Podcasts about Our Time

#099 - Join me and Robin Landa, distinguished professor at Kean University and globally recognized ideation expert. She's a best-selling author of books on ideation, creativity, branding, advertising and design and is recognized by The Carnegie Foundation as one of the “Great Teachers of Our Time.” She has 25 books, including Strategic Creativity: A Business Field Guide to Advertising, Branding, and Design and The New Art of Ideas: Unlock Your Creative Potential.We discuss:the most important thing to do if you want to be traditionally published,Bookstagram, BookTok and LinkedIn vs. Instagram,her 3-step methodology for creating worthwhile ideas (and what constitutes worthwhile),how knowing your audience is just as important for creativity as it is for business,and how to unlock your creative potential.Smith Publicity is the site Robin references that has great free resources for authors.Connect with Robin at RobinLanda.com and follow her on Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram and TikTok.Interested in working with me and getting all your web copy written in one day? Get details about VIP copywriting days here.Screenshot your fave episode, tag me @JennieTheWordsmith, and do it as many times as you want between now and 4/23/23 . . . and WIN PRIZES!!Support the showFollow me places! LinkedIn | Instagram | TikTok | Pinterest | Twitter | YouTube | FacebookMusic Credit:Brighter Days by Markvard & Kvarmezhttps://soundcloud.com/markvardhttps://soundcloud.com/simen-eliassen-kvarmeCreative Commons — Attribution 3.0 Unported — CC BY 3.0Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/brighter-daysMusic promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/jVEoeR9AunYThinking of starting a podcast of your own? Adam Schaeuble is the MAN when it comes to all things podcasting and his Podcast Launch Blueprint is packed to the gills with everything you need to take your podcast from concept to launch in four weeks or less!

Pastor Freddy T Wyatt and Jonathan Vinson return to talk of the Our Time initiative and what's in store for Real Life during this exciting and holy season. Listen in as they talk of spring break, share more about Our Time, and reflect on the work we share with God for His Kingdom. Text "mission" to 97000 to learn more about Real Life or visit RealLifeSango.com    Our Time Guidebook Our Time Vision video

Robin Landa is a distinguished professor at Kean University and a globally recognized ideation expert. She is a well-known “creativity guru” and a best-selling author of books on creativity, design, and advertising. She has won numerous awards and The Carnegie Foundation counts her among the "Great Teachers of Our Time."She has written twenty-five books, including Strategic Creativity, Graphic Design Solutions, Advertising by Design, Build Your Own Brand, Designing Brand Experiences, and Nimble.About The New Art of Ideas: Unlock Your Creative PotentialIn a world with a surplus of ideas, what separates a good idea from a bad one?In her breakthrough book, The New Art of Ideas: Unlock Your Creative Potential (Berrett-Koehler Publishers; November 8, 2022), Robin Landa offers a comprehensive and actionable guide on how to produce the kind of ideas people can't turn down.The New Art of Ideas is designed to help readers consistently produce worthwhile ideas by becoming nimble and imaginative thinkers better equipped to compete and produce in a global economy.In the book, Landa presents her proven framework for generating consequential ideas,The Three Gs— the first new idea generation technique since brainstorming.• Goal—What you want to achieve• Gap—The missing piece that your idea provides• Gain—The overall benefits of your ideaThis book is about how to get great ideas. Not just lots of ideas, but ideas worth pursuing that get results. With explanations and examples of each component, The New Art of Ideas demystifies the process of effective ideation and hands you the key to unlock your creative potential.Actor Holly Taylor (Manifest; The Americans) illustrated the book and Broadway director and choreographer Lorin Latarro wrote the foreword.Drawing from her expertise and key themes in The New Art of Ideas, we discuss:· The new framework for valuable ideation: The Three Gs — Goal, Gap, and Gain· How to use the fluid process (in any order) to generate, crystalize, amplify, and evaluate worthwhile ideas across disciplines and industries· How to evaluate the validity of your ideas so that you don't waste time on fruitless endeavors· How the Three Gs process differs from others— It's an actionable system vs. a black box ideation method that depends on an elusive Aha! moment· The benefits of the Three Gs: How worthwhile ideas impact profit, people, and the planet· How diversity, equity, and inclusion can amplify the Three Gs process· How leaders and organizations can employ this process in their companies to get ahead of the competition in an idea-based economy· How individuals at any level can develop creative habits— and where to start· Are you a gap seeker? Critical steps to identify key growth opportunities· The impacts that emotion and doubt play in goal setting— and how to overcome the obstacles· Notable examples of how impactful ideas were developedThe New Art of Ideas is available on Amazon and everywhere books are sold.For more information, please visit: Robin's Website Robin on YouTube @proflanda on Instagram

Pastor Freddy T Wyatt begins the Our Time series. Listen as he shares the vision and scriptural inspiration for the Our Time Initiative.   To learn more, text "mission" to 97000 or visit https://www.reallifesango.com

Original Air Date 1/15/2022 Today we take a look at tradeoffs that are becoming ever more evident between the advancement of mass communication and social media technologies and the ways in which those advancements contribute to the degradation of social cohesion. Be part of the show! Leave us a message or text at 202-999-3991 or email Jay@BestOfTheLeft.com  Transcript BestOfTheLeft.com/Support (Get AD FREE Shows & Bonus Content) SHOW NOTES Ch. 1: Re-musing Ourselves - On the Media - Air Date 3-3-06 The late media critic Neil Postman argued in his seminal book "Amusing Ourselves to Death," that as TV prevailed over the printed word, it impaired our ability to make sense of a world of information. Jay Rosen writes the blog, PressThink. Ch. 2: Neil Postman Technopoly - C-Span Book TV - Air Date 7-10-92 Neil Postman, author of Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology published by Alfred A. Knopf Publishers, spoke on the theme of his book which noted the dependence of Americans on technological advances for their own security. Ch. 3: Prescient Predictions 1984; Brave New World; and Network Part 1 - Future Tense - Air Date 7-7-19 The dystopian best-seller 1984 was published exactly seventy years ago. Its influence has been profound. But does it really speak to today's politico-cultural environment? Scott Stephens believes Aldous Huxley's Brave New World is a closer match. Ch. 4: The Trouble With Reality - On The Media - Air Date 5-17-17 This is a conversation between Brooke Gladstone, author of "The Trouble with Reality: A Rumination on Moral Panic in Our Time," and WNYC morning show host Brian Lehrer. Ch. 5: Prescient Predictions 1984; Brave New World; and Network Part 2 - Future Tense - Air Date 7-7-19 Ch. 6: Neil Postman on Cyberspace - The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour - Air Date 7-25-95 Charlene Hunter-Gault interviews media theorist and cultural critic Neil Postman on PBS' The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour in 1995. Postman discusses new media and the "Faustian bargain" of technological change in the context of the "Information Superhighway." Ch. 7: Alexa, What's Amazon Doing Inside My Home? - Land of the Giants - Air Date 7-30-19 What's the downside to letting Alexa run your entire home? And why is Amazon making a microwave oven powered by Alexa? FINAL COMMENTS Ch. 8: Final comments on Faustian Bargains MUSIC (Blue Dot Sessions)   Produced by Jay! Tomlinson Visit us at BestOfTheLeft.com Listen Anywhere! BestOfTheLeft.com/Listen Listen Anywhere! Follow at Twitter.com/BestOfTheLeft Like at Facebook.com/BestOfTheLeft Contact me directly at Jay@BestOfTheLeft.com

Stef van Dongen is an innovator, an entrepreneur, and the founder of Pioneers of Our Time. While working with high-powered leaders and change-makers, he realized that they were making important decisions for the future of the world from a place of being disconnected from themselves, nature, and the consequences of their choices. In this episode, you'll hear how Stef discovered an attunement with nature that set him off on a journey to help change makers reconnect with themselves and nature while working to restore and regenerate the forest ecosystem and rural economy of the Muga Valley.  

Welcome to our newest show at Impact Radio USA, "INTERVIEWS and MORE", the show that features past interviews from our guests on "Dr. Paul's Family Talk" radio show. In addition to continuing to promote our guests, this show also gives our listeners another opportunity to hear the great information that our guests have provided. As for the "More", we will cover everything from food, to cars, to Bible verses, to music, and so much "MORE"! NEW SHOWS ARE DROPPED EACH MONDAY AT 10:00 AM ET. On today's segment, we will play the interview with Humorist Author/Columnist, DOROTHY ROSBY. DOROTHY ROSBY, a humor columnist (currently in 38 newspapers!) and author from South Dakota, will join us to discuss her unique and humorous looks at life, as well as to discuss her books, "I Used to Think I Was Not That Bad and Then I Got to Know Me Better", "Alexa's a Spy and Other Things to Be Ticked off About, Humorous Essays on the Hassles of Our Time", and "I Didn't Know You Could Make Birthday Cake from Scratch, Parenting Blunders from Cradle to Empty Nest". We will also discuss her newest release, "‘Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate, Holidays, Special Occasions and Other Times Our Celebrations Get Out of Hand". FROM HER BIO and WEBSITE: "I love talking about the writing life and all aspects of humor including humor writing and finding humor in difficult times. My next book, ‘Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate, is a humorous take on the way we Americans create celebrations for everything then turn them into a chores, or worse, nightmares. 'Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate is a collection of humorous pieces about holidays, special occasions and other times our celebrations make us feel not-so-celebratory. It's understanding for those who think Christmas form letters can be honest—or they can be interesting. And it's empathy for anyone who's ever gotten poison ivy during Nude Recreation Week or eaten all their Halloween candy and had to hand out instant oatmeal packets to their trick-or-treaters. I love to talk about all of that too!  I live in the beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota, 20 miles from Mount Rushmore, something I'm very proud of though I'm not on it. Dorothy Rosby is an author and syndicated humor columnist whose work appears in publications throughout the West and Midwest. You can see the list on the editor's page. If your local newspaper doesn't run her column and you think (as we do) that it should, pass her name on to them. She'd love to hear from you if you enjoy her blog—not so much if you don't. Kidding! (Sort of.)" dorothyrosby.com

This is Our Time! --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/buster-holzer/support

Self Love is one of those concepts that can be a little tricky to understand. It encompasses so much more than pedicures and manicures and massages! Many of us shy away from "self-love" thinking that it is prideful and self-centered because we've been taught to be humble and selfless. Right?! In the scriptures, we learn to love our neighbor AS ourselves.  This means to love ALL of us.  Both ourselves and others.  To have care, compassion, concern, and forgiveness for both parties.  The interesting thing is these "companion commandments" work together.  When we love ourselves, it's easy to love our neighbor, and vice versa.  Listen in to this episode as we discuss more of the why, why's, and hows to self-love! Ezra Taft Benson "Beware of Pride" Matthew 22: 36-39 David A. Bednar "The Character of Christ" Gifford Nielsen "This is Our Time"      

Bradley Terrence Jordan, better known by his stage name Scarface, but originally DJ Akshen, is an icon MC and record producer. He was also a member of the Geto Boys, a hip-hop group from Houston, Texas. He grew up in Houston and is originally from the city's South Acres (Crestmont Park) neighborhood. In 2012, The Source ranked him #16 on their list of the Top 50 Lyricists of All Time, while About.com ranked him #6 on its list of the 50 Greatest MCs of Our Time (1987–2007). He is without a doubt one of the best to ever do it and we talk about his iconic place in hip-hop and what he truly finds successful. Enjoy!

