well, the works, control charts, blah, blah, blah, blah. And then you start seeing that the process is getting better and so your defects are coming down and things are getting better generally. And so you're spending lesser money on inspection, you're spending lesser time on inspection, your resources are going in the right direction. And so that amount starts coming down and you keep doing that and you keep doing that and then you reach a point where you say, "Okay, this is it. I need this much of inspection at a bare minimum to keep myself," like Dr. Deming said, "not devoid of any information." I need to know what's happening. So that need-to-know basis, just enough, now that becomes the cap, right? And you say now, "If after this I see an increase in the money being spent, then... It's not that I'm going to go and just eliminate. I'll try to find out why." And if you look at it, that's exactly what Dr. Deming said, understand the purpose of inspection is to make the process better. The product, of course, will get better and you use the inspection intelligently to understand because good and bad products come from the same process. This is absolutely true for both manufacturing as well as services. You always can look at the activities and see which are the ones which are prone to a lot of mistakes that can happen and then you try to help the person carrying out the process. "Can I eliminate this? Can I reduce this?"   0:40:14.0 Balaji Reddie: And talking about AI, I think AI can help a lot in that, in much of the so-called mundane activities which are repeatable and being done on a regular basis. You can bring in AI over there, use it in the right way. Right? Even for the inspection thing, they talk about it, but yeah, like I said, we need to keep our eye and just keep glancing at it, but not going and standing in front of the process all the time. You don't need to do that. Just... So like Dr. Deming said, watch that... Look at the trend, the impact of my action that I need to inspect. So in that sense, like I said, the act of inspecting will never go away, but our reliance on that will come down drastically. And once in a while, just glancing through, just letting us know that things are going according to plan is the right way of looking at this. Anyway, I think that's all we have time for today, Andrew.   0:41:10.2 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. So I'm gonna wrap up by saying 290 years ago, Benjamin Franklin said, "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."   0:41:23.2 Balaji Reddie: Wow.   0:41:24.2 Andrew Stotz: Well, it's a lot of what you've just described is the idea of starting at the beginning and trying to reduce the need to depend on inspection. I love the stuff that you talked about about... He didn't say eliminate inspection, he said reduce the dependence. And that really reminded me that there's a purpose. And as you've described, the purposes of inspection isn't only just, "Okay, we don't want something bad going out to the customer," but what it really is about is understanding how are we doing. How have the upstream preventative or improvements that we've done in the upstream resolved or reduced what's happening at the downstream? I think that was a major thing for me as a young guy when I first heard Deming, to understand that, start at the beginning and try to get things right from the beginning, that will reduce the amount of trouble that you have towards the end. So, fantastic.   0:42:22.2 Balaji Reddie: That's true. That's true. All right, then.   0:42:24.5 Andrew Stotz: Well...   0:42:25.1 Balaji Reddie: We meet again next week or week after that to continue this.   0:42:27.0 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, I look forward to it. And for the listeners out there, remember to go to deming.org and jump into DemingNext to continue your journey.   0:42:36.5 Balaji Reddie: Yes.   0:42:37.0 Andrew Stotz: This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, which is, "People are entitled to joy in work."   0:42:45.3 Balaji Reddie: "Joy in work."

