Podcasts about Orphan

In September 1900, ten nuns and ninety-three children were trapped inside an orphanage on the exposed western edge of Galveston Island as a Category 4 hurricane swallowed the city. With one dormitory already gone and the Gulf rising through the remaining building, the Sisters made a decision. They cut down the clotheslines, tied groups of children to themselves, and waited for the water. When the orphanage collapsed, ninety children and all ten Sisters died. Days later, recovery crews found them scattered along the coast—still tied together. The knots had held. Tonight, we tell the story of St. Mary's Orphan Asylum, the three boys who somehow survived, and a decision made in the final minutes before the deadliest natural disaster in American history destroyed almost everything around them. YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@HauntedAmericanHistoryTikTok - @hah_podcasthauntedamericanhistory.comPatreon- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/hauntedamericanhistory⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠HAH DISCORD - https://discord.com/invite/bJdbpH3hQm Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week we're reairing our episode on the Orphan prequel Orphan First Kill (2022)! Jamie and Nikisha talk Horror Street Fighter, the 'Save The Last Dance' hop, Hamilton, freestyle mopping, a different name for the movie, child development, unhinged notes, feelings on Connecticut, and, of course, Billy vs Stu. Watch us on YouTube! Follow us on Instagram | Twitter | TikTok: @TalkHorrorPod Check out Jamie (aka EmoSupportJamie) on Twitch!

Give hope. Strengthen families. Change futures. Orphan care alliance provides support, care, and community serving foster, adoptive, kinship, and at-risk children and families. www.ocakids.org        ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Look for HOPE is Here: - at www.HOPEisHere.Today - on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/HOPEisHereToday - on Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/hopeisherelex/ - on X (Twitter) - https://www.x.com/hopeisherelex - on TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@hopeisherelex - on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtJ47I4w6atOHr7agGpOuvA Help us bring HOPE and encouragement to others: - by texting the word GIVE to 833-713-1591 - by visiting https://www.hopeisheretoday.org/donate   #Lexington #Kentucky #christianradio #JesusRadio #Jesus #WJMM #GregHorn #GregJHorn #suicideprevention #KentuckyRadio #HOPEisHere #Hope #HopeinJesus #FoodForThoughtFriday #MondayMotivation #FridayFeeling #Motivation #Inspiration #cupofHope #FYP #ForYouPage #SuicideAwareness

Coming to you from Whidbey Island, Washington this is Stories From Women Who Walk with Story Prompt Friday and your host, Diane Wyzga. The other day my longtime, dear friend and storytelling galpal, Michelle, asked me if I'd like to take over an expiring domain name. Why would I be interested in that? Because the name, Storywerx, was what we called ourselves, a troupe of storytellers who came together when I offered to teach a semester of story skills. We kept on learning, growing, and  eventually performing stories together. I'd not thought about Storywerx in years although a few of us are still in touch. A little older, a little wiser but still storytellers at heart and in practice. I was trying to remember a story that a gentleman in our troupe had told during a Storywerx performance. I vaguely remembered it having something to do with the teller's past. It was a story about an orphan boy who brought a stone to life. Here's a secret: the more you get to know a storyteller and listen to the stories she is telling, the more you will get to understand her life and why that story is being told at that time. Meanwhile, leave it to Michelle to know what I was searching for. I'd like to share the story with you as we walk each other home.   Once upon a time there lived a little orphan boy who was so lonely and so hungry that no one wanted to be near him. His mouth was always open, his teeth were always showing and his tears were always flowing down his cheeks. He was such a wild child—wild with hunger and loneliness—that the people in that village had to tie him down at the entrance to one of the skin houses so that he would not try to eat the hunters on their way to the seal hunt. That's how hungry he was. Sometimes the people of that village would leave him bits of reindeer or seal meat but nothing would satisfy his hunger. As we know it was something more than hunger that was gnawing at him: those deep needs that not even the person themselves understands. Every day the boy stretched his chain a little bit more and a little bit more until he could get near a smooth round stone that was about his size. You see, his mother and father had died one night and their bodies dragged off by bears. All that had been left behind in the skin house where they all had lived was this one large stone. In time the boy got close enough to that stone, so close he was able to wrap his arms and his legs around it and would not let go. Of course his people thought the child had become quite mad. On their way from the hunt with animal carcasses slung over their shoulders they would jeer at him. They would say look and say: Annuk has taken a stone for a wife! It's good for you to have a wife who is a stone so you cannot use your hunger to eat her. The boy was so hungry and so lonely that he finally reached the end of feeling for his life. He kept his body wrapped around that stone and the stone began to take the heat from his body. The boy began to die as the stone took the heat from his hands, from his legs, and even the heat from his face where he rested it on the stone. Just as the boy was living his last breath the hunters of that village came by on their way home from the hunt. Again they shouted to him, Boy! You are like a bird nesting with that stone like it's an egg. We should call you Bird Boy! You are good for nothing. Near death the boy shed great icy tears that rolled down his cheeks and those cold cold tears hit the hot hot stone with a hiss and a crack and the stone broke open. Inside was the most perfect little girl the boy could ever want. She said, I am here for you now. You are an orphan no more. She gave him a bow and arrows and a harpoon. The boy and the girl made their house, raised a family and if they are not yet dead they are in that land where the snow is violet and the night sky is black. They are living still. Story Prompt: Recall a time when you felt at your lowest ebb and yet a deep intuition sensed that the darkest hour is just before dawn. And with the dawn would come what you needed to find your way back home. Write that story and share it as you will because we are all walking each other home.   The Stone Child - An Inuit Story from Warming the Stone Child by Clarissa Pinkola Estes You're invited: “Come for the stories - stay for the magic!” Speaking of magic, subscribe & spread this episode  with a generous 5-star review & comment—it helps us all—& join us next time! AND!  Stop by my Quarter Moon Story Arts website during reconstruction, email me [info@quartermoonstoryarts.net] to arrange a no-obligation Discovery Conversation, and stay current with me as Quarter Moon Story Arts on SUBSTACK. Stories From Women Who Walk Production Team Podcaster: Diane F Wyzga & Quarter Moon Story Arts Music: Entering Erdenheim by Steve Schuch & Night Heron Music ALL content and image © 2019 to Present Quarter Moon Story Arts. All rights reserved. Enjoy my work? Share & attribute it to Diane Wyzga of Stories From Women Who Walk podcast with a link back to the original source.

Till He Come brings together some of Charles H. Spurgeon's most tender and spiritually searching meditations on the Lord's Supper. Drawn from addresses delivered at the Metropolitan Tabernacle and also in smaller gatherings around the communion table, these messages invite believers to linger and renew their love and devotion for Christ in remembrance of His atoning sacrifice. Spurgeon leads readers into the heart of Christian communion – reflecting on Christ's love, His finished work, and the believers' fellowship with Him “until the day breaks and the shadows flee away.” Whether speaking of resting under the shadow of the Almighty, our Lord's loveliness, or the redemption we have because of His selfless sacrifice, Spurgeon masterfully expounds on the endless depth and breadth of Christ's love and character as displayed through His broken body and poured-out blood. These short sermons are especially suited for personal devotion, preparation for the Lord's Table, or for those entrusted with leading others in communion. Reverent, Christ-centered, and moving, Till He Come stands as one of Spurgeon's most precious devotional works – calling believers to remember their Savior, cherish His presence, and proclaim His death and resurrection until the day He returns for His chosen. About the Author Charles Haddon (C. H.) Spurgeon (1834-1892) was a British Baptist preacher. He started preaching at age 16 and quickly became famous. He is still known as the “Prince of Preachers” and frequently had more than 10,000 people present to hear him preach at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London. His sermons were printed in newspapers, translated into many languages, and published in many books.