In this episode, Courtenay invites founder of Autonomy and host of the podcasts Grand Theft World and Peace Revolution, Richard Grove, back to the show to discuss how his personal journey & experiences led him to discover the historical cycles of corruption now often labeled as “conspiracy theories”. While many are “waking up” to the many deceptions and lies that have permeated our society and been inculcated through our formal education it's often a traumatic experience that enables us to fully shift our paradigm. Richard graciously and eloquently, condenses his story of tremendous injustice and grievances in the corporate world to convey the importance of authentic education vs indoctrination and how he discovered a path to unveil the truths of how the world operates and became inspired to use his painful experience to purposefully execute a mission of finding ways he can empower others to become autodidactic critical thinkers!  As a conceptual artist and forensic historian, Richard is passionate about reviving individuals from the perpetuated cycles of helplessness society has instilled through its education systems, government controls, and mainstream propaganda. After retiring in his 30's from a successful run in corporate America, Richard became a whistleblower to the injustices he witnessed and felt compelled to resolve them. Since, he has dedicated his efforts to collecting evidence that illustrates ongoing corruption of justice and empowers individuals to find their own sense of cognitive liberty and personal autonomy. Episode Resources: New World Order: A Strategy of Imperialism by Sean Stone DOPE, Inc.: Britain's Opium War Against the World by Executive Intelligence Review Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carroll Quigley The Underground History American Education by John Taylor Gatto & Richard Grove The Anglo-American Establishment by Carroll Quigley Tragedy & Hope 101 by Joseph Plummer The Devil's Chessboard by David Talbot rothchildarchive.org Connect with Richard: Website: https://getautonomy.info/ignite      https://thegreaterreset.org/speakers/richard-grove/       https://grandtheftworld.com/       https://tragedyandhope.com/ ————————————————— Disclaimer: this is intended to be inspiration & entertainment. We aim to inform, inspire & empower. Guest opinions/ statements are not a reflection of the host or podcast. Please note these are conversational dialogues. All statements and opinions are not necessarily meant to be taken as fact. Please do your own research. Thanks for watching! ————————————————— Follow & Connect with Courtenay: https://www.courtenayturner.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/KineticCourtz TruthSocial: https://truthsocial.com/@CourtenayTurner Instagram: https://instagram.com/kineticcourtz?utm_medium=copy_link Telegram: https://t.me/courtenayturnerpodcastcommunity Read some of her articles: https://www.truthmatters.biz Listen to &/or watch the podcast here! https://linktr.ee/courtenayturner Support my work & Affiliate links: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/courtzt https://zstacklife.com/?ref=COURTENAYTURNER The wellness company: https://www.twc.health/?ref=UY6YiLPqkwZzUX Enroll link: https://app.sharehealthcare.com/enroll? Referral code: courtz Www.HolyHydrogen.com Discount code: UPRISING144K Ignite Sales: https://www.universityofreason.com/a/29887/KVR3yvZo Mindset workshop: https://www.universityofreason.com/a/2147526145/KVR3yvZo Critical thinking trivium method: https://www.universityofreason.com/a/2147486641/KVR3yvZo Solutions webinar: https://www.universityofreason.com/a/2147492490/KVR3yvZo Richard's GTW freedom vault: https://www.universityofreason.com/a/2147506649/KVR3yvZo https://www.universityofreason.com/a/29887/KVR3yvZo ©2022 All Rights Reserved Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Synopsis On this day in 1934, an excited crowd of locals and visitors had gathered in Hartford, Connecticut, for the premiere performance of a new opera entitled Four Saints in Three Acts. The fact that the opera featured 16 saints, not 4, and was divided into 4 acts, not 3, was taken by the audience in stride, as the libretto was by the expatriate American writer, Gertrude Stein, notorious for her surreal poetry and prose. The music, performed by players from the Philadelphia Orchestra and sung by an all-black cast, was by the 37-year old American composer, Virgil Thomson, who matched Stein's surreal sentences with witty musical allusions to hymn tunes and parodies of solemn, resolutely tonal music. Among the locals in attendance was the full-time insurance executive and part-time poet, Wallace Stevens, who called the new opera (quote): "An elaborate bit of perversity in every respect: text, settings, choreography, [but] Most agreeable musically… If one excludes aesthetic self-consciousness, the opera immediately becomes a delicate and joyous work all around." The opera was a smashing success, and soon opened on Broadway, where everyone from Toscanini and Gershwin to Dorothy Parker and the Rockefellers paid a whopping $3.30 for the best seats—a lot of money during one of the worst winters of the Great Depression. Music Played in Today's Program Virgil Thomson (1896-1989) Four Saints in Three Acts Orchestra of Our Time; Joel Thome, conductor. Nonesuch 79035 On This Day Births 1741 - Belgian-born French composer André Grétry, in Liège; 1932 - American composer and conductor John Williams, in New York City; Deaths 1709 - Italian composer Giuseppe Torelli, age 50, in Bologna; 1909 - Polish composer Mieczyslaw Karlowicz, age 32, near Zakopane, Tatra Mountains; Premieres 1874 - Mussorgsky: opera “Boris Godunov”, at the Mariinsky Theatre in St. Petersburg, with bass Ivan Melnikov in the title role, and Eduard Napravnik conducting; This was the composer's own revised, nine-scene version of the opera, which originally consisted of just seven scenes (Julian date: Jan.27); 1897 - Kalinnikov: Symphony No. 1 (Gregorian date: Feb. 20); 1904 - Sibelius: Violin Concerto (first version), in Helsinki, by the Helsingsfors Philharmonic conducted by the composer, with Victor Novácek as soloist; The revised and final version of this concerto premiered in Berlin on October 19, 1905, conducted by Richard Strauss and with Karl Halir the soloist; 1907 - Schoenberg: Chamber Symphony No. 1 in Vienna, with the Rosé Quartet and members of the Vienna Philharmonic; 1908 - Rachmaninoff: Symphony No. 2 in St. Petersburg, with the composer conducting (Julian date: Jan. 26); 1909 - Liadov: “Enchanted Lake” (Gregorian date: Feb. 21); 1910 - Webern: Five Movements, Op. 5, for string quartet, in Vienna; 1925 - Cowell: "Ensemble" (original version for strings and 3 "thunder-sticks"), at a concert sponsored by the International Composers' Guild at Aeolian Hall in New York, by an ensemble led by Vladimir Shavitch that featured the composer and two colleagues on "thunder-sticks" (an American Indian instrument also known as the "bull-roarer"); Also on program was the premiere of William Grant Still's "From the Land of Dreams" for three voices and chamber orchestra (his first concert work, now lost, dedicated to his teacher, Edgard Varèse); 1925 - Miaskovsky: Symphonies Nos. 4 and 7, in Moscow; 1934 - Virgil Thomson: opera "Four Saints in Three Acts" (libretto by Gertrude Stein), in Hartford, Conn.; 1942 - Stravinsky: "Danses concertantes," by the Werner Janssen Orchestra of Los Angeles, with the composer conducting; 1946 - Bartók: Piano Concerto No. 3 (completed by Tibor Serly after the composer's death), by the Philadelphia Orchestra, Eugene Ormandy conducting and György Sándor as the soloist; 1959 - Elie Siegmeister: Symphony No. 3, in Oklahoma City; 1963 - Benjamin Lees: Violin Concerto, by the Boston Symphony, with Erich Leinsdorf conducting and Henryk Szeryng the soloist; 1966 - Lou Harrison: "Symphony on G" (revised version), at the Cabrillo Music Festival by the Oakland Symphony, Gerhard Samuel condicting; 1973 - Crumb: "Makrokosmos I" for amplified piano, in New York; 1985 - Earle Brown: "Tracer," for six instruments and four-track tape, in Berlin; 1986 - Daniel Pinkham: Symphony No. 3, by the Plymouth (Mass.) Philharmonic, Rudolf Schlegel conducting; 2001 - Sierra: "Concerto for Orchestra," by the Philadelphia Orchestra, Wolfgang Sawallisch conducting; Others 1875 - American composer Edward MacDowell admitted to the Paris Conservatory; 1877 - German-born (and later American) composer Charles Martin Loeffler admitted to the Paris Conservatory; 1880 - German opera composer Richard Wagner writes a letter to his American dentist, Dr. Newell Still Jenkins, stating "I do no regard it as impossible that I decide to emigrate forever to America with my latest work ["Parsifal"] and my entire family" if the Americans would subsidize him to the tune of one million dollars. Links and Resources On Virgil Thomson More on Thomson

NTD News Today—1/27/20231. Biden Touts Economy, Bashes MAGA in Speech2. Jeff Zients Selected as Next Chief of Staff3. Musk Meets with McCarthy, Jeffries4. Investigating ‘Signature Abuse of Our Time'5. 25 States Sue Biden Administration6. Lawmakers Submit 140+ Bill Amendments7. 5 Memphis Officers Charged in Nichols' Death8. 13 Arrested for Gun Store Burglaries9. Relief Efforts Underway in Half Moon Bay10. BuzzFeed to Use AI for Content Creation11. ChatGPT Passes Exam at Ivy League School12. NYC Bike Path Killer Convicted13. Woman Identified 50 Years After Death14. Feds Reject License Renewal Application15. Farm-to-Table Healthier School Lunches16. Nanjing Sees 6-Fold Increase in Deaths17. Hong Kong to Ban All CBD Products18. New Bill Seeks to Block Sales to China19. Video: Chopper Lifts F-25 Stealth Fighter20. Ex-Chicago Student Given 8 Years for Spying21. ICC Reopens Probe into Philippine Drug War22. Gerard Filitti | The Lawfare Project23. Germany's Top Nazi Hunter Races Against Time24. The Holocaust Survivor Who Fled Ukraine Twice25. Second Gentleman to Visit Auschwitz26. Experiencing Rio's New Holocaust Museum27. Holocaust Survivor Swindled on Dating Site28. U.S. Deliveries of Tanks to Ukraine Delayed29. Gunman Attacks Azerbaijan's Embassy in Iran30. Trans Rapist to Be Moved from Women's Prison31. Dutch Gov't Agencies Told Not to Use TikTok32. Belgian Firemen Protest Attacks Against Them33. Shen Yun Brings ‘Divine Spark' on U.S. Tour34. 4,300-Year-Old Tombs Discovered in Egypt35. How to Be a ‘Super-Ager'36. January 27: National Chocolate Cake Day