In der 365. Ausgabe der «Dritten Halbzeit» geht es um den Schweizer Fussball, die Super League und das enttäuschende Abschneiden der Schweizer Clubs im Europacup. Kein Schweizer Team spielt in dieser Saison in der Champions League oder Europa League. Mit dem FC Thun und dem FC Lugano sind nur zwei Clubs in der Conference League vertreten. Der Schweizer Fussball verliert im europäischen Vergleich den Anschluss. Warum ist das so und weshalb ist vorerst keine Besserung in Sicht? Gleichzeitig liefert die Super League spektakulären Fussball: 30 Tore fallen in den sechs Partien dieses Wochenendes. Die Grasshoppers verlieren 2:5 beim FC Vaduz und bleiben das einzige Team ohne Sieg. Der FC Thun gewinnt 4:3 beim FC St. Gallen. Und die Young Boys erzielen drei Tore gegen den FC Basel, müssen sich aber trotzdem mit einem Unentschieden begnügen. In Bern steht Alvyn Sanches im Mittelpunkt. Ist der Offensivspieler von den Young Boys tatsächlich zu gut für die Schweizer Liga? Beim FC Vaduz sorgt Lutfi Dalipi für Begeisterung. Beim FC Sion stellt sich die Frage, wie es mit Winsley Boteli weitergeht. Und beim FC Luzern geht es – wie könnte es anders sein? – endlich mal wieder um Bernhard Alpstaeg. Das alles und mehr in der 365. Ausgabe der «Dritten Halbzeit».Die Themen: 00:00 Intro 00:51 Die Schweiz verliert den Anschluss 13:43 GC verliert und Dalipi brilliert 27:34 Thun weiss noch, wie es geht 35:44 Sanches muss jetzt wechseln! 53:59 Drei Punkte für den FCZ 01:02:31 Die Alpstaeg-Saga geht weiter Produktion: Sara Spreiter In der Dritten Halbzeit wird über den Schweizer Fussball diskutiert. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

WERBUNG | ►Teste dein Wissen und finde mehr über Akne Inversa heraus: [Link weiter unten] ►Behalte den Fokus im Run – mit WISO MeinBüro gemeinsam selbstständig! Mit dem Code Beans50 sparst du 50% auf das erste Jahr: [Link weiter unten] /WERBUNG Eine liebgewonnene Tradition findet auch auf der GAMESCOM 2026 bzw. BEANSCOM 2026 ihren Platz - ALMOST DÖHLI. Fabian Döhla kapert unsere Show ALMOST DAILY sowie unsere GAMESCOM TAKE OFF SHOW SONNTAG damit gleich mit und spricht mit Etienne Garde alias Eddy und Felix Rick von der GAMESTAR über alles, was dem Trio so in den Sinn kommt. Schuhe, Branchen-Gossip, gesellschaftliche Entwicklung, Nostalgie und das Gameplay von THE WITCHER 3 REMASTERED bzw. THE WITCHER 3 SONGS OF THE PAST und CYBERPUNK 2077 1 udn 2, das alles findet seinen Platz. Und auch ihr, liebe Menschen, seid via Chat dabei. Viel Spaß! Rocket Beans wird unterstützt von Akne Inversa, ASUS, dem BR, HUK, Knabe Kola, Koelnmesse, Memory PC, Peugeot, prep my meal Samsung und WISO MeinBüro. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What happens when you put a climate impact label on beef in the supermarket? In this episode, we talk with Dr. Maiken Maier, a political scientist and environmental behavior researcher who studies how climate and food policies influence human behavior, social norms, and public opinion.We dive into her paper, “Increasing the Uptake of Plant-Based Diets: An Analysis of the Impact of a CO₂ Food Label,” and its fascinating findings about the relationship between individual behavior and systems change.Dr. Maier explains why seemingly modest interventions — like carbon labels, choice architecture, and behavioral design — may be far more powerful than they first appear, particularly when they begin changing what people see as normal, desirable, and politically possible.LINKS

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Lea Oetjen und Holger Zschäpitz über die neue Zinsangst, den Glatzen-Boom an der Börse und was sonst noch wichtig wird in dieser Woche. Außerdem geht es um Nvidia, AMD, Airbus, Veradermics, Absci, Cosmo Pharmaceuticals, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, Intel, Veolia, Xylem, Dow, Abacus Global Management, Blackstone, Apollo Global Management, iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF (WKN: A0RPWH), Pictet Water (WKN: 933349), BNP Paribas Aqua (WKN: A14UBP), KBI Water Fund (WKN: A1JDDT), L&G Clean Water UCITS ETF (WKN: A2PM52) und Amundi MSCI Water UCITS ETF (WKN: LYX0CA). Am 2. Oktober findet unser „Alles auf Aktien“-Summit in Berlin statt. Ihr wollt dabei sein? Wir verlosen Tickets: Schreibt uns eine Mail an AAA@WELT.de und begründet, warum ihr unbedingt gewinnen solltet. Falls ihr euer Glück nicht dem Zufall überlassen wollt, bekommt ihr mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ satte 50 Prozent Rabatt aufs Ticket – aber nur über diesen Link: https://veranstaltung.businessinsider.de/event/financesummit26/summary?rp=c6dc55d6-6f4f-4fb4-b75f-3f3501d84859 Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Diese Folge enthält Werbung für Smartbroker+. Depot eröffnen, 30 € ETF als Bonus sichern und aus tausenden ETFs wählen. Smartbroker+ macht Investieren einfach. Alle Informationen gibt es unter: https://get.smartbrokerplus.de/triple-aaa-podcast2/ Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt. Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

AI Troopers — mi nueva comunidad donde cada semana implementamos inteligencia artificial juntos, en vivo, para que vendas más, automatices procesos y bajes tus costos. Únete aquí