To say that Coco Chanel was influential in fashion would be a huge understatement. Ever heard of the little black dress? Dave Young: Welcome to the Empire Builders Podcast, teaching business owners the not-so-secret techniques that took famous businesses from mom-and-pop to major brands. Stephen Semple is a marketing consultant, story collector, and storyteller. I’m Stephen’s sidekick and business partner, Dave Young. Before we get into today’s episode, a word from our sponsor, which is, well, it’s us, but we’re highlighting ads we’ve written and produced for our clients. So here’s one of those. [Oliva Gibbs Law Ad] Dave Young: Welcome back to the Empire Builders Podcast. And Dave Young here, Steve Semple over there. That doesn’t mean anything if you’re just listening to this in your car. I don’t know which one of us is here and which one of us is over there. But Stephen told me as the countdown started, he said, “Hey, I got another fashion topic for us.” And I’m like, “Shh, quiet. Let me guess. Let me guess because knowing me, maybe it’s something I know this time.” Right? Right. So I’m thinking Columbia fishing shirts. Stephen Semple: I think your other guess was Carhartt. Dave Young: Carhartt? Pants from Walmart or Sam’s Club. Probably not those, knowing you and your European travels and your fine taste. Stephen Semple: I think you’ve heard of this one though. I think you’ve heard of Chanel. Dave Young: Oh, Coco Chanel. Stephen Semple: Yes. Dave Young: She was in tight with the Germans, wasn’t she? Sort of accused of that? There’s intrigue. There’s movies. Stephen Semple: Oh yeah. Dave Young: There’s a whole miniseries and things. Stephen Semple: There’s a whole bunch of stuff about Coco Chanel, but she did a lot of innovation in fashion man. And I’m going to say this is one, given some of the background things that happened, I struggled a little bit with sort of creating the through line here because I didn’t want all of that stuff to overshadow some of the amazing things that she actually did in the fashion world that was unbelievably innovative. Dave Young: Cool. Stephen Semple: And today, Chanel remains one of the largest, most profitable luxury companies in the world. They are privately owned by a German family, the Wertheimer family. And so therefore, it doesn’t receive the same attention because it’s not publicly traded, but they do publish annual financials. And so 2025 revenue was 19.3 billion US, profit of 4.7 billion, 38,000 employees operating in a hundred countries. And to put that in perspective, that makes them the same size as Hermes, makes them bigger than Ferrari, 50% larger than Rolex. Really about the only one that’s larger is LVMH, but LVMH is like 75 luxury brands. So it’s a big deal. Really, really big deal. One of the other things I found interesting is they own dozens of these specialist artistry that do embroidery and feathers and- Dave Young: Really? Stephen Semple: … and do other luxury components. And they pretty routinely invest about a billion dollars annually in capital investment. Dave Young: Wow. Stephen Semple: They’re an interesting company, especially when you consider it all started with one tiny shop that sold hats in 1910. Dave Young: Hats? 1910? Stephen Semple: Just hats, yeah. Coco was born Gabriela Chanel. The name Coco was actually a nickname that came later when she was doing singing in Samoa, France in 1883. So in 1885, her mother dies. She’s 12 years old. She goes to an orphanage where she learns how to sew. Now in 1903, she’s working as a clerk in a seamstress in a shop in Milan that sells lingerie and linens and hosieries and things along that lines. And she’s also singing in cafes, which is where she gets the nickname Coco. Dave Young: Okay. Stephen Semple: Now it’s here that she meets Etienne Balsan, who’s an aristocrat, and Coco becomes his mistress and lives with him. And one of his passion is breeding horses. So she gets into the whole horse set thing. And there’s these early pictures that show her kind of really dressed very tomboyish for the time, really dressed for the outdoors. And she starts making hats and she wants to open a store selling hats. Now he feels this is kind of a bit of a passing fancy. So he lends her some money and says, “You can do this out of my apartment in Paris, but we’re not going to do this real store thing.” And during this time, she meets a friend of his, Arthur Boy Capel, who’s a coal mining millionaire. And for a short period of time, the three of them are kind of a triumvirate, but she falls in love with Boy and runs off with Boy to Paris. Dave Young: Okay. Stephen Semple: Now, this is where things are interesting. They create a gentleman’s agreement on finances. Capel finances the business and Balsan provides the location for their previously shared, I don’t know what status we’re talking about, but this is the part of the story I struggled with because on one hand you could look at this and say she couldn’t have done this without these rich men. But we also got to remember the rules at the time were so limiting for women. She couldn’t have signed a lease. She couldn’t have borrowed money at a bank. All of these things were such that that was the only way you could do something like this. Today she would’ve done it on her own. I’m completely convinced of that. Dave Young: Well, and you also have to say they couldn’t have done it without her. Stephen Semple: Absolutely, they couldn’t. Absolutely, they couldn’t. But find sometimes these things can diminish her accomplishments and her accomplishments are absolutely immense. So in 1910, she opens her first store at 21 Rue Cambon in Paris selling hats. But this is what made her hats different. At the time, women’s hats were headache-inducing, large, fuzzy, gauze, feathers, really, unbelievably ornate and hard to wear. You actually had hat pins to keep them on and all this other crap. Her hat’s still large, but they were simple and comfortable. That was her big thing. I want them to be simple and comfortable. Now, location she was in also already had a dressmaker, so she couldn’t make dresses. So she was doing these hats. And then in 1913, she opens a location in Deauville selling dresses. Again, here’s what she did different. Dresses at the time were these heavy corseted affairs. Hard to move in, hard to wear, uncomfortable. She made things that were simple and comfortable. This is what made Chanel so interesting. Simple and comfortable. Rather than being dazzled by aristocracy, she noticed something else. What she noticed is their fashion looked and felt uncomfortable. Huge hats, corsets, heavy dresses. Women may have looked elegant, but they just couldn’t move around. And this observation of hers created the opportunity. She didn’t just build a better product. She built a different philosophy. Most designers at the time were asking this question, “How can I make women look more extravagant?” Chanel asked the question, “How can I make a woman look elegant and feel free?” Dave Young: Okay. Stephen Semple: Which is a different question. Dave Young: It’s a big difference. Stephen Semple: Yeah. It is a big difference. And if you think about it, really what she created was first casual wear. Dave Young: Yeah. Stephen Semple: Right? Dave Young: Yeah. Stephen Semple: That’s really the category that she invented. So her next innovation came in 1913 with the dress store in Deauville where she started using this fabric called Jersey Fabric. Now, it’s a cheap fabric that up to this point had only been used for men’s underwear. But what she liked about it was comfortable. It was flexible. It was light. It was easy to wear. So she found this thing that everyone was dismissing, but she saw a value that no one else saw, and she changed the story around it. She basically, again, invented sportswear using this fabric. Isn’t that incredible? Now, here’s her other big innovation, and I didn’t realize this. She’s the one who invented the idea of the little black dress. Dave Young: Oh, I think I have a glimpse of that in the back of my storehouse of strange facts, but I probably couldn’t have pulled it out. Stephen Semple: Which is incredible how iconic that is. This happened in 1926. So before 1926, early 1920s, black was not considered fashionable for everyday wear. Black clothing was for mourning, was for widows, was for domestic servants, religious dress. That’s what it stood for. And she managed to take black, which let’s face it, no positives there, and made it elegant wear. If you were a wealthy woman at the time attending a social event, you were expected to wear colorful fabrics, elaborate embroidery, beads, lace decorations. Black was considered too plain. But what Chanel saw was after World War I, the world was changing. A middle class was emergent. Women had worked in factories, they were becoming independent, they were driving cars, they were playing sports, they were entering professional life, and their clothing hadn’t caught up. Chanel believed elegance wasn’t about showing wealth, it was more about confidence. So she stripped away everything that was unnecessary. If you think about the real breakthrough moment on this was in October 1926, Vogue published Chanel’s simple black crepe dress, and the magazine called it the Ford of Chanel. Dave Young: The Ford of Chanel. Stephen Semple: The Ford of Chanel. Dave Young: Yeah, like a model piece. Stephen Semple: Because it was simple, it was reliable, it was accessible, it was timeless, and it was suitable for almost everyone. So instead of being this hope couture that only a handful of women could wear, Vogue predicted that this dress would become the universal uniform for stylish women. And they were right. Dave Young: Stay tuned. We’re going to wrap up this story and tell you how to apply this lesson to your business right after this. [Using Stories To Sell] Dave Young: Let’s pick up our story where we left off, and trust me, you haven’t missed a thing. Stephen Semple: Instead of being this hope couture that only a handful of women could wear, Vogue predicted that this dress would become the universal uniform for stylish women. And they were right. Dave Young: I don’t know. I’m no expert on those times, but when I think of other black garb and we talk about funerals and religious orders and things like that, you think of the flowing robes of a nun or the just frilly, lacy, Victorian era, I don’t even know, dresses that you see women in mourning in, right? Widows and things. And they look extremely bulky and hot and folded and frilly and uncomfortable. And she stripped all that away to where it’s just… What it really emphasized is form. Stephen Semple: Yes. Dave Young: And let you accessorize and add accents, right? Stephen Semple: Exactly. Dave Young: You show your arms, that’s like accessorizing the little black dress. And it highlights a piece of jewelry. Stephen Semple: Absolutely. Yeah. So what she removed was the heavy embroidery, the bright colors, all of those things. And social rules. She changed social rules around it. So what’s left? A clean silhouette and this simplicity that shifted the attention from the dress to the woman wearing it, which was a revolutionary concept. Dave Young: Before that, you would identify basically identity by the wearing of black. There’s a nun, there’s someone mourning. Stephen Semple: There’s a woman in mourning. Yeah. But the other thing is it changed the economics of fashion. To your point, Dave, simply change the shoes, the jewelry, the handbag, the scarf, and you change the outfit. And the same dress could be worn lunch, dinner, work, party. Today we call this versatility. Back then, revolutionary. Dave Young: Well, and honestly, in the mind, and we talk about this in our portals and the 12 languages, the mind class, the more you layer on things that. If you’re trying to say mourning, you’re mourning someone. Okay, black, folds, lace, hat, veil, all of the things that you associate with mourning. If you’re trying to say a nun, it would be folds and layers and nothing showing except maybe a little white in the hat or somewhere around the edges. And the more things that you layer on that provide it with the reinforcement of that meaning, the more deeply it’s felt to be understood. So you look at someone that’s wearing all that and you say, “Oh, this is a person that’s in mourning.” And if you strip all those things away and you do something that is different, that makes your head kind of go, “Wait, what’s this?” Instead of being, “Oh, this is a nun.” You say, “Oh, who are you?” You raise interest. You raise interest. Stephen Semple: See, this is what she understood. Oh yeah, but wouldn’t it be so easy to go, you can’t do black because black stands for all these negative things. But what she understood exactly what you’re saying, if I strip away all these things, I’m actually creating a new meaning to this color. I’m actually changing the language it’s speaking, which is so difficult and so amazing and so brilliant on her part. And it’s interesting when you think about she changed the economics of fashion so that essentially what used to happen with elegance is a wealthy woman would own a dozen elaborate dresses. Now, what could happen is a woman of means could have one beautifully designed dress that could do the work of many. So she changed that. You know who else did that when we think about it? If we go back to our early episode of M.M. LaFleur where she looked at fashion and she was a working woman, professional working woman, and she said, “You know what? Fashion doesn’t work for a woman in an office. I need to change the rules. It needs to have a pocket that works, needs to pass the New York taxi test. I can slide out of a taxi with skirt hiking up. I need to be able to bend over and get out a file without Cleavage showing.” But again, changed the rules around fashion. This is what Chanel did. And the interesting thing is luxury used to say the language of all this dress and whatnot was, how much money can I spend? Where the little black dress said, “I don’t have anything to prove.” It threw out a very different signal. It really was a dress innovation. For her, black was grief. After her, black was sophistication. Dave Young: Yeah, and mystery. It’s an intrigue as opposed to, “Well, I get this.” Stephen Semple: She persuaded society to see black differently. How freaking incredible is that? That is remarkable. Dave Young: She did removing most of the black. Stephen Semple: Yes. Yes. Very few people have had that type of cultural influence. So when I was looking at this, I went, “Oh man, she is a remarkable woman to be able to do that.” So when you step back and you think about the hats, the jersey sportswear, the little black dress, they all followed the same pattern. They weren’t three separate innovations. They were three expressions of one insight. And that insight was women wanted to feel free, not dressed. The hats removed the enormous feathers and decorations. The jersey sportswear removed the stiff, restricted fabrics, and the little black dress removed all the unnecessary ornamentation. And she did one other thing to further free women, handbags. She was the first person to add the shoulder strap to a handbag, freeing the hands. Dave Young: All right. I never think of that, but you’re absolutely right. Stephen Semple: The question she was constantly asking is how do I give women more freedom while making them feel even more elegant? That was the philosophy of the company. Dave Young: That’s so cool. Stephen Semple: Yeah. So she became an empire because the hats were successful. The Jersey clothing was successful. Little black dress was successful, all because they proved that same idea. Elegant should never come at the expense of freedom. And that’s the thing she pursued. And when we think about it, at the time, that was even a revolutionary idea. Dave Young: Yeah, absolutely right. Absolutely right. Stephen Semple: It was what we would call a bold idea. A bold, bold idea. Dave Young: I want to watch this movie about Coco Chanel, not the one where she gets. In the ’30s and ’40s, she got caught up with financial problems because everybody in Paris did. The market goes away and she was doing what she needed to do. Leave it at that. Stephen Semple: And that’s it. And there’s all sorts of things around how the ownership will come back and forth. And she left for a while and was brought back. But I decided, you know what? Dave Young: Yeah, that’s not what built her brand. Stephen Semple: And her brilliance was bold. These ideas seem obvious today, but they were bold change ideas that changed the way the world looked at fashion, changed the way the world looked at the color black. And anybody who does that is a remarkable innovator who took this bold idea and ran it out there. Dave Young: I love it. I love it. Thank you for sharing the Coco Chanel story. Stephen Semple: Remarkable woman. Yeah. Dave Young: Next week we’re going to explore the fashion options in the fishing section of Walmart. Maybe we won’t do that. Stephen Semple: People will start thinking you fish. Dave Young: I don’t. No, I absolutely don’t, but I absolutely do. I like fishing shirts. I just do. They’re comfortable. They breathe a little. Stephen Semple: There you go. Dave Young: You’d be surprised. Nevermind. You don’t want to know where to. I’ll tell you anyway, you’d be surprised if you go to the fishing section of Walmart to look for a shirt because you don’t expect to find a colorful, bright, comfortable shirt in the fishing section yet there they are. Stephen Semple: There they are. All right. Awesome. Dave Young: Thank you for bringing Coco Chanel to the Empire Building. Stephen Semple: I don’t know where to go with all this. No, we’re done. We’re done. Stick a fork in it. Thanks, David. Dave Young: See you next time. Thanks for listening to the podcast. Please share us, subscribe on your favorite podcast app, and leave us a big fat juicy five star rating and review at Apple Podcasts. And if you’d like to schedule your own 90-minute Empire Building session, you can do it at empirebuildingprogram.com.