The characters are young and hopeful about the future, but we the audience know exactly how their lives are going to turn out. Emily Clark returns to discuss that dramatic irony as well as hanging plaques. You can listen to the podcast Emily co-hosts called Dear Friends Podcast: https://dearfriendspodcast.carrd.coShe hosts Stealing Focus on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/Divinemissem82And you can follow her on Twitter: https://twitter.com/emilyabclarkWe are using three productions to frame our discussion of Merrily We Roll Along.The Original Broadway Cast (1981) starring Jim Walton, Ann Morrison, and Lonny Price.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-original-broadway-cast-recording/738703005Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/3KZq3isCTbYMzGvnXkTfNr?si=u2vq6PhGTCeyOW9W8mTnhwOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Original-Broadway/dp/B01KB0V58O/The Off-Broadway Revival cast (1994) starring Malcolm Gets, Amy Ryder, and Adam Heller.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-the-new-cast-recording-1994-off/1440771486Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/51xg0INwgGytnQTHm2N0Tc?si=Vv_WetrCQ9OaTmgtpBTpZQOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Cast-Recording/dp/B000026G4K/The Encores! revival (2012) starring Colin Donnell, Celia Keenan-Bolger, and Lin-Manuel Miranda.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-2012-new-york-cast-recording/542006479Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/2ouySS4WHFplUHtwduvPKx?si=SLaweV0XRomMEvIPXqlpDAOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Encores-Recording/dp/B007Q1IT1I/Our sponsors this week are: STORYHIVE Anniversary Documentary Edition - https://www.storyhive.com/editions/V2_8 - It's the largest edition yet! Celebrate a decade of creativity with us by pitching any story to STORYHIVE's Anniversary Documentary Edition. We are funding 80 content creators with $20,000 in production funding, along with mentorship, training and distribution, plus additional top up funding from Creative BC. Alberta Podcast Network - https://www.albertapodcastnetwork.com - The Network promotes and supports Alberta-made podcasts, and connects their audiences with Alberta-based businesses and organizations.The podcast featured this week was The Read-Along - https://readalongpod.blogspot.com/ - Taking you on a journey through a good book, one chapter at a time. Send feedback to puttingittogetherpodcast@gmail.comPutting It Together is a proud member of The Alberta Podcast Network: Locally grown. Community supported. Here's their link again: https://www.albertapodcastnetwork.comRecorded by Media Lab YYC. Media Lab is a production company. They help you tell your story. They do this by assisting in the creation of videos and podcasts. Find more information at: http://medialabyyc.comKeep up to date with Putting It Together by following its social media channels.Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/puttingittogetherpodcastTwitter: https://twitter.com/sondheimpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/sondheimpodcast ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

The #XRP King is Here! https://xroyalty.io/ E1415 | YOU ARE BEING TESTED FOR THE NEXT LEVEL! Mother Fuckers We Are Not Backing Down In 2023. We Are Kings and Queens! This is Our Time! Listen Now! Free Discord | https://3twarrior.com/discord49541345 Linqto: https://www.linqto.com/?cjevent=b65ecbbec46011ec81b91b3a0a1c0e10 JOIN TODAY! (CRYPTO/MINDSET) | https://3twarrior.com/sales-page-515930741636122245022 3T Warrior Academy YouTube! | https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_e0zCKJyBdLYAvTQBgQrPw 3T Labs Gear and Supplements |https://www.3twarriorlabs.com #podcasting #motivation #health #crypto #cryptocommunity #cryptocurrency #fitness #wealth #generationalwealth #investing #entrepreneurship Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here.