Pippa ist happy: Mit ihrem Verkleidungskoffer ist alles möglich! Auf ihrer Berufereise war sie in der Geisterbahn und als Clownin tätig. Nun geht es als Detektivin auf Spurensuche. Aus der OHRENBÄR-Hörgeschichte: Pippa auf Berufereise (Folge 3 von 5) von Dorthe Voss. Es liest: Merete Brettschneider. ▶ Mehr Hörgeschichten empfohlen ab 6: https://www.ohrenbaer.de/podcast/empfohlen-ab-6.html ▶ Mehr Infos unter https://www.ohrenbaer.de & ohrenbaer@rbb-online.de

No city (or metro region) is defying gentrification. All of them are failing at it.I feel that in my bones and soul when I step out of my creative studio and into a world where the train might be cancelled after I made the 15-20 minute walk to the station, and I can only get to McDonald's on foot within 5 minutes.A world where my younger cousins in school may not be valued because they're Black, but maybe they have a good doctor, an amazing community recreation center, and someone to make their hair look dope? I know they probably don't say dope for any reason anymore, but still, we are all aging and growing on this round planet with dwindling water together.That's why I decided to take cities back to school this fall and grade their performance! I did a more qualitative measure of this back in 2018-2019, and now I want to put a number on this work, so you all can more easily measure your city's progress and improve on areas that would be graded “needs improvement” on a traditional report card. A version of this report card is also in The Defying Gentrification Playbook.I graded the six metros/cities I've lived in (Greensboro; Washington, DC; Baltimore; Kansas City; Raleigh; Durham) and four cities I would consider living in (Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and Atlanta) I counted the core city elements and included adjacent counties if they behave as suburban satellite business districts and villages, not just the legacy city limits and their central business districts. Still, my 13 rubric points for metro regions may not be your 13.However, as a scholar of cities for nearly two decades and a multiply marginalized person as a regular human in cities for 40 years, I feel like my rubric covers everything.I've created a JotForm survey to capture cities and specifically metro regions I haven't been able to include in this series and to test the validity and reliability of my rubric so that this measure can be expanded. I also added a block so that you can tell me what I missed, so it can be added in. My rubric is very US-centric, but a lot of what I'm grading is affected by US federal law. I'd love to see how a Vienna or Hong Kong or London would look in my metric. That's where this survey comes in. Take the survey.Over the next few weeks, as I celebrate my tenth anniversary of dropping everything and moving from Kansas City to Washington, DC, out of my own volition, on the assumption that I could thrive in the District, I'll share my personal grades of cities/regions I've lived in or frequently visited. Over time, I'll update the grades based on what you've told me.This is our bridge between our Black August series on what I can control as a Black queer feminist disabled urbanist, the elders that guide me spiritually, and the on-the-ground facts of what is and isn't present in a city that tickles my Black queer feminist disabled urbanist spidey senses!Now let's get to those things I'm grading on!What's On The Report CardJotform will not let me give cities zeros in its automatic grade setting. It's very similar to my retired middle school teacher mom, who always stopped her Fs in her classroom grades at a 60. Her logic is that a 0 is hard to recover from, but a 60 is fixable. 0.5 signals fixable, but needs fixing.As I mentioned at the beginning, no city achieved a perfect score. The highest grade achieved was a 78, a low C, and the lowest grade was a 67, a high F. The average grade is a 73, which is a low D. Not failing, but barely passing. You'll have to come back in subsequent weeks to find out which cities failed and why. But I will tell you this week what I graded them on, in no special order of importance:Art and creative spaces for all skill and desire levels2- Both amateur and professional artists have somewhere to go that fulfills their need for creativity and a livelihood for their work.1- Only amateur or only professional artists have somewhere to go to practice their art and craft. There's also no real pipeline between the two types of artists, and professional artists are often not homegrown.0.5- No art at all, at least not in visible spaces.Thriving entrepreneurship and gainful employment are available to more than white, straight, abled, wealthy people.2- Both thriving entrepreneurship and gainful (above a living wage based on the MIT calculator) employment are present in folks who aren't straight, white, cis, male, and have family wealth1- Only one or the other is present in non-straight, white, cis, male, and family wealthy folks. Tokens are made of the few people who stand out, because it's not normal; it's extraordinary.0.5- Nobody is working or owning businesses besides the straight white cis male with family wealth. Or