The Sixth Sense, Piranha, Bodies Bodies Bodies, Antropophagus, Lady Killer, and The Bat headline this episode of This Week in Horror History, covering August 3 through August 9. As summer horror reaches its hottest, strangest stretch, we're starting our early Halloween horror pregame with killer fish, emotional ghost stories, murderous housewives, hurricane-party paranoia, forbidden cult cinema, and Vincent Price lurking inside a classic old-dark-house mystery. Inside this episode: August 3, 1978 — Piranha releases in the United StatesJoe Dante turns the post-Jaws killer-animal boom into a fast, funny, and surprisingly vicious summer creature feature. Genetically altered military piranha escape into the water system, transforming lakes, rivers, vacation spots, and summer-camp swimming holes into potential feeding grounds. August 6, 1999 — The Sixth Sense releases in the United StatesM. Night Shyamalan changes the modern ghost story with the haunting tale of Cole Sear, a frightened child surrounded by dead people no one else can see. Beneath the famous twist is a deeply emotional horror movie about grief, loneliness, empathy, and the things both the living and the dead are desperate to say. August 3, 2016 — Lady Killer 2 #1 reaches comic shopsJoëlle Jones brings back Josie Schuller, a stylish midcentury homemaker, devoted mother, and highly efficient professional killer. The horror comic transforms domestic perfection into a bloodstained performance where violence is already inside the home, wearing gloves, preparing dinner, and cleaning up after itself. August 5, 2022 — Bodies Bodies Bodies releases theatrically in the United StatesA24 traps a group of wealthy, deeply dysfunctional friends inside a mansion during a hurricane. When a party game becomes a possible murder investigation, slasher tension collides with social-media anxiety, buried resentment, toxic friendships, accusations, and spectacularly bad decisions.Deep-Cut Spotlight — AntropophagusJoe D'Amato's notorious Italian cult-horror film sends unsuspecting visitors to a beautiful but eerily abandoned Greek island where paradise has become a sun-bleached trap. Also known as Anthropophagus and The Grim Reaper, the movie earned a reputation as one of those forbidden video-store horrors whispered about by genre fans because its most extreme moments supposedly had to be seen to be believed. It is grimy, excessive, mean-spirited, and inseparable from the dangerous mystique created by its alternate titles, shocking cover art, and cult-cinema notoriety. Horror Birthdays This Week: John Landis, M. Night Shyamalan, Vera Farmiga, and Tobin Bell enter the birthday roll, bringing connections to An American Werewolf in London, The Sixth Sense, The Conjuring, Bates Motel, Orphan, Saw, and some of modern horror's most recognizable filmmakers, paranormal investigators, and moralizing masterminds. Weekly Recommendation — The BatVincent Price enters an old-dark-house mystery filled with locked rooms, hidden money, suspicious residents, secret passageways, clawed gloves, and a masked killer known only as the Bat. Released in 1959, The Bat delivers classic black-and-white comfort horror with thunderstorms, creaking hallways, shadowy intruders, and the cozy feeling that someone could appear at the far end of the corridor at any moment. It is the perfect late-summer watch for horror fans already pregaming for Halloween and preparing for the arrival of spooky season.From Piranha and The Sixth Sense to Lady Killer, Bodies Bodies Bodies, Antropophagus, and The Bat, this week in horror history proves that terror can swim beneath summer water, stand silently in the corner of a child's room, hide behind domestic perfection, explode during a hurricane party, or wait inside a darkened house.The calendar may still say August, but the Halloween horror pregame starts now.