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Lorraine Daston, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Historian of science Lorraine Daston's wonderful new book, Rules: A Short History of What We Live by (Princeton UP, 2022). is just out. Daston's earlier pathbreaking works include Against Nature, Classical Probability in the Enlightenment and many co-authored books, including Objectivity (with Peter Galison) which introduced the idea of historically changeable "epistemic virtues." In this Recall this Book conversation, Daston--Raine to her friends--shows that rules are never as thin (as abstract and context-free) as they pretend to be. True, we love a rule that seems to brook no exceptions: by the Renaissance, even God is no longer allowed to make exceptions in the form of miracles. Yet throughout history, Raine shows, islands of standardized stability are less stable than they seem. What may feel like oppressively general norms and standards are actually highly protected ecotopes within which thin rules can arise. Look for instance at the history of sidewalks (Raine has)! Raine, Elizabeth and John dive into the details. Implicit and explicit rules are distinguished in the case of e.g. cookbooks and monasteries--and then the gray areas in-between are explored. When students unconsciously ape their teachers, that is a tricky form of emulation--is it even possible to "follow but not ape"? Perhaps genres do this work: The Aeneid is not the Iliad and yet older writers are somehow internalized in the later ones. Mentioned in the Episode Karl Polanyi, 1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, on the embeddedness of markets in norms and rules. John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (1690) denounces the "arbitrary will of another," an early case of seeing will simply qua will is unacceptable. Arnold Davidson sees genre variation (like Milton learning from Homer) also happening in musical invention. Michael Tomasello works on children's rule-following and enforcement against violations, Johannes Huizinga's Homo Ludens (1938) with its notion of demarcated "sacred spaces of play" is a touchstone of rule-following Lorraine and John both adore. Recallable Books The Rule of Saint Benedict (516 onwards) Irma Rombauer, Joy of Cooking (1931 onwards) As Elizabeth says, it's from following the rules that joy emerges.... Walter Miller's Canticle for Liebowitz Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground (1864) an instance of the notion that one establishes free will by caprice or defiance against natural laws ("damnit, gentleman, sometimes 2+2=5 is a nice thing too!") Read the transcript here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Holden Karnofsky is the co-CEO of Open Philanthropy and co-founder of GiveWell. He is also the author of one of the most interesting blogs on the internet, Cold Takes.We discuss:* Are we living in the most important century?* Does he regret OpenPhil's 30 million dollar grant to OpenAI in 2016?* How does he think about AI, progress, digital people, & ethics?Highly recommend!Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Timestamps(0:00:00) - Intro(0:00:58) - The Most Important Century(0:06:44) - The Weirdness of Our Time(0:21:20) - The Industrial Revolution (0:35:40) - AI Success Scenario(0:52:36) - Competition, Innovation , & AGI Bottlenecks(1:00:14) - Lock-in & Weak Points(1:06:04) - Predicting the Future(1:20:40) - Choosing Which Problem To Solve(1:26:56) - $30M OpenAI Investment(1:30:22) - Future Proof Ethics(1:37:28) - Integrity vs Utilitarianism(1:40:46) - Bayesian Mindset & Governance(1:46:56) - Career AdviceTranscriptDwarkesh Patel  All right, today I have the pleasure of speaking with Holden Karnofsky who is the co-CEO of Open Philanthropy. In my opinion, Holden is one of the most interesting intellectuals alive. Holden, welcome to the Lunar Society. Holden Karnofsky Thanks for having me. The Most Important CenturyDwarkesh PatelLet's start off by talking about The Most Important Century thesis. Do you want to explain what this is for the audience? Holden Karnofsky My story is that I originally co-founded an organization called GiveWell that helps people decide where to give as effectively as possible. While I'm no longer as active as I once was there, I'm on its board. It's a website called GiveWell.org that makes good recommendations about where to give to charity to help a lot of people. As we were working at GiveWell, we met Cari Tuna and Dustin Moskovitz. Dustin is the co-founder of Facebook and Asana and we started a project that became Open Philanthropy to try to help them give away their large fortune and help as many people as possible. So I've spent my career looking for ways to do as much good as possible with a dollar, an hour, or basically whatever resources you have (especially with money).I've developed this professional specialization in looking for ideas that are underappreciated, underrated, and tremendously important because a lot of the time that's where I think you can find what you might call an “outsized return on investment.” There are opportunities to spend money and get an enormous impact because you're doing something very important that's being ignored by others. So it's through that kind of professional specialization that I've actively looked for interesting ideas that are not getting enough attention. Then I encountered the Effective Altruist Community, which is a community of people basically built around the idea of doing as much good as you can. It's through that community that I encountered the idea of the most important century. It's not my idea at all, I reached this conclusion with the help and input of a lot of people. The basic idea is that if we developed the right kind of AI systems this century (and that looks reasonably likely), this could make this century the most important of all time for humanity. So now let's talk about the basic mechanics of why that might be or how you might think about that. One thing is that if you look back at all of economic history ( the rate at which the world economy has grown), you see acceleration. You see that it's growing a lot faster today than it ever was. One theory of why that might be or one way of thinking about it through the lens of basic economic growth theory is that in normal circumstances, you can imagine a feedback loop where you have people coming up with ideas, and then the ideas lead to greater productivity and more resources.When you have more resources, you can also have more people, and then those people have more ideas. So you get this feedback loop that goes people, ideas, resources, people, ideas, resources. If you're starting a couple of hundred years ago and you run a feedback loop like that, standard economic theory says you'll get accelerating growth. You'll get a rate of economic growth that goes faster and faster. Basically, if you take the story of our economy to date and you plot it on a chart and do the kind of simplest thing you can to project it forward, you project that it will go that our economy will reach an infinite growth rate this century. The reason that I currently don't think that's a great thing to expect by default is that one of the steps of that feedback loop broke a couple hundred years ago. So it goes more people, more ideas, more resources, more people, more ideas, more resources. But, a couple hundred years ago, people stopped having more children when they had more resources. They got richer instead of more populous. This is all discussed on the Most Important Century page on my blog, Cold Takes. What happens right now is that when we have more ideas and we have more resources, we don't end up with more people as a result. We don't have that same accelerating feedback loop. If you had AI systems that could do all the things humans do to advance science and technology (meaning the AI systems could fill in that “more ideas” part of the loop), then you could get that feedback loop back. You could get sort of this unbounded, heavily accelerating, explosive growth in science and technology. That's the basic dynamic at the heart of it and a way of putting it that's trying to use familiar concepts from economic growth theory. Another way of putting it might just be, “Gosh, if we had AI systems that could do everything humans do to advance science and technology, that would be insane.” What if we were to take the things that humans do to create new technologies that have transformed the planet so radically and we were able to completely automate them so that every computer we have is potentially another mind working on advancing technology? So either way, when you think about it, you could imagine the world changing incredibly quickly and incredibly dramatically. I argue in the Most Important Century series that it looks reasonably likely, in my opinion, more than 50-50, that this century will see AI systems that can do all of the key tasks that humans do to advance science and technology. If that happens, we'll see explosive progress in science and technology. The world will quickly become extremely different from how it is today. You might think of it as if there was thousands of years of changes packed into a much shorter time period. If that happens, then I argue that you could end up in a deeply unfamiliar future. I give one example of what that might look like using this hypothetical technology idea called digital people. That would be sort of people that live in virtual environments that are kind of simulated, but also realistic and exactly like us. When you picture that kind of advanced world, I think there is a decent reason to think that if we did get that rate of scientific and technological advancement, we could basically hit the limits of science and technology. We could basically find most of what there is to find and end up with a civilization that expands well beyond this planet, has a lot of control over the environment, is very stable for very long periods of time, and looks sort of post-human in a lot of relevant ways. If you think that, then this is basically our last chance to shape how this happens. The most important century hypothesis in a nutshell is that if we develop AI that can do all the things humans do to advance science and technology, we could very quickly reach a very futuristic world that's very different from today's. It could be a very stable, very large world, and this is our last chance to shape it.The Weirdness of Our TimeDwarkesh Patel Gotcha. I and many other people are going to find that very wild. Could you walk us through the process by which you went from working in global development to thinking this way? In 2014, for example, you had an interview or a conversation and this is a quote from there. “I have looked at the situation in Africa, have an understanding of the situation in Africa, and see a path of doing a lot of good in Africa. I don't know how to look into the far future situation, don't understand the far future situation, and don't see a path to doing good on that front I feel good about.” Maybe you can walk me through how you got from there to where you are today.Holden Karnofsky Firstly, I want to connect this back to how this relates to the work I was doing at GiveWell, and why this all falls under one theme. If we are on the cusp for this century of creating these advanced AI systems, then we could be looking at a future that's either very good or very bad. I think there are decent arguments that if we move forward without caution and we develop sloppily designed AI systems, they could end up with goals of their own. We would end up with a universe that contains very little that humans value or a galaxy that does or a world where very powerful technologies are used by ill-meaning governments to create a world that isn't very good. We could also end up with a world where we manage to eliminate a lot of forms of material scarcity and have a planet that's much better off than today's. A lot of what I ask is how can we help the most people possible per dollar spent? If you ask how we can help the most people possible per dollar spent, then funding some work to help shape that transition and make sure that we don't move forward too incautiously, and that we do increase the odds that we do get like a good future world instead of a bad future one, is helping a huge number of people per dollar spent. That's the motivation. You're quoting an argument I was having where we posted a transcript back in 2014–– a time that was part of my journey of getting here. I was talking to people who were saying, “Holden, you want to help a lot of people with your resources. You should be focused on this massive event that could be coming this century that very few people are paying attention to, and there might be a chance to make this go well or poorly for humanity.” So I was saying, “Gosh, like that sure is interesting.” And I did think it was interesting. That's why I was spending the time and having those conversations. But I said, “When I look at global poverty and global health, I see what I can do. I see the evidence. I see the actions I can take. I'm not seeing that with this stuff.” So what changed? I would say a good chunk of what changed is maybe like the most boring answer possible. I just kept at it. I was sitting there in 2014 saying, “Gosh, this is really interesting, but it's all a bit overwhelming. It's all a bit crazy. I don't know how I would even think about this. I don't know how I would come up with a risk from AI that I actually believed was a risk and could do something about today.” Now, I've just been thinking about this for a much longer time period. I do believe that most things you could say about the far future are very unreliable and not worth taking action on, but I think there are a few things one might say about what a transition to very powerful AI systems could look like. There are some things I'm willing to say would be bad if AI systems were poorly designed, had goals of their own, and ended up kind of running the world instead of humans. That seems bad.I am more familiar today than I was then with the research and the work people can do to make that less likely and the actions people can take to make that less likely–– so that's probably more than half the answer. But another thing that would be close to half the answer is that I think there have been big changes in the world of AI since then. 2014 was the beginning of what's sometimes called the “deep learning revolution”. Since then, we've basically seen these very computationally intensive (but fundamentally simple) AI systems achieve a lot of progress on lots of different unrelated tasks. It's not crazy to imagine that the current way people are developing AI systems, cutting-edge AI systems, could take us all the way to the kind of extremely powerful AI systems that automate roughly everything humans do to advance science and technology. It's not so wild to imagine that we could just keep on going with these systems, make them bigger, put more work into them, but basically stay on the same path and you could get there. If you imagine doing that, it becomes a little bit less daunting to imagine the risks that might come up and the things we could do about them. So I don't think it's necessarily the leading possibility, but it's enough to start thinking concretely about the problem. Dwarkesh Patel Another quote from the interview that I found appealing was “Does the upper crust of humanity have a track record of being able to figure out the kinds of things MIRI claims to have figured out?” By the way, for context for the viewers, MIRI is the organization Eliezer was leading, which is who you were talking to at the time. Holden Karnofsky I don't remember exactly what kinds of things MIRI was trying to figure out and I'm not sure that I even understood what they were that well. I definitely think it is true that it is hard to predict the future, no matter who you are, no matter how hard you think, and no matter how much you've studied. I think parts of our “world” or memeplex or whatever you want to call it, overblow this at least a little bit. I think I was buying into that a little bit more than I could. In 2014, I would have said something like, “Gosh, no one's ever done something like making smart statements about what several decades out of our future could look like or making smart statements about what we would be doing today to prepare for it.” Since then, I think a bunch of people have looked into this and looked for historical examples of people making long-term predictions and long-term interventions. I don't think it's amazing, but I think I wrote a recent blog post entitled The Track Record of Future. It seems… fine. “Fine” is how I put it, where I don't think there's anyone who has demonstrated a real ability to predict the future with precision and know exactly what we should do. I also don't think humans' track record of this is so bad and so devastating that we shouldn't think we are capable of at least giving it a shot. If you enter into this endeavor with self-awareness about the fact that everything is less reliable than it appears and feels at first glance and you look for the few things that you would really bet on, I think it's worth doing. I think it's worth the bet. My job is to find 10 things we could do, and have nine of them fail embarrassingly, on the off chance that one of them becomes such a big hit that it makes up for everything else. I don't think it's totally crazy to think we could make meaningful statements about how things we do today could make these future events go better, especially if the future events are crazily far away (especially if they're within the next few decades.) That's something I've changed my mind on, at least to some degree. Dwarkesh Patel Gotcha. Okay, so we'll get to forecasting in a second, but let's continue on the object-level conversation about the most important century. I want to make sure I have the thesis right. Is the argument that because we're living in a weird time, we shouldn't be surprised if something transformative happens in a century or is the argument that something transformative could happen this century? Holden Karnofsky It's a weird time. So something we haven't covered yet, but I think is worth throwing in is that a significant part of the ‘Most Important Century series' is making the case that even if you ignore AI, there's a lot of things that are very strange about the time that our generation lives in. The reason I spent so much effort on this is because back in 2014, my number one objection to these stories about transformative AI wasn't anything about whether the specific claims about AI or economic models or alignment research made sense. This whole thing sounded crazy and was just suspicious. It's suspicious if someone says to you, “You know, this could be the most important century of all time for humanity.” I titled the series that way because I wanted people to know that I was saying something crazy and that I should have to defend it. I didn't want to be backpedaling or soft-pedaling or hiding what a big claim I was making. I think my biggest source of skepticism was how I didn't have any specific objection. It sounds crazy and suspicious to say that we might live in one of the most significant times of the most significant time for humanity ever. So a lot of my series is saying that it is weird to think that, but we already have a lot of evidence that we live in an extraordinarily weird time that would be on the short list of contenders for the most important time ever–– even before you get into anything about AI, and just used completely commonly accepted facts about the world. For example, if you chart the history of economic growth, you'll see that the last couple hundred years have seen faster growth by a lot than anything else in the history of humanity or the world. If you chart anything about scientific and technological developments, you'll see that everything significant is packed together in the recent past. There's almost no way to cut it. I've looked at many different cuts of this. There's almost no way to cut it that won't give you that conclusion. One way to put it is that the universe is something like 11 or 12 billion years old. Life on Earth is three billion years old. Human civilization is a blink of an eye compared to that. We're in this really tiny sliver of time, the couple hundred years when we've seen a huge amount of technological advancement and economic growth. So that's weird. I also talk about the fact that the current rate of economic growth seems high enough that we can't keep it going for that much longer. If it went for another 10,000 years, that's another blink of an eye and galactic time scales. It looks to me like we would run out of atoms in the galaxy and wouldn't have anywhere to go. So I think there are a lot of signs that we just live in a really strange time. One more thing that I'll just throw in there–– I think a lot of people who disagree with my take would say, “Look, I do believe eventually we will develop space colonization abilities. We could go to the stars, fill up the galaxy with life, and maybe have artificial general intelligence, but to say that this will happen in a century is crazy. I think it might be 500 years. I think it might be a thousand years. I think it might be 5000 years.” A big point I make in the series is how I say, “Well, even if it's 100000 years, that's still an extremely crazy time to be in in the scheme of things.” If you make a graphic timeline and you show my view versus yours, they look exactly the same down to the pixel. So there are already a lot of reasons to think we live in a very weird time. We're on this planet where there's no other sign of life anywhere in the galaxy. We believe that we could fill up the galaxy with life. That alone would make us among the earliest life that has ever existed in the galaxy–– a tiny fraction of it. So that's a lot of what the series is about. I'll answer this question explicitly. You ask, “Is this series about whether transformative AI will come and make this century weird?” or is it about “This century could be weird, and therefore transformative AI will come?” The central claim is that transformative AI could be developed in this century and the sections about ‘how weird a time we live in' are just a response to an