others are working, but for under a living wage.Wraparound medical care2- Yes, with a care center that's not a hospital, with all specialties present or able to be referred in-house, an urgent care and pharmacy that are open 24 hours, and accept all insurances and genders.1- Yes, the care center is there, but it's not all inclusive of hours, specialties, genders, and insurances. Or there's just a hospital.0.5- No hospital, no care center.Culturally competent non-medical hair and body care2- You have hair salons for all textures, hair care for all textures in all of your beauty supply stores, and you have practitioners of all types of non-medical or quasi-medical body care sensitive to all skin types and tones and sizes.1- You have these spaces, but they have documented issues with diverse hair types, skin tones, and body sizes0.5- No spaces will even accept a non-white, skinny, straight-haired person into their establishmentsFood that provides both joy and basic nutritional needs in all neighborhoods2- The food is fun and nutritious1- The food is fun or nutritious, not both0.5- There's no food at all. This is not a food desert; this is apartheid.Public transit exists for more than just paratransit users2- Public transit of all types runs for 24 hours a day1- Public transit exists, but outside of paratransit, there are restrictions on its timing, where it takes people, and what type of vehicles/trains there are.0.5- Even disabled folks can't get transportationSpiritual spaces of all faiths that affirm and delight in Black, disabled, feminist and/or queer lives2- All faiths have somewhere to go where their gender, sexual orientation, skin color, size, national origin, and their politics are affirmed and loved in the pursuit of good morality or a divine presence. These places also honor that there are different faiths, or lack thereof, and that's ok. These places respect a gray area, but have clarity on right and wrong that doesn't dehumanize people.1- Some houses of faith behave like the above, but they are few and far between, making it harder for people to plug in and for the communities to have a positive impact on the community.0.5-Houses of faith are all hateful, dogmatic, and even actively terrorizing those that don't believe in their tenets.Schools that affirm Black children K-12, no matter their ability level or perceived behavior.2- Every school, no matter who runs it or how much that might put a target on their backs, believes that Black children can thrive. This investment in Black kids reaps across all children, as in many schools, they are the most marginalized.1- Only a handful of schools, and they are ones you have to apply to and/or pay for, are affirming of Black children.0.5- No schools affirm Black children, and they may be terrorizing them and contributing directly, without shame, to the school-to-prison pipeline.Bookstores and libraries that affirm all authors and all readers.2- Specialized bookstores and libraries exist, and the regular ones honor books that aren't written by white, straight, cis, and male authors.1- Only specialized bookstores and libraries exist, or the regular ones are hostile to readers that aren't white, cis, straight, or male.0.5- No bookstores or libraries exist at all, except for maybe an aisle in Walmart, Target, Dollar Tree, or Dollar GeneralParks, playgrounds, waterfronts, and other natural resources/outdoor activities are not closed off to the public.2- These resources and activities are free and open to the public.1- These outdoor resources have a price tag, or they are partially operated by private entities.0.5- They don't exist at all or are all privatized with no kind of public accessBlack, LGBTQ, disabled, feminist, and other community centers and community events.2- All community centers and events understand that communities overlap and could need support services and culturally competent activities and vendors. They also provide safety for their primary audience of people, while being welcoming.1- Community centers and events for specific groups exist, but they don't serve others or understand intersectional identities or the need for core community safety.0.5- No community centers at allBasic housing that doesn't exceed 30% of one's income at the poverty level and for those under the area median income.2- Housing that meets and exceeds these standards, happily and fully.1- Housing that meets these standards, but begrudgingly and with an outside emphasis on mixed-income areas and market rate areas, without ensuring those who need housing and have no or low income are housed.0.5- People who can pay for housing are unhoused, and of course those who can't are unhoused by default.A way to get out of town that's not your personal vehicle (if you even have one).2- You have an airport that flies internationally, a train station that can take you to all corners of your country and possibly into others, and you have rental cars, rideshares, bikeshares, and trails connected to other cities.1- You have a handful of the above, but not everything0.5- You have none of this besides private vehiclesWhat else stood out with these cities and their initial gradesMost cities had perfect scores on the following measures:* Art and creative spaces for all skill and desire levels* Culturally competent non-medical hair and body care* Spiritual spaces of all faiths that affirm and delight in Black, disabled, feminist and/or queer lives* Bookstores and libraries that affirm all authors and all readers.