Life doesn't always unfold the way we expect. But God is still faithful.When a rare genetic diagnosis, years of caregiving, financial strain, depression, and marital struggles threatened to overwhelm her family, Allison Byxbe discovered that God's faithfulness isn't found in changed circumstances—it's found in His presence.In this deeply honest conversation, Allison shares how God met her in the darkest seasons of her life, restored hope, healed her heart, strengthened her marriage, and taught her to trust Him when nothing made sense. She also reveals how the simple practice of journaling became a powerful pathway to processing grief, hearing God's voice, and experiencing lasting healing.In this episode, you'll discover how to:Trust God when life doesn't go as planned.Find hope in the middle of disappointment and unanswered questions.Process grief and difficult emotions in healthy, biblical ways.Experience God's presence even when your circumstances don't change.Use journaling as a practical tool to deepen your relationship with Christ.If you're walking through a difficult season or wondering whether God is still at work in your story, this conversation will strengthen your faith, encourage your heart, and remind you that He is still writing something beautiful.Click here for SHOW NOTES!Start a Her God Story Podcast Club! Learn more here!Share this message with a friend and subscribe for weekly encouragement and inspiration! Check out HerGodStory.org for a FREE 6-WEEK DEVOTIONAL and to see upcoming guests. Want to help Widows and Orphans? Join our growing company of women meeting special needs of parentless children and nurturing their unique gifts so they can be ALL God has in mind for them! And help meet real needs of women who have given a lifetime of service to God! Support the Somebody Cares Widows and Orphan fund today! Learn more about the ministry at SomebodyCares.org, Read Jodie's BLOG at LivingYourFaith.net

Rudy Reyes discusses his humble origins from an Oklahoma Orphanage, to a nationally recognized figure. He breaks down the lessons he learned from the military and what he hopes to accomplish with his platform. Get the facts first with Morning Wire.- - -Ep. 3017- - -Wake up with new Morning Wire merch: https://bit.ly/4lIubt3- - -Today's Sponsors:Alliance Defending Freedom - For a limited time, every dollar you give to ADF will be MATCHED but only while matching funds last.Go to https://JoinADF.com/WIRE or text WIRE to 83848 to have your gift to ADF doubled. Fast Growing Trees - Visit https://FastGrowingTrees.com to get 20% off yout first purchase when using the code WIRE at checkout.- - -Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacymorning wire,morning wire podcast,the morning wire podcast,Georgia Howe,John Bickley,daily wire podcast,podcast,news podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Esther 2:1–18 (LSB) Series: The Book of Esther (Sermon 3) Speaker: Rocky Stevenson Church: Benoni Bible Church Sermon Overview: In Esther 2:1–18, the narrative shifts from the public vanity of Xerxes' palace to the quiet, behind-the-scenes movements of divine providence. Set historically between Xerxes' defeat in Greece (479 BC) and the rise of Haman, this passage details how an orphaned Jewish girl, Hadassah (Esther), is brought into the royal harem and eventually crowned queen of Persia. This exposition examines the complex realities of life in exile. Far from presenting Mordecai and Esther as flawless heroes, the text reveals assimilated exiles navigating a corrupt pagan system. Yet, God's covenant faithfulness is not contingent upon human heroism; it rests entirely on His sovereign grace. Key Theological Themes: The Invisibility and Certainty of Divine Providence: How God arranges secondary causes to accomplish His sovereign decrees. Redemptive History & The Preservation of the Seed: Linking Esther's ascension to the preservation of the Jewish remnant, the lineage of David, and the ultimate arrival of Jesus Christ (Galatians 4:4–5). Covenant Promises to Scattered Israel: Demonstrating that God's covenant loyalty (Jeremiah 31:35–36; Romans 11:26) extended fully to the exiles in Persia, not just the remnant in Jerusalem. An encouraging and sobering exposition for all believers seeking to trust God's silent sovereign hand in ordinary, mundane, or difficult seasons.

Academy Award winning filmmaker, editor, composer and producer John Ottman (BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY, MICHAEL, THE USUAL SUSPECTS, STAR TREK: DISCOVERY, ORPHAN, SUPERMAN RETURNS, APT PUPIL, VALKYRIE, URBAN LEGENDS: FINAL CUT, X2: X-MEN UNITED) joins Adam and Joe in the ArieScope studio to discuss his incredible career. Tired of commercials? Support THE MOVIE CRYPT for just $1 a month and start getting every episode commercial-free! Visit www.Patreon.com/TheMovieCrypt to sign-up today!

Many Christians believe in the supernatural—but few know how to live in it.The supernatural life Jesus promised isn't reserved for a select few—it's part of the inheritance of every believer. The real question isn't whether God still speaks, heals, delivers, and transforms lives today. The question is: How do we step into that kind of life?In this compelling episode of Her God Story, Jennifer Bagnaschi shares her journey of discovering what it means to walk in the authority and intimacy Jesus intended for every follower. From childhood encounters that made Scripture come alive to learning to discern God's voice through dreams, embrace spiritual authority with humility, and obey the Holy Spirit one step at a time, Jennifer's testimony reveals what it looks like to live with a vibrant, everyday awareness of God's presence.Together, we'll explore: • How to grow in your identity in Christ. • Why understanding the reality of the spiritual realm is essential for every believer. • How humility and obedience position us to experience God's power. • Practical ways to cultivate a deeper relationship with Jesus and walk in step with the Holy Spirit.If you've ever sensed there is more to the Christian life than simply believing the right things, this conversation will encourage you to pursue the deeper life Jesus offers. Come discover how an ordinary believer can walk in extraordinary dependence on an extraordinary God.Click here for SHOW NOTES!Share this message with a friend and subscribe for weekly encouragement and inspiration! Check out HerGodStory.org for a FREE 6-WEEK DEVOTIONAL and to see upcoming guests. Want to help Widows and Orphans? Join our growing company of women meeting special needs of parentless children and nurturing their unique gifts so they can be ALL God has in mind for them! And help meet real needs of women who have given a lifetime of service to God! Support the Somebody Cares Widows and Orphan fund today! Learn more about the ministry at SomebodyCares.org, FOLLOW US ON:Facebook: @SomebodyCaresAmerica Youtube: SomebodyCaresAmerica Rumble: SomebodyCares X: _SomebodyCares.Instagram: SomebodyCaresAmericaLinkedIn: Somebody Cares America You can also receive periodic ministry updates or join our prayer team by signing up here!

7/19/2026 - Living From a Different Reality Part 3: From Orphan to Sons and Daughters - Pastor Jim Baker by Zion Christian Fellowship

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

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

How did Theseus escape the Labyrinth? Is the Labyrinth real? Who created the Minotaur? Assassin's Creed Odyssey immerses players in the mythology of Ancient Greece. In particular, they can walk in the footsteps of Theseus through the Labyrinth and come face to face with the mythical Minotaur. Archaeology reveals the real roots of the myth and how it developed over time.How is the myth connected to Knossos palace on Crete? Prof Nicoletta Momigliano guides Tristan Hughes from The Ancients podcast through the maze of myth vs reality that is the Minoan Labyrinth.Echoes of History is a Ubisoft podcast, brought to you by History Hit. Watch this episode on YouTube.Hosted by: Tristan HughesEdited by: Alex JonesProduced by: Robin McConnell, Anne-Marie LuffSenior Producer: Anne-Marie LuffProduction Manager: Beth DonaldsonExecutive Producers: Etienne Bouvier, Julien Fabre, Steve Lanham, Jen BennettMusic:Phoibe the Orphan by The Flight, Michael GeorgiadesThe Minotaur by The FlightBarnabas by The Flight, Michael GeorgiadesIf you liked this podcast please subscribe, share, rate & review. Take part in our listener survey here.Tell us your favourite Assassin's Creed game or podcast episode at echoes-of-history@historyhit.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Record date: 6/15/24Finally releasing a listener's request from 2 years ago!They died, oopsies. Enjoy from wherever you are Karmen.The Hussies review in this deep dive of an episode, plot by plot of the movie Orphan from 2009 starring Isabelle Fuhrman. Based on the true events of Czech con woman Barbora Skrlova. The girls talk about the pysche of woman with stunted growth, adoption, dogs and dad bods.Dana has Russian boss PTSD.Kypria has walked in on parents PTSD.question left unanswered:How did grandma get that mink? Only Fred knows.