objection. It's a response to a point of skepticism. It's a way of saying there are already a lot of reasons to think we live in a very weird time. So actually, this thing about AI is only a moderate quantitative update, not a complete revolution in the way you're thinking about things. Dwarkesh Patel There's a famous comedian who has a bit where he's imagining what it must have been like to live in 10BC. Let's say somebody comes with the proof that current deep learning techniques are not scalable for some reason and that transformative AI is very unlikely this century. I don't know if this is a hypothetical where that would happen, but let's just say that it is. Even if this is a weird time in terms of economic growth, does that have any implications other than transformative AI? Holden Karnofsky I encourage people to go to my series because I have a bunch of charts illustrating this and it could be a little bit hard to do concisely now. But having learned about just how strange the time we live in is when you look at it in context, I think the biggest thing I take away from this is how we should really look for the next big thing. If you'd been living 300 years ago and you'd been talking about the best way to help people, a lot of people might have been talking about various forms of helping low-income people. They probably would have been talking about spreading various religious beliefs. It would have seemed crazy to think that what you should be thinking about, for example, was the steam engine and how that might change the world, but I think the Industrial Revolution was actually an enormous deal and was probably the right thing to be thinking about if there's any way to be thinking about it how that would change the world and what one might do to make that a world that could be better.So that's basically where I'm at. I just think that as a world, as a global civilization, we should place a really high priority on saying that we live in a weird time. Growth has been exploding, accelerating over the last blink of an eye. We really need to be nervous and vigilant about what comes next and think about all the things that could radically transform the world. We should make a list of all the things that might radically transform the world, make sure we've done everything we can to think about them and identify the ways we might be able to do something today that would actually help. Maybe after we're done doing all that, we can have a lot of the world's brightest minds doing their best to think of stuff and when can't think of any more, then we can go back to all the other things that we worry aboutRight now the world invests so little in that kind of speculative, “Hey, what's the next big thing?” Even if it's not super productive to do so, even if there's not that much to learn, I feel the world should be investing more in that because the stakes are extremely high. I think it's a reasonable guess that we're living in a world that's recently been incredibly transformed by the Industrial Revolution and the future could be incredibly transformed by the next thing. I just don't think this gets a lot of discussion in basically any circles. If it got some, I would feel a lot more comfortable. I don't think the whole world should just obsess over what the next transformative event is, but I think right now there's so little attention to it. The Industrial Revolution Dwarkesh Patel I'm glad you brought up the Industrial Revolution because I feel like there are two implicit claims within the most important century thesis that don't seem perfectly compatible. One is that we live in an extremely wild time and that the transition here is potentially wilder than any other transition there has been before. The second is we have some sense of what we can be doing to make sure this transition goes well. Do you think that somebody at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, knowing what they knew then, could have done something significant to make sure that it went as favorably as possible? Or do you think that that's a bad analogy for some reason? Holden Karnofsky It's a pretty good analogy for being thought-provoking and for thinking, “Gosh, if you had seen the Industrial Revolution coming in advance and this is when economic growth really reached a new level back in the 1700s and 1800s, what could you have done?” I think part of the answer is it's not that clear and I think that is a bit of an argument we shouldn't get too carried away today by thinking that we know exactly what we can do. But I don't think the answer is quite nothing. I have a goofy cold-taste post that I never published and may never publish because I lost track of it. What it basically says is “What if you'd been in that time and you had known the Industrial Revolution was coming or you had thought it might be?” You would ask yourself what you could be doing. One answer you might have given is you might have said, “Well, gosh, if this happens, whatever country it happens in might be disproportionately influential. What would be great is if I could help transform the thinking and the culture in that country to have a better handle on human rights and more value on human rights and individual liberties and a lot of other stuff–– and gosh, it kind of looks like people were doing that and it looks like it worked out.” So this is the Enlightenment.I even give this goofy example–– I could look it up and it's all kind of a trollish post. But the example is someone's thinking, “Hey, I'm thinking about this esoteric question about what a government owes to its citizens” or, “When does a citizen have a right to overthrow a government or when is it acceptable to enforce certain beliefs and not?” Then the other person in the dialogue is just like, “This is the weirdest, most esoteric question. Why does this matter? Why aren't you helping poor people?” But these are the questions that the Enlightenment thinkers were thinking about. I think there is a good case that they came up with a lot of stuff that really shaped the whole world since then because of the fact that the UK became so influential and really laid the groundwork for a lot of stuff about the rights of the governed, free speech, individual rights, and human rights. Then I go to the next analogy. It's like we're sitting here today and someone is saying, “Well, instead of working on global poverty, I'm studying this esoteric question about how you get an AI system to do what you want it to do instead of doing its own thing. I think it's not completely crazy to see them as analogous.” Now, I don't think this is what the Enlightenment thinkers are actually doing. I don't think they were saying this could be the most important millennium, but it is interesting that it doesn't look like there was nothing to be had there. It doesn't look like there's nothing you could have come up with. In many ways, it looks like what the Enlightenment thinkers were up to had the same esoteric, strange, overly cerebral feel at the time and ended up mattering a huge amount. So it doesn't feel like there's zero precedent either.Dwarkesh Patel Maybe I'm a bit more pessimistic about that because I think the people who are working on individual rights frameworks weren't anticipating an industrial revolution. I feel like the type of person who'd actually anticipate the industrial revolution would have a political philosophy that was actually probably a negative given, you know… Karl Marx. If you saw something like this happening, I don't think it would be totally not obvious. Holden Karnofsky I mean, I think my basic position here is that I'm not sitting here highly confident. I'm not saying there's tons of precedent and we know exactly what to do. That's not what I believe. I believe we should be giving it a shot. I think we should be trying and I don't think we should be totally defeatist and say, “Well, it's so obvious that there's never anything you could have come up with throughout history and humans have been helpless to predict the future.” I don't think that is true. I think that's enough of an example to kind of illustrate that. I mean, gosh, you could make the same statement today and say, “Look, doing research on how to get AI systems to behave as intended is a perfectly fine thing to do at any period in time.” It's not like a bad thing to do. I think John Locke was doing his stuff because he felt it was a good thing to do at any period in time, but the thing is that if we are at this crucial period of time, it becomes an even better thing to do and it becomes magnified to the point where it could be more important than other things. Dwarkesh Patel The one reason I might be skeptical of this theory is that I could say, “Oh, gosh, if you look throughout history, people were often convinced that they were living in the most important time,” or at least an especially important time. If you go back, everybody could be right about living in the most important time. Should you just have a very low prior that anybody is right about this kind of thing? How do you respond to that kind of logic?Holden Karnofsky First of all, I don't know if it's really true that it's that common for people to say that they're living in the most important time in history. This would be an interesting thing to look at. But just from stuff I've read about past works on political philosophy and stuff, I don't exactly see this claim all over the place. It definitely happens. It's definitely happened. I think a way of thinking about it is that there are two reasons you might think you are especially important. One is that you actually are and you've made reasonable observations about it. Another is that you want to be or you want to think you are so you're self-deceiving. So over the long sweep of history, a lot of people will come to this conclusion for the second reason. Most of the people who think they're the most important will be wrong. So that's all true. That certainly could apply to me and it certainly could apply to others. But I think that's just completely fine and completely true. I think we should have some skepticism when we find ourselves making these kinds of observations. At the same time, I think it would be a really bad rule or a really bad norm that every time you find yourself thinking the stakes are really high or that you're in a really important position, you just decide to ignore the thought. I think that would be very bad.If you imagine a universe where there actually are some people who live in an especially important time, and there are a bunch of other people who tell stories to themselves about whether they do, how would you want all those people to behave? To me, the worst possible rule is that all those people should just be like, “No, this is crazy, and forget about it.” I think that's the worst possible rule because the people who are living at the important time will then do the wrong thing. I think another bad rule would be that everyone should take themselves completely seriously and just promote their own interests ahead of everyone else's. A rule I would propose over either of them is that all these people should take their beliefs reasonably seriously and try to do the best thing according to their beliefs, but should also adhere to common sense standards of ethical conduct and not do too much “ends justify the means' reasoning.” It's totally good and fine to do research on alignment, but people shouldn't be telling lies or breaking the law in order to further their ends. That would be my proposed rules. When we have these high stake, crazy thoughts, we should do what we can about them and not go so crazy about them that we break all the rules of society. That seems like a better rule. That's the rule I'm trying to follow. Dwarkesh Patel Can you talk more about that? If for some reason, we can be convinced that the expected value calculation was immense, and you had to break some law in order to increase the odds that the AI goes well, I don't know how hypothetical this would be. Is it just that you're not sure whether you would be right and so you'd just want to err on the side of caution? Holden Karnofsky Yeah, I'm really not a fan of ends justify the means' reasoning. The thing that looks really, really bad is people saying it's worth doing horrible things and coercing each other and using force to accomplish these things because the ends we're trying to get to are more important than everything else. I'm against that stuff. I think that stuff looks a lot worse historically than people trying to break the future and do helpful things. So I see my main role in the world as trying to break the future and do helpful things. I can do that without doing a bunch of harmful, common sense, unethical stuff. Maybe someday there will be one of these intense tradeoffs. I haven't really felt like I've run into them yet. If I ever ran into one of those intense tradeoffs, I'd have to ask myself how confident I really am. The current level of information and confidence I have is, in my opinion, not enough to really justify the means. Dwarkesh Patel Okay, so let's talk about the potential implausibility of continued high growth. One thing somebody might think is, “OK, maybe 2 percent growth can't keep going on forever, but maybe the growth slows down to point five percent a year.” As you know, small differences in growth rates have big effects on the end result. So by the point that we've exhausted all the possible growth in the galaxy, we'll probably be able to expand to other galaxies. What's wrong with that kind of logic where there's point five percent growth that still doesn't imply a lock-in or would it be weird if that implied a lock-in?Holden Karnofsky I think we might want to give a little bit more context here. One of the key arguments of the most important century is that it's just part of one of the arguments that we live in a strange time. I'm also arguing that the current level of economic growth just looks too high to go on for another 10,000 years or so. One of the points I make, which is a point I got from Robin Hanson, is that if you just take the current level of economic growth and extrapolate it out 10,000 years, you end up having to conclude that we would need multiple stuff that is worth as much as the whole world economy is today–– multiple times that per atom in the galaxy. If you believe we can't break the speed of light, then we can't get further than that. We can't get outside the galaxy. So in some sense, we run out of material. So you're saying, “Alright but what if the growth rate falls to 0.5 percent?” Then I'm kind of like, “OK, well, so the growth rate now I ballparked it in the post is around 2 percent. That's the growth rate generally in the most developed countries. Let's say it falls to 0.5 percent.” Just like for how long? Did you calculate how long it would take to get to the same place? Dwarkesh Patel I think it was like 25,000 years. 0.5 percent gets you like one world-size economy. It's 10,000 versus 25,000, but 25,000 is the number of light years between us and like the next galaxy. Holden Karnofsky That doesn't sound right. I don't think this galaxy calculation is very close. There's also going to be a bunch of dead space. As you get to the outer reach of the galaxy, there's not going to be as much there. That doesn't sound super right, but let's just roll with it. I mean, sure, let's just say that you had 2 percent today and then growth went down to 0.5 percent and stayed there forever. I'm pretty sure that's still too big. I'm pretty sure you're still going to hit limits in some reasonable period of time, but that would still be weird on its own. It would just be like, “Well, we lived in the 200-year period when we had 2 percent growth and then we had 0.5 percent growth forever.” That would still make this a kind of an interesting time. It would be the most dynamic, fastest-changing time in all of human history. Not by a ton, but it's also like you pick the number that's the closest and the most perfectly optimized here. So if it went down to 0.1 percent or even down to 0.01 percent, then it would take longer to run out of stuff. But it would be even stranger with the 2 percent versus the 0.01 percent. So I don't really think there's any way out of “Gosh, this looks like this looks like it's probably going to end up looking like a very special time or a very weird time.”Dwarkesh Patel This is not worth getting hung up on, but from that perspective, then the century where we had 8 percent growth because of the Industrial Revolution–– would you say that maybe that's the most important century?Holden Karnofsky Oh, sure. Yeah, totally. No, the thing about rapid growth is it's not supposed to be on its own. By growth standards, this century looks less special than the last one or two. It's saying that the century is one of a handful or I think when I say “One of 80 of the most significant centuries,” or something by economic growth standards. That's only one argument, but then I look at a lot of other ways in which this century looks unusual. To say that something is the most important century of all time sounds totally nuts because there are so many centuries in the history of humanity, especially if you want to think about it on galactic time scales. Even once you narrow it down to 80, it's just much way less weird. If I've already convinced you using kind of non-controversial reasoning that we're one of the 80 most important centuries, it shouldn't take me nearly as much further evidence to say, actually, this one might be number one out of 80 because you're starting odds are more than 1 percent. So to get you up to 10 percent or 20 percent or 30 percent doesn't necessarily require a massive update the way that it would if we're just starting from nowhere. Dwarkesh Patel I guess I'm still not convinced that just because this is a weird century, this has any implications for why or whether we should see transformative AI this century. If we have a model about when transformative AI happens, is one of the variables that goes into that “What is the growth rate in 2080?” It just feels weird to have this as a parameter for when the specific technological development is going to happen. Holden Karnofsky It's just one argument in the series. I think the way that I would come at it is I would just say, “Hey, look at AI systems. Look at what they're doing. Look at how fast the rate of progress is. Look at these five different angles on imagining when I might be able to do all the things humans do to advance science and technology.” Just imagine that we get there this century. Wouldn't it be crazy to have AI that could do all the things humans do to advance science and technology? Wouldn't that lead to just a lot of crazy stuff happening? There's only ever been one species in the history of the universe that we know of that can do the kinds of things humans do. Wouldn't it be weird if there were two? That would be crazy. One of them was a new one we built that could be copied at will, and run at different speeds on any hardware you have. That would be crazy. Then you might come back and say, “Yeah, that would be crazy. This is too crazy. Like I'm ruling this out because this is too crazy.” Then I would say, “OK, well, we have a bunch of evidence that we live in an unusual, crazy time.” And you actually should think that there's a lot of signs that this century is not just a random century picked from a sample of millions of centuries. So that's the basic structure of the argument. As far as the growth rate in zero AD, I think it matters. I think you're asking the question, why do the dynamics of growth in zero AD matter at all for this argument? I think it's because it's just a question of, “How does economic growth work generally and what is the trend that we're on, and what happens if that trend continues?” If around zero AD growth was very low but accelerating, and if that was also true at one hundred AD and a thousand AD and negative a thousand or, you know, a thousand BC, then it starts to point to a general pattern. Growth is accelerating and maybe accelerating for a particular reason, and therefore you might expect more acceleration.AI Success ScenarioDwarkesh Patel Alright, let's talk about transformative AI then. Can you describe what success looks like concretely? Are humans part of the post-transformative AI world? Are we hoping that these AIs become enslaved gods that help us create a utopia? What does the concrete success scenario look like? Holden Karnofsky I mean, I think we've talked a lot about the difficulty of predicting the future, and I think I do want to emphasize that I really do believe in that. My attitude to the most important century is not at all, “Hey, I know exactly what's going to happen and I'm making a plan to get us through it.” It's much more like there's a general fuzzy outline of a big thing that might be approaching us. There are maybe two or three things we can come up with that seem good to do. Everything else we think about, we're not going to know if it's good to do or bad to do. So I'm just trying to find the things that are good to do so that I can make things go a little bit better or help things go a little bit better. That is my general attitude. It's like if you were on a ship in a storm and you saw some very large, fuzzy object obscured by the clouds, you might want to steer away from it. You might not want to say, “Well, I think that is an island and I think there's probably a tiger on it. So if we go and train the tiger in the right way, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,” you don't want to get into that. Right? So that is the general attitude I'm taking.What does success look like to me? Success could look like a lot of things, but one thing success would look like to me would frankly just be that we get something not too different from the trajectory we're already on. So, in other words, if we can have systems that behaved as intended, acted as tools and amplifiers of humans, and did the things they're supposed to do. If we could avoid a world where those systems got sort of all controlled by one government or one person, we could avoid a world where that caused a huge concentration of power. If we could have a world where AI systems are just another technology that helps us do a lot of stuff, and we'd invent lots of other technologies and everything is relatively