* Parks, playgrounds, waterfronts, and other natural resources/outdoor activities not closed off to the public.This is not surprising in that these are the easiest things for any city to provide, often without political pushback, although some libraries are under fire for being so diverse, equitable, and inclusive.This is also in line with how movements and lifestyle changes that emerged and became more mainstream during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic have affected and stuck with certain sectors of society, like houses of faith and arts spaces.No city scored above 0.5 on housing, because most cities, even the most progressive ones in the spaces above, meet the standard that warrants a 1. This is a measure I am most looking forward to your feedback on. Same with community centers. I've heard some community centers really struggle with how to be in community and properly handle conflict resolution and intersectional identity. This might actually go down because of things you share with me.In the meantime, Greensboro, my beloved hometown, is up first on a deep dive analysis. I'll be sharing its scores and sharing specific places that fill in the gaps, along with city-specific ways the gaps that aren't filled can be filled.Your city might be a failure now, but by the end of this, it will be a winner!Before you go…I'm bringing classifieds back! All you need to know about how this will work, plus an order form, is right here in the application. All ads will follow my announcements in this section of the newsletter and can start running as soon as the next newsletter. I also have a solid editorial calendar in place through the end of the calendar year, so we can talk about ideal placement too!I am currently in Greensboro for a panel on my colleague and friend Marrianne LeGrecco's book on food justice in Greensboro, Everybody Eats. We'll be at Scuppernong Books on Elm Street this afternoon from 4-6 pm.If you want my guidance on anything, especially on how to respond to ads in the classifieds, I'm booking 90-minute strategy sessions! This is a great way to have me help you plan something, namely your career or funding strategy, and they are rebookable!Thanks to everyone who came to the inaugural Making New Fantasies: A Defying Gentrification Workshop, which we decided to do on every third Thursday as a virtual journaling workshop around processing what cities do and don't do for us. Registration is free, and you can register at this link. Join us in September if you want encouragement to write your own stories and make your own plans to make your community better.Get The Defying Gentrification Playbook full-color PDF for just $19.99Finally, for one last time, grade your city!Until next time,Kristen Get full access to Defying Gentrification with Kristen Jeffers at theblackurbanist.substack.com/subscribe

Medical freedom advocate and former forensic psychiatrist Dr. Andy Kaufman takes on Big Pharma, mind control, DARPA surveillance, and political corruption in episode 261 of the Far Out with Faust podcast.Kaufman is a medical freedom advocate and former forensic psychiatrist who trained at Duke after earning his biology degree from MIT. During his medical career, he held academic and leadership positions, served as an expert witness in state and federal courts, published research, and developed a patented medical device. After breaking publicly with the medical establishment during the COVID-19 era, Kaufman became known for challenging mainstream narratives around viruses, vaccines, genetics, psychiatry, and disease, while advocating for natural healing, personal sovereignty, and becoming your own health authority.Faust and Kaufman examine how institutional power shapes what people are taught to believe about science, medicine, politics, and even their own bodies. Their conversation moves from the incentives behind accepted medical narratives to propaganda, government deception, surveillance, and the ways fear and authority can influence human behavior. Together, they question how much of what we accept as truth is the product of evidence and how much is the result of conditioning, repetition, and trust in institutions.In this episode:• Is Genetics a Mind-Control Program?: Kaufman questions one of the most foundational beliefs in modern biology.• The Antidepressant Data Nobody Saw: What did unpublished FDA trials reveal about the drugs millions of people take?• What Are You Signing at the Hospital?: The fine print behind informed consent may be more consequential than most patients realize.• DARPA's Disturbing Question: You won't believe what Kaufman says government-linked interests wanted to do with his medical invention.• When War Becomes a Video Game: What happens when killing is reduced to pixels on a screen?• Medication or Domestication?: Kaufman challenges the explosion of psychiatric diagnoses and prescription drugs.