Dan has one really big story this week!  We're going to head to Austria's Moosham Castle, a place with an exceptionally dark legacy, even for a castle.  The darkest part of this legacy was forged during one of Europe's most horrifying witch hunts, when 139 innocent people, many of them orphaned and sometimes also disabled children, were tortured and executed in the shadow of a legend known as Wizard Jackl. We start with the history , then we'll look into paranormal claims including a modern encounter. Lynze brings four short stories this week, a nice counterbalance! A story about a college dorm, a possible forest cryptid, a ghost couple and a truly terrible place to run into a shadow person.  LAST EVER Wet Hot Bad Magic Summer Camp 2026: Have you heard?! We have some amazing friends joining us at camp! Astonishing Legends and True Crime Campfire will both be bringing their shows to the live stage this summer! If you want to see them and us, get your tickets at badmagicproductions.com  Do you want to get all of our episodes a WEEK early, ad free? Want to help us support amazing charities? Join us on Patreon! Want to be a Patron? Get episodes AD-FREE, listen and watch before they are released to anyone else, bonus episodes, a 20% merch discount, additional content, and more! Learn more by visiting: https://www.patreon.com/scaredtodeathpodcast. Send stories to mystory@scaredtodeathpodcast.com Send everything else to info@scaredtodeathpodcast.com Please rate, review, and subscribe anywhere you listen. Thank you for listening! Follow the show on social media: @scaredtodeathpodcast on Facebook and IG and TT Website: https://www.badmagicproductions.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/scaredtodeathpodcast Instagram: https://bit.ly/2miPLf5 Mailing Address: Scared to Death PO Box 3891 Coeur d'Alene, ID 83816 Opening Sumerian protection spell (adapted): "Whether thou art a ghost that hath come from the earth, or a phantom of night that hath no home… or one that lieth dead in the desert… or a ghost unburied… or a demon or a ghoul… Whatever thou be until thou art removed… thou shalt find here no water to drink… Thou shalt not stretch forth thy hand to our own… Into our house enter thou not. Through our fence, breakthrough thou not… we are protected though we may be frightened. Our life you may not steal, though we may feel SCARED TO DEATH." Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of Scared to Death ad-free and a whole week early. Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Send us Fan MailJesus give us the promise that we are not alone, we are not forgotten, and we are not left to figure out faith by ourselves. The Spirit is with us, the Son is for us, and the Father loves us.God bless you today and I encourage you to spend time in God's Word https://www.instagram.com/biblicaltapestry/https://www.facebook.com/HyperNike12

Part 1 of 2. Pastor Doris Jeune has been raising up and inspiring women of destiny in Haiti for the last 55 years. From the time she was five days old, Doris was raised in an orphanage. Abandoned, rejected, and starving, her beginnings seemed to set her up for a life without hope. Then she met Jesus, and eventually her husband, Bishop Joel Jeune. God has used this powerhouse couple in Haiti to do mighty things, including starting their own orphanage and becoming Mommy and Daddy to hundreds of children over the years who have grown up to love Jesus and do marvelous things with their lives as well. Tune in to hear Pastor Doris' amazing story! August 17-21, 2026, Pastor Doris is hosting the International Women's Conference 2026 at Christian Retreat in Bradenton, Florida, and Sharon Buss will be one of the speakers! This will be a glorious time of encouraging women (husbands are welcome too!) to go deeper in their relationship with Jesus, to become secure in their identity in Christ, and to intercede for Haiti, the US, and the nations. God needs His daughters to be free to flow with His Holy Spirit in obedience and to step into all that He has for them in these last days! Check out the link below to learn more! EMAIL: feedback@globaloutpouring.orgWEBSITE: https://globaloutpouring.net Related Links:School of the Supernatural–Translation by Faith: September 7-12, 2026Feeling led to give? Partner with us here!International Women's Conference 2026Streaming for the International Women's Conference 2026“Daughter of Destiny: Ashes to Glory” by Doris Burke JeuneGrace InternationalPodcast Episode 324: “Desperate for Discernment” with Reshma Allen CONNECT ON SOCIAL MEDIAGlobal Outpouring Facebook PageGlobal Outpouring on InstagramGlobal Outpouring YouTube ChannelGlobal Outpouring on X

The FF Dynasty - Season 10, Episode 36: Casey breaks down a 3 year Orphan to Contender Rebuild with real life Trades and Rookie Draft Strategy for your pleasurrre (This was a Pleasure Chest Show now released to the Public) -- Roster Reviews are Live! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://theffdynasty.com/pricing#roster-reviews -- In Memory of Randall "Memphis" Young donate to the family - ⁠https://gofund.me/b06e20329 ⁠ -- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Insta⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ --

250 years on, we ask the question: would America even exist without Alexander Hamilton? We tell the story of the French-speaking outsider who created the dollar, faced down the states, and set the world's biggest economy in motion, before being murdered in one of history's strangest duels. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I sit down with Charles as he opens up about a lifetime of searching for belonging after growing up without consistent parental support. Together, we unpack the shame he carries from past decisions, the emotional wounds that kept him looking for community in all the wrong places, and why true healing begins with self-forgiveness rather than self-punishment. We explore the power of confession, the importance of finding a place to safely tell your story, and what it really means to come home to yourself. If you've ever struggled to let go of your past or felt like you never truly belonged, this conversation is for you.SHOW HIGHLIGHTS00:00 - Welcome to the Coaching Session01:20 - The Weight of Shame and Past Mistakes03:32 - Childhood Abandonment and Early Trauma06:25 - Searching for Belonging Through Psychedelic Communities13:21 - When the Search for Healing Goes Wrong16:09 - Learning to Stop Being Strong All the Time20:26 - Carrying Secrets and Living With Regret23:36 - Feeling Like an Orphan in Search of Home26:58 - Fatherhood, Softness, and Breaking Survival Mode31:05 - Why Confession Is the First Step Toward Healing36:09 - Finding the Path Back to Yourself42:04 - What It Means to Come Home Within44:32 - Healing Before Helping Others49:56 - A Daily Practice for Self-Acceptance56:24 - Final Reflections and Next Steps***Tired of feeling like you're never enough? Build your self-worth with help from this free guide: https://training.mantalks.com/self-worthPick up my book, Men's Work: A Practical Guide To Face Your Darkness, End Self-Sabotage, And Find Freedom: https://mantalks.com/mens-work-book/Heard about attachment but don't know where to start? Try the FREE Ultimate Guide To AttachmentCheck out some other free resources: How To Quit Porn | Anger Meditation | How To Lead In Your RelationshipBuild brotherhood with a powerful group of like-minded men from around the world. Check out The Alliance. Enjoy the podcast? Leave a review on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or Podchaser. It helps us get into the ears of new listeners, expand the ManTalks Community, and help others find the tools and training they're looking for. And don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts | SpotifyFor more, visit us at ManTalks.com | Facebook | Instagram

What does it take to stand for truth when the world pushes back?Born into slavery and transformed by faith, Sojourner Truth became one of the most courageous voices in American history—calling a divided nation back to justice, dignity, and God's truth. In this powerful episode of Her God Story, host Jodie Chiricosta steps into an immersive conversation inspired by Sojourner's own words, historical accounts, and deep Christian faith.Through hardship, loss, and unimaginable obstacles, Sojourner discovered a freedom no one could take away—a freedom rooted in Christ. Her story will challenge you to live boldly, trust God fully, and speak truth with grace in your own generation.In this episode, you'll discover:How faith sustained Sojourner through suffering and injusticeThe courageous decision that led her to walk into freedomWhy truth and justice must remain connected to faithBiblical encouragement for standing firm in difficult timesPractical inspiration to trust God with your next stepAs America reflects on 250 years of history, this conversation offers a timely reminder that God still raises up voices of courage, conviction, and hope.If you need fresh faith, renewed courage, or a deeper understanding of freedom through Christ, this episode is for you.Click here for SHOW NOTES!Share this message with a friend and subscribe for weekly encouragement and inspiration! Check out HerGodStory.org for a FREE 6-WEEK DEVOTIONAL and to see upcoming guests. Want to help Widows and Orphans? Join our growing company of women meeting special needs of parentless children and nurturing their unique gifts so they can be ALL God has in mind for them! And help meet real needs of women who have given a lifetime of service to God! Support the Somebody Cares Widows and Orphan fund today! Learn more about the ministry at SomebodyCares.org, FOLLOW US ON:Facebook: @SomebodyCaresAmerica Youtube: SomebodyCaresAmerica Rumble: SomebodyCares X: _SomebodyCares.Instagram: SomebodyCaresAmericaLinkedIn: Somebody Cares America You can also receive periodic ministry updates or join our prayer team by signing up here!

Jon reads “The Secret of the Super-Orphan” from Action Comics 253 (1959) and talks about it!

THE SONS OF ASTRAY | THE ORPHAN SON | PROPHET SHEPHERD BUSHIRI

Last week, 38-year-old convicted rapist Nicholas Rossi died in a Utah hospital while under police custody. ­ Rossi (born Nicholas Alahverdian) operated under several aliases, including Arthur Knight, purportedly an orphan from Ireland. ­ He was first reported dead six years ago, with a Boston Globe obituary among the write-ups. But he wasn't actually deceased. He was alive and very much aware that he was on the FBI's radar. ­ Having fled to Scotland, Rossi became the subject of an Interpol Red Notice and increased media attention, with interviews and identities colliding as his web of lies was exposed. ­ “Nicholas Rossi was clever, but then he was very stupid in other ways,” says investigative journalist and podcaster Jane MacSorley, who has worked on the story since the beginning of 2022. ­ On this episode of The Indo Daily, host Fionnán Sheahan is joined by MacSorley, who details her own encounter with Nicholas Rossi and explores the numerous complications and contradictions of his life. ­ The Indo Daily is part of the Trust Project. You can see our ethics policies at independent.ie/ourjournalismSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hester has everything - good looks, good health, a loving family. But she is troubled by a recurring dream she has had since childhood. But is it just a dream - or a warning?This is reading of "The Face" by E. F. Benson, 1924.