broadly distributed and everything works roughly as it's supposed to work, then you might be in a world where we continue the trend we've seen over the last couple of hundred years, which is that we're all getting richer. We're all getting more tools. We all hopefully get an increasing ability to understand ourselves, study ourselves, and understand what makes us happy, what makes us thrive. Hopefully, the world just gets better over time and we have more and more new ideas that thus hopefully make us wiser. I do think that in most respects, the world of today is a heck of a lot better than the world of 200 years ago. I don't think the only reason for that is wealth and technology, but I think they played a role. I think that if you'd gone back to 200 years ago and said, “Holden, how would you like the world to develop a bunch of new technologies as long as they're sort of evenly distributed and they behave roughly as intended and people mostly just get richer and discover new stuff?” I'd be like, “That sounds great!” I don't know exactly where we're going to land. I can't predict in advance whether we're going to decide that we want to treat our technologies as having their own rights. That's stuff that the world will figure out. But I'd like to avoid massive disasters that are identifiable because I think if we can, we might end up in a world where the future is wiser than we are and is able to do better things. Dwarkesh Patel The way you put it, AI enabling humans doesn't sound like something that could last for thousands of years. It almost sounds as weird as chimps saying “What we would like is humans to be our tools.” At best, maybe they could hope we would give them nice zoos. What is the role of humans in this in this future? Holden Karnofsky A world I could easily imagine, although that doesn't mean it's realistic at all, is a world where we build these AI systems. They do what they're supposed to do, and we use them to gain more intelligence and wisdom. I've talked a little bit about this hypothetical idea of digital people–– maybe we develop something like that. Then, after 100 years of this, we've been around and people have been having discussions in the public sphere, and people kind of start to talk about whether the AIs themselves do have rights of their own and should be sharing the world with us. Maybe then they do get rights. Maybe some AI systems end up voting or maybe we decide they shouldn't and they don't. Either way, you have this kind of world where there's a bunch of different beings that all have rights and interests that matter. They vote on how to set up the world so that we can all hopefully thrive and have a good time. We have less and less material scarcity. Fewer and fewer tradeoffs need to be made. That would be great. I don't know exactly where it ends or what it looks like. But I don't know. Does anything strike you as unimaginable about that? Dwarkesh Patel Yeah, the fact that you can have beings that can be copied at will, but also there's some method of voting..Holden Karnofsky Oh, yeah. That's a problem that would have to be solved. I mean, we have a lot of attention paid to how the voting system works, who gets to vote, and how we avoid things being unfair. I mean, it's definitely true that if we decided there was some kind of digital entity and it had the right to vote and that digital entity was able to copy itself–– you could definitely wreak some havoc right there. So you'd want to come up with some system that restricts how many copies you can make of yourself or restricts how many of those copies can vote. These are problems that I'm hoping can be handled in a way that, while not perfect, could be non-catastrophic by a society that hasn't been derailed by some huge concentration of power or misaligned systems. Dwarkesh Patel That sounds like that might take time. But let's say you didn't have time. Let's say you get a call and somebody says, “Holden, next month, my company is developing or deploying a model that might plausibly lead to AGI.” What does Open Philanthropy do? What do you do? Holden Karnofsky Well, I need to distinguish. You may not have time to avoid some of these catastrophes. A huge concentration of power or AI systems don't behave as intended and have their own goals. If you can prevent those catastrophes from happening, you might then get more time after you build the AIs to have these tools that help us invent new technologies and help us perhaps figure things out better and ask better questions. You could have a lot of time or you could figure out a lot in a little time if you had those things. But if someone said–– wait how long did you give me?Dwarkesh Patel A month. Let's say three months. So it's a little bit more. Holden Karnofsky Yeah, I would find that extremely scary. I kind of feel like that's one of the worlds in which I might not even be able to offer an enormous amount. My job is in philanthropy (and a lot of what philanthropists do historically or have done well historically), is we help fields grow. We help do things that operate on very long timescales. So an example of something Open Philanthropy does a lot of right now is we fund people who do research on alignment and we fund people who are thinking about what it would look like to get through the most important century successfully. A lot of these people right now are very early in their careers and just figuring stuff out. So a lot of the world I picture is like 10 years from now, 20 years from now, or 50 years from now. There's this whole field of expertise that got support when traditional institutions wouldn't support it. That was because of us. Then you come to me and you say, “We've got one week left. What do we do?” I'd be like, “I don't know. We did what we could do. We can't go back in time and try to prepare for this better.” So that would be an answer. I could say more specific things about what I'd say in the one to three-month time frame, but a lot of it would be flailing around and freaking out, frankly. Dwarkesh Patel Gotcha. Okay. Maybe we can reverse the question. Let's say you found out that AI actually is going to take much longer than you thought, and you have more than five decades. What changes? What are you able to do that you might not otherwise be able to do? Holden Karnofsky I think the further things are, the more I think it's valid to say that humans have trouble making predictions on long time frames. The more I'd be interested in focusing on other causes of very broad things we do, such as trying to grow the set of people who think about issues like this, rather than trying to specifically study how to get AI systems like today's to behave as intended. So I think that's a general shift, but I would say that I tend to feel a bit more optimistic on longer time frames because I do think that the world just isn't ready for this and isn't thinking seriously about this. A lot of what we're trying to do at Open Philanthropy is create support that doesn't exist in traditional institutions for people to think about these topics. That includes doing AI alignment research. That also includes thinking through what we want politically, and what regulations we might want to prevent disaster. I think those are a lot of things. It's kind of a spectrum. I would say, if it's in three months, I would probably be trying to hammer out a reasonable test of whether we can demonstrate that the AI system is either safe or dangerous.If we can demonstrate it's dangerous, use that demonstration to really advocate for a broad slowing of AI research to buy more time to figure out how to make it less dangerous. I don't know that I feel that much optimism. If this kind of AI is 500 years off, then I'm kind of inclined to just ignore it and just try and make the world better and more robust, and wiser. But I think if we've got 10 years, 20 years, 50 years, 80 years, something in that range, I think that is kind of the place where supporting early careers and supporting people who are going to spend their lives thinking about this would be beneficial. Then we flash forward to this crucial time and there are a lot more people who spent their lives thinking about it. I think that would be a big deal. Dwarkesh Patel Let's talk about the question of whether we can expect the AI to be smart enough to disempower humanity, but dumb enough to have that kind of goal. When I look out at smart people in the world, it seems like a lot of them have very complex, nuanced goals that they've thought a lot about what is good and how to do good. Holden Karnofsky A lot of them don't. Dwarkesh Patel Does that overall make you more optimistic about AIs? Holden Karnofsky I am not that comforted by that. This is a very, very old debate in the world of AI alignment. Eliezer Yudkowsky has something called the orthogonality thesis. I don't remember exactly what it says, but it's something like “You could be very intelligent about any goal. You could have the stupidest goal and be very intelligent about how to get it.” In many ways, a lot of human goals are pretty silly. A lot of the things that make me happy are not things that are profound or wonderful. They're just things that happen to make me happy. You could very intelligently try to get those things, but it doesn't give me a lot of comfort. I think basically my picture of how modern AI works is that you're basically training these systems by trial and error. You're basically taking an AI system, and you're encouraging some behaviors, while discouraging other behaviors. So you might end up with a system that's being encouraged to pursue something that you didn't mean to encourage. It does it very intelligently. I don't see any contradiction there. I think that if you were to design an AI system and you were kind of giving it encouragement every time it was getting more money into your bank account, you might get something that's very, very good at getting money into your bank account to the point where you'd going to disrupt the whole world to do that. You will not automatically get something that thinks, “Gosh, is this a good thing to do?” I think with a lot of human goals, there's not really a right answer about whether our goals actually make sense. They're just the goals we have.Dwarkesh Patel You've written elsewhere about how moral progress is something that's real, that's historically happened, and it corresponds to what actually counts as moral progress. Do you think there's a reason to think the same thing might happen with AI? Whatever the process is that creates moral progress?Holden Karnofsky I kind of don't in particular. I've used the term moral progress as just a term to refer to changes in morality that are good. I think there has been moral progress, but I don't think that means moral progress is something inevitable or something that happens every time you are intelligent. An example I use a lot is attitudes toward homosexuality. It's a lot more accepted today than it used to be. I call that moral progress because I think it's good. Some people will say, “Well, you know, I don't believe that morality is objectively good or bad. I don't believe there is any such thing as moral progress. I just think things change randomly.” That will often be an example I'll pull out and I'll say, “But do you think that was a neutral change?” I just think it was good. I think it was good, but that's not because I believe there's some underlying objective reality. It's just my way of tagging or using language to talk about moral changes that seem like they were positive to me. I don't particularly expect that an AI system would have the same evolution that I've had in reflecting on morality or would come to the same conclusions I've come to or would come up with moralities that seem good to me. I don't have any reason to think any of that. I do think that historically there have been some cases of moral progress. Dwarkesh Patel What do you think is the explanation for historical progress? Holden Karnofsky One thing that I would say is that humans have a lot in common with each other. I think some of history contains cases of humans learning more about the world, learning more about themselves, and debating each other. I think a lot of moral progress has just come from humans getting to know other humans who they previously were stereotyping and judging negatively and afraid of. So I think there's some way in which humans learning about the world and learning about themselves leads them to have kind of conclusions that are more reflective and more intelligent for their own goals. But, if you brought in something into the picture that was not a human at all, it might be very intelligent and reflective about its goals, but those goals might have zero value from our point of view. Dwarkesh Patel Recent developments in AI have made many people think that AI could happen much sooner than they otherwise thought. Has the release of these new models impacted your timelines? Holden Karnofsky Yeah, I definitely think that recent developments in AI have made me a bit more freaked out. Ever since I wrote The Most Important Century series and before that, there were years when Open Philanthropy was very interested in AI risk, but it's become more so as we've seen progress in AI. I think what we're seeing is we're seeing these very generic, simple systems that are able to do a lot of different tasks. I think people are interested in this. There are a lot of compilations of what GPT-3 is–– a very simple language model that, by the way, my wife and brother-in-law both worked on. This very simple language model just predicts the next word it's going to see in a stream of text. People have gotten it to tell stories. People got similar (though not identical) models to analyze and explain jokes. People have gotten it to play role-playing games, write poetry, write lyrics, answer multiple-choice questions, and answer trivia questions. One of the results that I found most ridiculous, strange and weird was this thing called Minerva, where people took one of these language models and with very little special intervention, they got it to do these difficult math problems and explain its reasoning and get them right about half the time. It wasn't really trained in a way that was very specialized for these math problems, so we just see AI systems having all these unpredictable human-like abilities just from having this very simple training procedure. That is something I find kind of wild and kind of scary. I don't know exactly where it's going or how fast. Dwarkesh Patel So if you think transformative AI might happen this century, what implications does that have for the traditional global health and well-being stuff that OpenPhilanthropy does? Will that have persistent effects of AI if it gets aligned? Will it create a utopia for us anyway? Holden Karnofsky I don't know about utopia. My general take is that anything could happen. I think my general take on this most important century stuff, and the reason it's so important is because it's easy to imagine a world that is really awesome and is free from scarcity and we see more of the progress we've seen over the last 200 years and we end up in a really great place. It's also easy to imagine a horrible dystopia. But my take is that the more likely you think all this is, the more likely you think transformative AI is, the more you should think that that should be the top priority, that we should be trying to make that go well instead of trying to solve more direct problems that are more short term. I'm not an extremist on this. So, OpenPhilanthropy does both.OpenPhilanthropy works on speculative far-off future risks and OpenPhil also does a bunch of more direct work. Again, we do direct and recommend a lot of money to give to those top charities, which do things like distributing bed nets in Africa to help prevent malaria and treat children for intestinal parasites. OpenPhilanthropy does a lot of advocacy for more money going to foreign aid or for better land use policies to have a stronger economy. We do a bunch of scientific research work that is more aimed at direct medical applications, especially in poor countries. So I support all that stuff. I'm glad we're doing it. It's just a matter of how real and how imminent do you think this transformative AI stuff is? The more real and more imminent, the more of our resources should go into it. Dwarkesh Patel Yeah, that makes sense to me. I'm curious, whatever work you do elsewhere, do those still have persistent effects after transformative AI comes? Or do you think they'll basically wash out in comparison to the really big stuff? Holden Karnofsky I mean, I think in some sense, the effects are permanent in the sense that if you cause someone to live a healthier, better life, that's a significant thing that happened. Nothing will ever erase that life or make that life unimportant, but I think in terms of the effects on the future, I do expect it mostly to wash out. I expect that mostly whatever we do to make the world better in that way will not persist in any kind of systematic, predictable manner past these crazy changes. I think that's probably how things look pre and post-industrial revolution. There are probably some exceptions, but that's my guess.Competition, Innovation , & AGI BottlenecksDwarkesh Patel You've expressed skepticism towards the competition frame around AI or you try to make capabilities go faster for the countries or companies you favor most. But elsewhere, you've used the “innovation as mining metaphor,” and maybe you can explain that when you're giving the answer. It seems like this frame should imply that the second most powerful AI company is probably right on the heels of the first most powerful. So if you think the first most powerful is going to take safety more seriously, you should try to boost them. How do you think about how these two different frames interact? Holden Karnofsky I think it's common for people who become convinced that AI could be really important to just jump straight to, “Well, I want to make sure that people I trust build it first.” That could mean my country, that could mean my friends, people I'm investing in. I have generally called that the competition frame which is “I want to win a competition to develop AI”, and I've contrasted it with a frame that I also think is important, called the caution frame, which is that we need to all work together to be careful to not build something that spins out of control and has all these properties and behaves in all these ways we didn't intend. I do think that if we do develop these very powerful AI systems, we're likely to end up in a world where there are multiple players trying to develop it and they're all hot on each other's heels. I am very interested in ways for us all to work together to avoid disaster as we're doing that. I am maybe less excited than the average person who first learns about this is and is like “I'm picking the one I like best and helping them race ahead.”Dwarkesh Patel Although I am someone interested in both, if you take the innovation as mining metaphor seriously, doesn't that imply that actually the competition is really a big factor here?Holden Karnofsky The innovation mining metaphor is from another bit of Cold Takes. It's an argument I make that you should think of ideas as being somewhat like natural resources in the sense of once someone discovers a scientific hypothesis or once someone writes a certain great symphony, that's something that can only be done once. That's an innovation that can only be done once. So it gets harder and harder over time to have revolutionary ideas because the most revolutionary, easiest-to-find ideas have already been found. So there's an analogy to mining. I don't think it applies super importantly to the AI thing because all I'm saying is that success by person one makes success by person two harder. I'm not saying that it has no impact or that it doesn't speed things up. Just to use a literal mining metaphor, let's say there's a bunch of gold in the ground. It is true that if you rush and go get all that gold, it'll be harder for me to now come in and find a bunch of gold. That is true. What's not true is that it doesn't matter if you do it. I mean, you might do it a lot faster than me. You might do it a lot ahead of me. Dwarkesh Patel Fair enough. Maybe one piece of skepticism that somebody could have about transformative AI is that all this is going to be bottlenecked by the non-automatable steps in the innovation sequence. So there won't be these feedback loops that speed up. What is your reaction? Holden Karnofsky I think the single best criticism and my biggest point of skepticism on this most important century stuff is the idea that you could build an AI system that's very impressive and could do pretty much everything humans can do. There might be one step that you still have to have humans do, and that could bottleneck everything. Then you could have the world not speed up that much and science and technology not advance that fast because they are doing almost everything. But humans are still slowing down this one step or the real world is slowing down one step. Let's say real-world experiments to invent new technologies take how long they take. I think this is the best objection to this whole thing and the one that I'd most like to look into more. I do ultimately think that there's enough reason to think that if you had AI systems that had human-like reasoning and analysis capabilities, you shouldn't count on this kind of bottleneck causing everything to go really slow. I write about that in this piece called Weak Point in the Most Important Century: Full Automation. Part of this is how you don't need to automate the entire economy to get this crazy growth loop. You can automate just a part of it that specifically has to do with very important tech like energy and AI itself. Those actually seem, in many ways, less bottlenecked than a lot of other parts of the economy. So you could be developing better AI algorithms and AI chips, manufacturing them, mostly using robots, and using those to come up with even better designs. Then you could also be designing more and more efficient solar panels, and using those to collect more and more energy to power your eyes. So a lot of the crucial pieces here just actually don't seem all that likely to be bottlenecked. You can be at the point wher