• Why Fauci Took the Fifth: What does his testimony reveal about accountability inside the system?• Who Decides What Counts as Science?: Kaufman exposes a problem hiding inside the way medical evidence is measured.From medicine and genetics to politics, surveillance, and war, this conversation challenges the systems that shape what we believe before we ever think to question them.00:00:00 Introduction to Dr. Andrew Kaufman00:01:34 Political Accountability & The Theater of Authority00:07:25 Questioning Genetics & The "Central Dogma" Programming00:15:28 Synthetic RNA & The Flaws in Modern Cognitive Tech00:20:24 Why Dr. Kaufman Walked Away from Allopathic Medicine00:27:05 The Illusion of Informed Consent & Hospital Contracts00:37:14 The Hidden Truth About Unnecessary Surgical Procedures00:44:19 Flawed Research, Antidepressants, & The Rise of Psychiatry00:51:22 DARPA Grants, Biomonitoring, & Remote Warfare Conditioning01:00:15 Overprescribing Sedatives & Systemic Pacification01:13:04 Censored Medical Data & The Failure of Two-Party Politics01:24:52 Autodidactic Learning & Taking Your Sovereignty Back01:31:20 Psychological Observations on High-Profile Public Spectacles01:38:42 The True Medicine Cabinet & Reclaiming Health AutonomyCheck out Dr. Andy's True Medicine Cabinethttps://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com/true-medicine-cabinetConnect with Dr. Andy Kaufmanhttps://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com/https://www.youtube.com/c/AndrewKaufmanMD/videoshttps://www.instagram.com/andrewkaufmanmd/https://www.facebook.com/andrewkaufmanmd/Join us on PatreonFor uncensored episodes, behind-the-scenes content, and exclusive community access:https://patreon.com/FarOutWithFaustListen on Spotify + Apple PodcastsSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6StPwgq2di3f8uxnc6SmIfApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/far-out-with-faust-fowf/id1533017218FOWF & Faust Checho on socialhttps://www.instagram.com/faroutwithfaust/https://www.instagram.com/theonefaustchecho/https://www.facebook.com/Faroutwithfausthttps://x.com/faustchechohttps://patreon.com/FarOutWithFaustQUESTION THE ANSWERS™#Healthcare #BigPharmawe'd love to hear from you

Warum sind wir alle Sternenstaub? Wann verschluckt unsere Sonne die Erde? Gibt es Aliens? Was ist vor dem Urknall passiert? Gibt es eine zweite Erde – und falls ja, wie kommen wir dahin? All das haben wir Anna Frebel, Astronomin und Professorin am MIT gefragt. Und sie hat so großartig geantwortet, dass wir diesen Podcast allen empfehlen, die gerne in den Nachthimmel gucken – auch ohne Teleskop.

Az előfizetők (de csak a Belső kör és Közösség csomagok tulajdonosai!) már szombat hajnalban hozzájutnak legfrissebb epizódunk teljes verziójához. A hétfőn publikált, ingyen meghallgatható verzió tíz perccel rövidebb. Itt írtunk arról, hogy tudod meghallgatni a teljes adást. Tudatmódosult vadkemping egymillió dolláros lakóautóban. Szivárványpikinik Vancouverben. Felfújható világ az Adrián. Fentanilosok a herbálosok ellen. Ruszin-Szendi biztonsági öv nélkül. Beoltották a magyart kiskereskedelem ellen? 00:00 Tartalomjegyzék. Itt a jó vancouveri fentanil! Amikor a Mötley Crüe viszkit lőtt be a Silver Jews pedig elszívta a fentaniltapaszok maradékát. 04:11 Bede Márton bemutatja a fentanil foldot. Akkor már inkabb a fentanil. Pride-tűzoltás Vancouverben. A furryk csodálatos világa. 08:36 Olcsó sör Vancouverben. A végtelen kanadai természet. Orca és okra. Uj Péter találkozása a masgouffal. 14:26 Érdekességek a Csendes-óceán partjáról. A hínárerdők. A marihuána hatása a kanadai boltosok kreativitására. Mit tegyünk, ha farkassal találkozunk? 20:39 Lakóautózás Vancouver Islanden. Class C motorhome. Vegyivécé-ürítés. Az utolsó pillanatos bookingfoglalások bökkenői. 27:36 Horvát kempingtrendek. Az egymillió dolláros lakóautó. Szerbhiány Horvátországban. A lakóautók slideoutja. 33:14 A dropstitch technológia forradalma. Horrorárak a foilboard-piacon. 38:40 Vitorlázás az Adrián. Ismét előbújtak a szigetszakértők 41:13 Auchan a pokolban, pokol az Auchanban. A Zabka, a Tom Market és a Plodine. 45:42 Uj Péter a budaörsi Auchan zöldségespultjánál. NEM VOLT PARADICSOM!!!! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Our speaker is Yossi Sheffi who is a Professor of Engineering at MIT and is a leading scholar in supply chain management. He is the author of a new book entitled Unsafe at MIT: A Chronicle of a Campus War on the Jews.I want to hear from Yossi about MIT's failure to protect its Jewish and Israeli students from violence. I want to learn why MIT's Administration managed the situation so poorly, and why MIT's disregard for its own rules and regulations resulted in chaos. Get full access to What Happens Next in 6 Minutes with Larry Bernstein at www.whathappensnextin6minutes.com/subscribe

Der erste Rabatt sieht harmlos aus wie ein kleiner Steinschlag in der Windschutzscheibe. Aber der Riss zieht sich durch den ganzen Deal. Dieter zeigt mit einem echten Einkaeufer aus dem Training, warum Verkaeufer den Preis aus Angst herschenken und wie du ihn haeltst, indem du jeden Rabatt zum Tausch machst. Mit einer einfachen Beobachtungs-Aufgabe fuers Team.