We have officially spiraled. In this episode, Dan gets completely called out for a sneaky financial move against his own wife, while Clint considers completely cutting off his charity donations out of pure spite. Plus, we test our sanity with a chaotic impromptu speech generator that results in a massive argument about an imaginary "orphan bus." You are genuinely not ready for how fast this chat falls apart—hit play and join the madness!

Do we have the audacity to stop PRAYING LIKE ORPHANS and start praying like heirs?These are the scripture referenced:Luke 11:1-10 To stay connected and to support this ministry click here:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/hopeandanchorchurch?utm_source=linktree_profile_share

What does true freedom really mean? In this special America 250 episode of Her God Story, Jodie Chiricosta imagines a thoughtful conversation with Abigail Adams—woman of faith, patriot, and one of the strongest moral voices of America's founding era.Drawing from Abigail's letters and historical writings, this inspiring episode explores freedom, virtue, courage, faith, and responsibility—and why liberty must remain grounded in God and moral character to endure.You'll be encouraged to:Stand firm in the freedom Christ givesFind courage and steadiness in uncertain timesGrow in faith and moral convictionUse your influence to serve others wellAnd live with greater purpose and responsibilityAbigail Adams: The Blessing of Freedom is a timely reminder that true liberty is both a gift and a sacred trust. Click here for SHOW NOTES!Start a Her God Story Podcast Club! Learn more here!Share this message with a friend and subscribe for weekly encouragement and inspiration! Check out HerGodStory.org for a FREE 6-WEEK DEVOTIONAL and to see upcoming guests. Want to help Widows and Orphans? Join our growing company of women meeting special needs of parentless children and nurturing their unique gifts so they can be ALL God has in mind for them! And help meet real needs of women who have given a lifetime of service to God! Support the Somebody Cares Widows and Orphan fund today! Learn more about the ministry at SomebodyCares.org, FOLLOW US ON:Facebook: @SomebodyCaresAmerica Youtube: SomebodyCaresAmerica Rumble: SomebodyCares X: _SomebodyCares.Instagram: SomebodyCaresAmericaLinkedIn: Somebody Cares America You can also receive periodic ministry updates or join our prayer team by signing up here!Read Jodie's BLOG at LivingYourFaith.net

Romans 8:16 anchors the believer’s identity in a powerful truth: through the Holy Spirit, we are affirmed as children of God. In this devotional, Cindi McMenamin unpacks what it means to live from that identity rather than slipping back into fear, anxiety, and emotional chaos. When life feels overwhelming, it’s easy to function as if we are spiritually alone, but Scripture reminds us that believers are fully adopted, fully known, and fully secured in God’s family. Highlights Romans 8:16 confirms believers are children of God through the Spirit. Stress and anxiety often reflect a forgotten identity in Christ. In Christ, believers are adopted, forgiven, and fully secure. God’s love is unshakable and cannot be separated from His children. Identity in Christ replaces an “orphan mindset” with confidence. Believers are complete in Christ, not unfinished projects. Our daily behavior reflects what we believe about God’s care. Living as God’s child produces peace, trust, and spiritual stability. Join the Conversation Have you experienced a time when God reminded you that He saw your pain, needs, or circumstances? How does knowing that God is El Roi—the God who sees you—change the way you approach difficult seasons? Continue the conversation with the Crosswalk community here: https://forums.crosswalk.com/ Do you want to listen ad-free? When you join Crosswalk Plus, you gain access to exclusive, in-depth Bible study guides, devotionals, sound biblical advice, and daily encouragement from trusted pastors and authors—resources designed to strengthen your faith and equip you to live it out boldly. PLUS ad free podcasts! Sign Up Today! Full Transcript Below: No Longer an OrphanBy Cindi McMenaminBible Reading:“The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (Romans 8:16 NKJV). Do you realize that when we worry and fret and start living a drama-filled life, we are forgetting who we really are? We are, in a sense, starting to live like orphans. After all, when you are trusting Christ alone for the forgiveness of your sin and for eternal life, you have become His adopted child (John 1:12; Romans 8:14-17). And in that relationship as His child, you have a new identity that does not include the corruption or chaos of your past, or the problems in your present, or the fears of your future. Your drama or problems don’t define you either. In your new role, God calls you: His child – John 1:12 says: “As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name.” His friend – Jesus said “No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you” (John 15:15). A saint – In Ephesians 1:1, believers in Christ are called saints. Yeah, but I’m not a saint, you may be thinking. Your actions may not always say it. But your position in Him says it. You are seen as perfect by Him because You are covered in the righteousness and goodness of Christ. Forgiven – Colossians 1:14 says you have been redeemed (bought back) and forgiven of all your sins—past, present, and future. So your past sins—or your past wounds—can no longer define you. Your slate is wiped clean. Complete – Do you feel like a “work in progress”? Many people describe themselves this way, referring to how they are not yet what God desires of them. But God’s Word is the final authority, and it says “you are complete in Him” (Colossians 2:10). The work has already been done. You just need to live in that truth and wear it. Secure – both eternally and daily, in Him. You are free from condemnation (Romans 8:1-2), free from condemning charges (Romans 8:31-34), and free from the possibility of abandonment (Hebrews 13:5). Unconditionally loved – Romans 8:35-39 says “nothing” will be able to separate you from the love of God – not death, life, circumstances, sin, poor choices, a season of rebellion, nothing! His temple – that means He lives within you. Your heart is His home. And He dwells with you daily (1Corinthians 6:19). Royalty – He says you are seated with Him in the heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6). His masterpiece –created in Him for good words which He prepared for you before you were ever born (Ephesians 2:10 NLT). Fully capable by His power –You are able to accomplish “all things” through Christ, who gives you strength (Philippians 4:13). His possession –You are not your own, you belong to Him because you were “bought at a price” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). That means He protects you and provides for you as His own. That also means nothing can touch you that hasn’t first gone through His loving hands. Intersecting Faith & Life: So, why do we stress about our needs, our problems, our finances, our health, and our relationships? Is that our way of saying God has forgotten us and He won’t really be a good Father to His child? Through our stress and striving, are we saying to others around us, “I’m on my own because God won’t—or can’t—help me.” How you and I live day to day is evidence of what we truly believe. An orphaned child says, “I am all alone. I have no one to help me.” A child of God lives confidently in the words: “My Father is with me. And He will help me.” The more you reaffirm who you are in Christ, the more your behavior will reflect your true identity—a loved, well-cared-for child of the Most High God who never needs to stress or worry. Why would you want to live any other way? Further Reading:Romans 8:12-17 For more on living like a loved child of God, see Cindi’s book, Drama Free: Finding Peace When Emotions Overwhelm You. Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

In this powerful episode of The Ugandan Boy Talk Show, we sit down with Brian Kagyezi, author of In The Eyes of an Orphan, as he shares his deeply personal journey of losing both parents before the age of 10 during Uganda's HIV/AIDS epidemic.Brian opens up about growing up as an orphan, the stigma and silence surrounding HIV/AIDS, navigating childhood without parents, and how those painful experiences shaped his purpose.We discuss:Losing both parents at a young ageGrowing up during the HIV/AIDS crisis in UgandaThe emotional impact of orphanhood and childhood traumaTurning pain into purposeWriting In The Eyes of an OrphanFaith, healing, family, and building a successful lifeAdvocating for vulnerable children in UgandaBrian's story is a reminder that your past does not have to define your future.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

We're going to the streets of New York City , where dangers lurk beneath pedestrians' feet. We'll also hear about an unsettling adoption scam involving a 37-year-old woman who allegedly posed as a 12-year-old girl using pacifiers and baby bottles. If that sounds especially offbeat to you, you're not alone. Featuring audio from 1010 WINS in New York City, the Dana & Parks Show out of KMBZ in Kansas City and the Dave Glover Show out of KMOX in St. Louis.

This episode is an invitation to rethink what we mean by orphan care and how Christians can best support vulnerable children around the world. I sat down with Elli Oswald, Executive Director of Faith to Action, for a conversation about orphan care and global missions. Elli brings over a decade of experience in global child welfare and shares why many organizations are shifting focus from institutional care toward strengthening families. Key takeaways: The majority of children in orphanages worldwide have living family, poverty separates them, not death Children thrive when they stay with family or in family-based environments Elli's story of Knabs shows how family tracing efforts reunited nearly every child in a Sierra Leone orphanage with their families The church's role is ensuring our giving creates the best outcomes Strengthening families before separation happens is more effective than caring for children after crisis This episode isn't about criticizing generosity, it's about channeling our compassion toward lasting stability, healing, and belonging. Whether your heart is for international missions, foster care, adoption, or serving vulnerable families, this conversation offers a fresh perspective on what effective compassion looks like.