Rick Podell and I discuss his early influences; Jackie Gleason; Ed Sullivan; 50's and 60's standups; Alan King; doing standup for his dog; tap dancing; leaving college to do Dames at Sea off Broadway; getting hired as a Universal contract player; doing Baretta and getting a mentor in Robert Blake; Busting Loose; Garry Marshall; Paramount commissary; Chopped Liver Brothers; how appearing on the Mike Douglas Show makes you crave for new material; how his jack-of-all trades style hurt him; working with Milton Berle in Two by Two and meeting his endowment; Budd Friedman gets roasted; writing the pilots Brothers and Our Time with co-writer Mike Preminger; starring in films "Lunch Wagon" and "Underground Aces"; co-starring in "Hero at Large" with John Ritter; losing out on Chips to Erik Estrada; performing with Richard Lewis, Rich Hall, and Dana Carvey; Jay Leno saying he was too handsome to be a successful comedian; touring Montana with Gilbert Gottfried; guest starring as Jackie Jackerman on a memorable Family Ties; guest starring as a mohel on Cheers; writing the screenplay for "Nothing in Common" about his relationship with his dad; having Tom Hanks and Jackie Gleason star; receiving letters from people with the same situations; the film being perceived as too Jewish; Gleason's ill-health; opening with Ginger Rogers for a year; opening for Cher; working on Sunset Boulevard on Broadway with Andrew Lloyd Webber and Glenn Close; being directed by someone who directed Ronald Reagan and Clark Gable; working and later teaching at the Beverly Hills Playhouse; cell phones; and his one-man show