Pardoned outlaw on the run. DeShawn Leeth hit a cop in Jesus' name. Christian apologist Frank Turek: Why pray? Gen Z atheists pretend God is real. Lady demands apology.

Not long ago, tech jobs were sought after for their security, benefits, wages, and the progressive values promoted by Silicon Valley companies. But now workers are barely hanging on. Clarissa Redwine and JS Tan join Paris Marx to discuss the state of worker organizing in the tech industry, including how it's changed since the mid-2010s and where it needs to go from here.Clarissa Redwine is a tech worker and labor activist. JS Tan is a PhD candidate at MIT and writes the Value Added newsletter. They are the authors of Against Tech Oligarchy: Worker Resistance in the World's Most Powerful Industry.The podcast is made in partnership with The Nation. Production is by Kyla Hewson. Support the show on Patreon.Also mentioned in this episode:You can now pre-order Paris's new book Hyperscale.Learn more about Kickstarter United in Clarissa's oral history podcast.Layoffs in 2026 have surpassed last year.Tech workers are pushing back against AI use.Paris talked to JS last year about the connection between tech and oil & gas.Support the show

What happens when your son drops out of MIT at 19, starts a defense company in his twenties, and sets out to reinvent the way America builds weapons? If you're Tamara Diller, you get a job. In this episode, Mike sits down with the Head of Marketing and Communications at Mach Industries, Tamara Diller, who also happens to be the mother of the founder and CEO, Ethan Thornton. Ethan's decision to leave MIT and pursue his vision for Mach has led to a company now valued at $1.8 billion. But the story gets more interesting when you hear it from his mother—and learn what Ethan was like long before he became a CEO. It's a revealing and often surprising conversation about family, ambition, risk, failure, manufacturing, and the remarkable journey from a kid who liked to blow stuff up to the leader of one of America's fastest-growing defense companies. At the center of it all is a fascinating question: What happens when the son you raised becomes your boss? Shout out to our great sponsors PureTalk.com/ROWE—Switch your phone service today and enjoy your first three months of talk, text, and data for just $15 a month regardless of which plan you choose. BuildFreedom.us—The best place to find a six-figure, AI-proof job. Build your future. Rebuild America.