Have you met someone who had drunk alcohol? It messes up their thinking so they make poor decisions. Many of the choices a drunk person makes is NOT what they would normally make. This week we are learning about how a big party and lots of wine led to the king needing to find a new queen. Who would he choose? God was working behind the scenes to make sure that one of his children would become the new queen of Persia. Year B Quarter 2 Week 23All Bible verses are from the NKJVHymn: Rescue the PerishingWrite to Ms. Katie: seedpod@startingwithjesus.comKatie's Korner: https://startingwithjesus.com/katies-korner/Find the Lessons Here: Kindergarten https://bit.ly/SeedPodKLessonsPrimary https://bit.ly/SeedPodPLessonsConnect with Us:Website: https://startingwithjesus.comStarting With Jesus - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/StartingWithJesusSeedPod - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvU2FBPEL5-Zi2QW0STVLg Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/startingwithjesusFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/startingwithjesusAcknowledgments:Bible Readings this Week: SophiaPodcast Producer: Katie ChitwoodSound Engineer: Dillon AustinMy Bible First, https://bit.ly/SeedPodLesson  for use of their Bible Lesson curriculum.AudioVerse, https://www.audioverse.org/  for partnering with us and supporting our ministry.Lindsey Mills, for writing and performing our SeedPod Kids Theme Song & Background Music. To learn more about her music or to get her CD, email her: lindsey@startingwithjesus.com

Have you met someone who had drunk alcohol? It messes up their thinking so they make poor decisions. Many of the choices a drunk person makes is NOT what they would normally make. This week we are learning about how a big party and lots of wine led to the king needing to find a new queen. Who would he choose? God was working behind the scenes to make sure that one of his children would become the new queen of Persia. Year B Quarter 2 Week 23All Bible verses are from the NKJVHymn: Rescue the PerishingWrite to Ms. Katie: seedpod@startingwithjesus.comKatie's Korner: https://startingwithjesus.com/katies-korner/Find the Lessons Here: Kindergarten https://bit.ly/SeedPodKLessonsPrimary https://bit.ly/SeedPodPLessonsConnect with Us:Website: https://startingwithjesus.comStarting With Jesus - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/StartingWithJesusSeedPod - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvU2FBPEL5-Zi2QW0STVLg Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/startingwithjesusFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/startingwithjesusAcknowledgments:Bible Readings this Week: SophiaPodcast Producer: Katie ChitwoodSound Engineer: Dillon AustinMy Bible First, https://bit.ly/SeedPodLesson  for use of their Bible Lesson curriculum.AudioVerse, https://www.audioverse.org/  for partnering with us and supporting our ministry.Lindsey Mills, for writing and performing our SeedPod Kids Theme Song & Background Music. To learn more about her music or to get her CD, email her: lindsey@startingwithjesus.com

Have you met someone who had drunk alcohol? It messes up their thinking so they make poor decisions. Many of the choices a drunk person makes is NOT what they would normally make. This week we are learning about how a big party and lots of wine led to the king needing to find a new queen. Who would he choose? God was working behind the scenes to make sure that one of his children would become the new queen of Persia. Year B Quarter 2 Week 23All Bible verses are from the NKJVHymn: Rescue the PerishingWrite to Ms. Katie: seedpod@startingwithjesus.comKatie's Korner: https://startingwithjesus.com/katies-korner/Find the Lessons Here: Kindergarten https://bit.ly/SeedPodKLessonsPrimary https://bit.ly/SeedPodPLessonsConnect with Us:Website: https://startingwithjesus.comStarting With Jesus - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/StartingWithJesusSeedPod - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvU2FBPEL5-Zi2QW0STVLg Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/startingwithjesusFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/startingwithjesusAcknowledgments:Bible Readings this Week: SophiaPodcast Producer: Katie ChitwoodSound Engineer: Dillon AustinMy Bible First, https://bit.ly/SeedPodLesson  for use of their Bible Lesson curriculum.AudioVerse, https://www.audioverse.org/  for partnering with us and supporting our ministry.Lindsey Mills, for writing and performing our SeedPod Kids Theme Song & Background Music. To learn more about her music or to get her CD, email her: lindsey@startingwithjesus.com

Have you met someone who had drunk alcohol? It messes up their thinking so they make poor decisions. Many of the choices a drunk person makes is NOT what they would normally make. This week we are learning about how a big party and lots of wine led to the king needing to find a new queen. Who would he choose? God was working behind the scenes to make sure that one of his children would become the new queen of Persia. Year B Quarter 2 Week 23All Bible verses are from the NKJVHymn: Rescue the PerishingWrite to Ms. Katie: seedpod@startingwithjesus.comKatie's Korner: https://startingwithjesus.com/katies-korner/Find the Lessons Here: Kindergarten https://bit.ly/SeedPodKLessonsPrimary https://bit.ly/SeedPodPLessonsConnect with Us:Website: https://startingwithjesus.comStarting With Jesus - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/StartingWithJesusSeedPod - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvU2FBPEL5-Zi2QW0STVLg Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/startingwithjesusFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/startingwithjesusAcknowledgments:Bible Readings this Week: SophiaPodcast Producer: Katie ChitwoodSound Engineer: Dillon AustinMy Bible First, https://bit.ly/SeedPodLesson  for use of their Bible Lesson curriculum.AudioVerse, https://www.audioverse.org/  for partnering with us and supporting our ministry.Lindsey Mills, for writing and performing our SeedPod Kids Theme Song & Background Music. To learn more about her music or to get her CD, email her: lindsey@startingwithjesus.com

Have you met someone who had drunk alcohol? It messes up their thinking so they make poor decisions. Many of the choices a drunk person makes is NOT what they would normally make. This week we are learning about how a big party and lots of wine led to the king needing to find a new queen. Who would he choose? God was working behind the scenes to make sure that one of his children would become the new queen of Persia. Year B Quarter 2 Week 23All Bible verses are from the NKJVHymn: Rescue the PerishingWrite to Ms. Katie: seedpod@startingwithjesus.comKatie's Korner: https://startingwithjesus.com/katies-korner/Find the Lessons Here: Kindergarten https://bit.ly/SeedPodKLessonsPrimary https://bit.ly/SeedPodPLessonsConnect with Us:Website: https://startingwithjesus.comStarting With Jesus - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/StartingWithJesusSeedPod - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvU2FBPEL5-Zi2QW0STVLg Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/startingwithjesusFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/startingwithjesusAcknowledgments:Bible Readings this Week: SophiaPodcast Producer: Katie ChitwoodSound Engineer: Dillon AustinMy Bible First, https://bit.ly/SeedPodLesson  for use of their Bible Lesson curriculum.AudioVerse, https://www.audioverse.org/  for partnering with us and supporting our ministry.Lindsey Mills, for writing and performing our SeedPod Kids Theme Song & Background Music. To learn more about her music or to get her CD, email her: lindsey@startingwithjesus.com

Have you met someone who had drunk alcohol? It messes up their thinking so they make poor decisions. Many of the choices a drunk person makes is NOT what they would normally make. This week we are learning about how a big party and lots of wine led to the king needing to find a new queen. Who would he choose? God was working behind the scenes to make sure that one of his children would become the new queen of Persia. Year B Quarter 2 Week 23All Bible verses are from the NKJVHymn: Rescue the PerishingWrite to Ms. Katie: seedpod@startingwithjesus.comKatie's Korner: https://startingwithjesus.com/katies-korner/Find the Lessons Here: Kindergarten https://bit.ly/SeedPodKLessonsPrimary https://bit.ly/SeedPodPLessonsConnect with Us:Website: https://startingwithjesus.comStarting With Jesus - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/StartingWithJesusSeedPod - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvU2FBPEL5-Zi2QW0STVLg Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/startingwithjesusFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/startingwithjesusAcknowledgments:Bible Readings this Week: SophiaPodcast Producer: Katie ChitwoodSound Engineer: Dillon AustinMy Bible First, https://bit.ly/SeedPodLesson  for use of their Bible Lesson curriculum.AudioVerse, https://www.audioverse.org/  for partnering with us and supporting our ministry.Lindsey Mills, for writing and performing our SeedPod Kids Theme Song & Background Music. To learn more about her music or to get her CD, email her: lindsey@startingwithjesus.com