Jim Kwik on Memory, AI, and Why Natural Intelligence Beats Artificial Intelligence Your brain is quietly outsourcing itself to AI, and you won't notice until it's gone. This episode gives you the exact framework to use artificial intelligence as a tool for brain optimization instead of a crutch that erodes your memory, focus, and critical thinking. Watch this episode on YouTube for the full video experience: https://www.youtube.com/@DaveAspreyBPR Host Dave Asprey sits down with Jim Kwik, one of the world's leading experts in memory improvement, brain optimization, and accelerated learning. For more than 30 years, Jim has served as the brain coach to professional athletes, political leaders, business magnates, and Hollywood icons, with corporate clients including Google, Nike, SpaceX, and Harvard. He hosts the Kwik Brain podcast with over 100 million downloads, reaches 200,000 people annually through live keynotes, and just wrapped his 14th annual Beyond Biohacking Conference with 5,000 attendees in Austin. Jim overcame a childhood brain injury that left him labeled "learning disabled," and turned that struggle into a mission he calls "no brain left behind." They break down the MIT study showing that people who use AI to write and think score worse on memory and comprehension than those who rely on their own brains, and why that matters for anyone serious about longevity, human performance, and anti-aging. Jim introduces the concept of digital dementia and cognitive sovereignty, explaining how nootropics, neuroplasticity, and functional medicine can support your biology while AI still requires you to keep your own hardware sharp. They cover the MEDS Rx framework for brain optimization: meditation, exercise, diet, sleep optimization, and relationships, plus why mitochondria, metabolism, and inflammation from processed food directly impact your cognitive output. Jim also shares how his own kids use AI as a tutor rather than a replacement for thinking, and why sleep inertia and the first few minutes after waking set the tone for your entire day. This is essential listening for anyone serious about biohacking, hacking their own brain, longevity, neuroplasticity, brain optimization, supplements, and building a Smarter Not Harder approach to human performance in the age of AI. You'll Learn: Why the MIT study found AI users had weaker memory and comprehension than people who did the work themselves What digital dementia and digital deduction are, and how they quietly erode your cognitive muscles How to use AI as an augmented intelligence partner instead of a replacement for critical thinking The MEDS Rx framework for brain optimization: meditation, exercise, diet, sleep, and relationships Why the first few minutes after waking determine your focus and mood for the entire day How spaced repetition and AI-assisted learning can lock in new skills and behavior change faster The HUMAN framework for staying irreplaceable in a world run by algorithms Thank you to our sponsors! - KILLSwitch | If you're ready for the best sleep of your life, order now at https://www.switchsupplements.com/and use code DAVE for 20% off - Neuronic | Go to www.neuronic.online Code DAVE for $100 off - Our Place | Upgrade your kitchen with Our Place today. Visit fromourplace.com/DAVE and use code DAVE for 10% off sitewide. - LMNT | Check it out at drinklmnt.com/DAVE. You'll get a free 8 count sample pack with any purchase. Dave Asprey is a four-time New York Times bestselling author, founder of Bulletproof Coffee, and the father of biohacking. With over 1,000 interviews and 1 million monthly listeners, The Human Upgrade brings you the knowledge to take control of your biology, extend your longevity, and optimize every system in your body and mind. Each episode delivers cutting-edge insights inhealth, performance, neuroscience, supplements, nutrition, biohacking, emotional intelligence, and conscious living. New episodes are released every Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, and Sunday (BONUS). Dave asks the questions no one else will and gives you real tools to become stronger, smarter, and more resilient. Keywords: Jim Kwik, Limitless, Kwik Brain, digital dementia, cognitive sovereignty, human intelligence, artificial intelligence, MIT AI study, brain injury recovery, accelerated learning, memory improvement, speed reading, neuroplasticity, spaced repetition, memory palace, MEDS Rx framework, sleep inertia, attentional priming, metacognition, digital deduction, brain optimization, cognitive flexibility, cognitive anti-fragility, 40 Years of Zen, biohacking, Beyond Biohacking Conference, HUMAN framework, learning how to learn, GPS dependency, mental fatigue, burnout recovery, Limitless Daily Resources: • Learn More About Jim At: https://limitlessdaily.com/ • Follow Jim On Instagram At: https://www.instagram.com/jimkwik/ • Watch Jim On YouTube At: https://www.youtube.com/jimkwik • Get My 2026 Clean Nicotine Roadmap | Enroll for free at https://daveasprey.com/2026-clean-nicotine-roadmap/ • Dave Asprey's Latest News | Go to https://daveasprey.com/ to join Inside Track today. • Danger Coffee: https://dangercoffee.com/discount/dave15? • My Daily Supplements: SuppGrade Labs (15% Off) • Favorite Blue Light Blocking Glasses: TrueDark (15% Off) • Dave Asprey's BEYOND Conference: https://beyondconference.com • Dave Asprey's New Book – Heavily Meditated: https://daveasprey.com/heavily-meditated • Join My Substack (Live Access To Podcast Recordings): https://substack.daveasprey.com/ • Upgrade Labs: https://upgradelabs.com Timestamps: 00:00 – Trailer 00:55 – Intro 06:54 – AI as Tool, Not Crutch 13:00 – Protecting Cognitive Sovereignty 21:28 – Digital Dementia Explained 27:13 – AI-Enhanced Learning Techniques 32:18 – Speed Listening and Reading 40:38 – Rapid Tips by Age 46:59 – Building an AI Second Brain 53:04 – Burnout and Brain Optimization See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.