Selkies rise from the sea in Celtic legend. Wild. Powerful. Unstoppable. This week on the Irish & Celtic Music Podcast, we celebrate the women of Celtic music who carry that same energy. From the north shore to the black water, Show 757 is an hour of music that will pull you under in the best possible way. It's the Irish & Celtic Music Podcast #757  -  -  Subscribe now at CelticMusicPodcast.com! One Street Over, Gillian Boucher & Bob McNeill, Fialla, Eloise & Co., The Leftovers, The Bow Tides, Low Lily, Tara's Folk, Sue Spencer, Eimear Arkins, Sora, Louise Bichan, Kim Carnie, THE DIVINERS GET CELTIC MUSIC NEWS IN YOUR INBOX The Celtic Music Magazine is a quick and easy way to plug yourself into more great Celtic culture. Enjoy seven weekly news items with what's happening with Celtic music and culture online. Subscribe now and get 34 Celtic MP3s for Free. VOTE IN THE CELTIC TOP 20 FOR 2026 This is our way of finding the best songs and artists each year. You can vote for as many songs and tunes that inspire you in each episode. Your vote helps me create this year's Best Celtic music episode. You have just three weeks to vote this year. Vote Now! You can follow our playlist on YouTube to listen to those top voted tracks as they are added every 2 - 3 weeks. THIS WEEK IN CELTIC MUSIC 0:08 - Boxing Robin "Ned Coleman's #2/The Orphan" from Land of the Noon - Day Moon Gypsy Youngraven - vocals, guitar, and bodhrán 3:28 - WELCOME 5:25 - Gillian Boucher & Bob McNeill "Mountain Road #2" from Race for the Sun Gillian Boucher: fiddle, piano 11:22 - Fialla "Maid in Her Father's Garden" from Home & Away Katie: Vocals, Guitar, Bodhrán, Irish Stepdancing 14:44 - Eloise & Co. "Hanter Dro 1953 Kraozon/Hanter Dro 1930 Gregam/Meetinghouse Hanter Dro" from avec Elodie Becky Tracy (fiddle, octave fiddle) Rachel Bell (accordion) Rachel Aucoin (piano) 18:35 - The Leftovers "Down By the Glenside" from Heart of Buffalo Elizabeth Shea: vocals 21:34 - FEEDBACK 24:17 - The Bow Tides "Trip to Gaelicia" from Sailing On Ellery Klein: fiddle Jessie Burns: fiddle Katie Grennan: fiddle, champion Irish dancer 28:29 - Low Lily "Where We Belong" from Angels in the Wreckage LIZ SIMMONS: Guitar & Vocals NATALIE PADILLA: Fiddle, Banjo & Vocals 32:06 - Tara's Folk "How many Roads" from remember how we fall Julien Casanova -  fiddle Catherine de Vençay -  cello 36:19 - Sue Spencer "Free in the Harbour" from North Shore Sue Spencer: Guitar, Vocals 40:22 - THANKS 42:51 - Eimear Arkins "The St. Louis Waltz (Waltz)" from Here & There Eimear Arikins: Fiddle, Vocals 47:10 - Sora "Selkie" from Ghostlines Sora -  Voice, Piano, Violin 50:09 - Louise Bichan "Auch" from The Lost Summer Louise Bichan: fiddle 53:58 - Kim Carnie "Eolas Gradhaich" from A' Chailleach Kim Carnie: vocals 57:20 - CLOSING 58:40 - THE DIVINERS "Daychovo Horo" from earshot (EP) ILSE DE ZIAH: Cello; Fiddle; Vocals 1:01:23 - CREDITS Support for this program comes from Hank Woodward. Support for this program comes from Dr. Annie Lorkowski of Centennial Animal Hospital in Corona, California. Support for this program comes from John Sharkey White, II. Support for this program comes from International speaker, Joseph Dumond, teaching the ancient roots of the Gaelic people. Learn more about their origins at Sightedmoon.com Support for this program comes from Cascadia Cross Border Law Group, Creating Transparent Borders for more than twenty five years, serving Alaska and the world. Find out more at   www.CascadiaLawAlaska.com The Irish & Celtic Music Podcast was produced by Marc Gunn, The Celtfather and our Patrons on Patreon. The show was edited by Mitchell Petersen with Graphics by Miranda Nelson Designs. Visit our website to follow the show. You'll find links to all of the artists played in this episode. Todd Wiley is the editor of the Celtic Music Magazine. Subscribe to get 34 Celtic MP3s for Free. Plus, you'll get 7 weekly news items about what's happening with Celtic music and culture online. Best of all, you will connect with your Celtic heritage. Please tell one friend about this podcast. Word of mouth is the absolute best way to support any creative endeavor. Clean energy is the single most powerful tool we have to fight climate change. Solar, wind, hydro  -  every kilowatt of clean power displaces the fossil fuels warming our planet. The big picture matters. So do the small choices you make every day. This week's tip comes from the 5 Rs of Sustainability: Refuse. Before you buy something new, ask yourself if you actually need it. Every item you don't buy is one that never had to be made, shipped, or eventually thrown away. Refusing is the most underrated act of sustainability there is. Start there. Your wallet and the planet will both thank you. Promote Celtic culture through music at http://celticmusicpodcast.com/. WELCOME THE IRISH & CELTIC MUSIC PODCAST * Helping you celebrate Celtic culture through music. I am Marc Gunn. I'm a Celtic musician and also host of Pub Songs & Stories. Every song has a story, every episode is a toast to Celtic and folk songwriters. Discover the stories behind the songs from the heart of the Celtic pub scene. This podcast is for fans of all kinds of Celtic music. We are here to build a diverse Celtic community and help the incredible artists who so generously share their music with you. If you hear music you love, please email the artists to let them know you heard them on the Irish & Celtic Music Podcast. These musicians are not part of some corporation. They are small indie groups that rely on people just like you to support their music so they can keep creating it. Please show your generosity. Buy a CD, Album Pin, Shirt, Digital Download, or join their community on Patreon. You can find a link to all of the artists in the shownotes, along with show times, when you visit our website at celticmusicpodcast.com. ALBUM PINS ARE CHANGING THE WAY WE HEAR CELTIC MUSIC Looking for a fresh way to support the music you love? Meet the Album Pin. Album Pins are lapel pins themed to a specific album — and each one comes with a digital download. Wear your music. All of my latest pins are wood - burned and locally produced, which means a smaller footprint and a one - of - a - kind feel you won't find anywhere else. Pick yours up at magerecords.com THANK YOU PATRONS OF THE PODCAST! Every episode of the Irish & Celtic Music Podcast exists because of you. Your support makes this possible, week after week, year after year. That is not a small thing. Your generosity covers real costs: audio engineering, graphic design, the Celtic Music Magazine, show promotion, and buying music directly from the independent Celtic artists we feature. You are the reason this music reaches new ears every single week. Not a patron yet? Here is what you are missing. Patrons get early access to episodes, music - only editions, free MP3 downloads, exclusive stories and artist interviews, and a vote in the Celtic Top 20. Join us today and help keep Celtic music alive, independent, and growing. Every single patron matters. Slainte! A special thanks to our Celtic Legends: Fuzzy, Dave and Rosie Donnelly, Rick Boyce, Bruce, Daniel Ide, Brian McReynolds, Marti Meyers, Alan Schindler, Margreta Silverstone, Emma Bartholomew, Dan mcDade, Jeff A, Gerald F Boyle, Miranda Nelson, Nancie Barnett, Gary R Hook, Lynda MacNeil, Kelly Garrod, Mike Schock, Shawn Cali HERE IS YOUR THREE STEP PLAN TO SUPPORT THE PODCAST Go to our Patreon page. Decide how much you want to pledge every month, $4, $12, $25. Keep listening to the Irish & Celtic Music Podcast to celebrate Celtic culture through music. You can become a generous Patron of the Podcast on Patreon at SongHenge.com. TRAVEL WITH CELTIC INVASION VACATIONS Every year, I take a small group of Celtic music fans on the relaxing adventure of a lifetime. We don't see everything. Instead, we stay in one area. We get to know the region through its culture, history, and legends. You can join us with an auditory and visual adventure through podcasts and videos. Learn more about the invasion at http://celticinvasion.com/ #celticmusic #irishmusic #celticmusicpodcast I WANT YOUR FEEDBACK What are you doing today while listening to the podcast? Send me a photo. If you're in a Celtic band, send me an audio recording of you performing live. Just audio. I'll use it in a podcast episode later this year. Email me at follow@bestcelticmusic. Asa Swain commented on Patreon: "I like hearing you talk, but thanks for releasing a "music only" version for everyone. I appreciate it." woodland folk replied to question, "how does the podcast make your life better?": I listen to ur podcast on my phone. on my closed fiddle case, mingled with birdsong, gentle hissing wood,the sun comes up early over the Mendips.the wind is still fresh... A battle of wills, my playlist rarely is enough....two tunes I play in the city right now I heard on one of my favourite episodes to date(man of the house),"the silver spear"& the blue idol.... I listened to this episode in a wood near the coast. maby five yrs ago, a deep cashcrop, scented pine. the needles leave a sponge rug moss covers old stumps & oaks, older by far than the rest of the wood that grow in crearings. deer whistle & bark in the night "home is were the heart is" & have on occasion gone back to listen again... The music u play suits the wood my friend..."  

On this episode of “The Kylee Cast,” Josh Wood, executive director of Them Before Us, joins Federalist Managing Editor Kylee Griswold to discuss the viral video of two gay “dads” laughing as the child they commissioned via surrogate cries for “mama.” Plus, Kylee and Josh discuss adoption, natural rights, and the direct line from this heartbreaking video back to Obergefell.Follow Josh on X: https://x.com/J_K_WoodLearn more about Them Before Us here: https://thembeforeus.com/Learn more about the Greater Than campaign here: https://greaterthancampaign.com/The Federalist Foundation is a nonprofit, and we depend entirely on our listeners and readers — not corporations. If you value fearless, independent journalism, please consider a tax-deductible gift today at TheFederalist.com/donate. Your support keeps us going.