Tracy K. Smith was named Poet Laureate in 2017, at the beginning of the fierce partisan divide of the Trump era. She quickly turned to her craft to address the deep political divisions the election laid bare, putting together a collection called “American Journal: Fifty Poems for Our Time.” Then she hit the road, visiting community centers, senior centers, prisons, and colleges, and reading poems written by herself and others for groups small and large. “It was exhausting, and exhilarating, and it was probably the best thing I could have done as an American,” she told The New Yorker's poetry editor, Kevin Young.   This segment originally aired July 5, 2019.

Tracy K. Smith was named Poet Laureate in 2017, at the beginning of the fierce partisan divide of the Trump era. She quickly turned to her craft to address the deep political divisions the election laid bare, putting together a collection called “American Journal: Fifty Poems for Our Time.” Then she hit the road, visiting community centers, senior centers, prisons, and colleges, and reading poems written by herself and others for groups small and large. “It was exhausting, and exhilarating, and it was probably the best thing I could have done as an American,” she told The New Yorker's poetry editor, Kevin Young.  This segment originally aired July 5, 2019.

Good Better or Best Use of Our Time? How Do We Leverage Our Talents to Uplift Others? Join V. Lee Henson, President and Founder of AgileDad as we explore the BEST ways to use our time this holiday season to uplift and inspire others.

DOROTHY ROSBY, a humor columnist (currently in 38 newspapers!) and author from South Dakota, will join us to discuss her unique and humorous looks at life, as well as to discuss her books, "I Used to Think I Was Not That Bad and Then I Got to Know Me Better", "Alexa's a Spy and Other Things to Be Ticked off About, Humorous Essays on the Hassles of Our Time", and "I Didn't Know You Could Make Birthday Cake from Scratch, Parenting Blunders from Cradle to Empty Nest". We will also discuss her newest release, "‘Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate, Holidays, Special Occasions and Other Times Our Celebrations Get Out of Hand". FROM HER BIO and WEBSITE: "I love talking about the writing life and all aspects of humor including humor writing and finding humor in difficult times. My next book, ‘Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate, is a humorous take on the way we Americans create celebrations for everything then turn them into a chores, or worse, nightmares. 'Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate is a collection of humorous pieces about holidays, special occasions and other times our celebrations make us feel not-so-celebratory. It's understanding for those who think Christmas form letters can be honest—or they can be interesting. And it's empathy for anyone who's ever gotten poison ivy during Nude Recreation Week or eaten all their Halloween candy and had to hand out instant oatmeal packets to their trick-or-treaters. I love to talk about all of that too!  I live in the beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota, 20 miles from Mount Rushmore, something I'm very proud of though I'm not on it. Dorothy Rosby is an author and syndicated humor columnist whose work appears in publications throughout the West and Midwest. You can see the list on the editor's page. If your local newspaper doesn't run her column and you think (as we do) that it should, pass her name on to them. She'd love to hear from you if you enjoy her blog—not so much if you don't. Kidding! (Sort of.)" dorothyrosby.com

DOROTHY ROSBY, a humor columnist (currently in 38 newspapers!) and author from South Dakota, will join us to discuss her unique and humorous looks at life, as well as to discuss her books, "I Used to Think I Was Not That Bad and Then I Got to Know Me Better", "Alexa's a Spy and Other Things to Be Ticked off About, Humorous Essays on the Hassles of Our Time", and "I Didn't Know You Could Make Birthday Cake from Scratch, Parenting Blunders from Cradle to Empty Nest". We will also discuss her newest release, "‘Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate, Holidays, Special Occasions and Other Times Our Celebrations Get Out of Hand". FROM HER BIO and WEBSITE: "I love talking about the writing life and all aspects of humor including humor writing and finding humor in difficult times. My next book, ‘Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate, is a humorous take on the way we Americans create celebrations for everything then turn them into a chores, or worse, nightmares. 'Tis the Season to Feel Inadequate is a collection of humorous pieces about holidays, special occasions and other times our celebrations make us feel not-so-celebratory. It's understanding for those who think Christmas form letters can be honest—or they can be interesting. And it's empathy for anyone who's ever gotten poison ivy during Nude Recreation Week or eaten all their Halloween candy and had to hand out instant oatmeal packets to their trick-or-treaters. I love to talk about all of that too!  I live in the beautiful Black Hills of South Dakota, 20 miles from Mount Rushmore, something I'm very proud of though I'm not on it. Dorothy Rosby is an author and syndicated humor columnist whose work appears in publications throughout the West and Midwest. You can see the list on the editor's page. If your local newspaper doesn't run her column and you think (as we do) that it should, pass her name on to them. She'd love to hear from you if you enjoy her blog—not so much if you don't. Kidding! (Sort of.)" dorothyrosby.com

In this episode, we explore the life and teachings of the Senegalese Sufi saint and social reformer Ahmadou Bamba (d. 1927), who led a movement of resistence against French colonialism through nonviolence.Thank you to Brahdamon for kindly allowing me to use his footage. Check out his channel here:https://www.youtube.com/c/BrahdamonVideos used:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ovb44sbHR8&t=221sSources/Suggested Reading:Babou, Cheikh Anta (2007). "Fighting the Greater Jihad: Amadu Bamba and the founding of the Mouridiyya of Senegal, 1853-1913". Ohio University Press.Clark, Andrew Francis (1999). "Imperialism, Independence, and Islam in Senegal and Mali". Africa Today, Volume 46, Number 3/4, Summer/Autumn. Indiana University Press.Creevey, Lucy E. (1985). "Muslim Brotherhoods and Politics in Senegal in 1985". The Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 23, No. 4. Cambridge University Press.Holm, Filip (2018). "The Architecture of Pilgrimage: a study on the Ziyara Bogal and charismatic authority in the Tijaniyya". Master's Thesis. Södertörn University.Kimball, Michelle R. (2018). "Shaykh Ahmadou Bamba: A Peacemaker for Our Time". The Other Press Sdn. Bhd.Mbacké, Khadim (2005). "Sufism and Religious Brotherhoods in Senegal". Markus Weiner Publishers.McLaughlin, Fiona (1997). "Islam and popular music in Senegal: The emergence of a new tradition". Africa: Journal of the international African Institute.Van Hoven, Ed (2000). "The nation turbaned? The construction of nationalist identities in Senegal. Journal of Religion in Africa, Vol. 30, Fasc. 2. Brill.#Senegal #Sufism #Islam Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ann Morrison originated the role of Mary Flynn in Merrily We Roll Along. She joins Kyle to discuss how she got to audition for both Hal Prince and Stephen Sondheim, the heartbreak of closing, and how she's turned all of that into a new show.Find out more about what Ann is up to by going to her website: https://www.annmorrison.net/You can purchase Stephen Sondheim's first book of lyrics, Finishing the Hat, by going here: https://amzn.to/2LB9ZJoWe are using three productions to frame our discussion of Merrily We Roll Along.The Original Broadway Cast (1981) starring Jim Walton, Ann Morrison, and Lonny Price.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-original-broadway-cast-recording/738703005Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/3KZq3isCTbYMzGvnXkTfNr?si=u2vq6PhGTCeyOW9W8mTnhwOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Original-Broadway/dp/B01KB0V58O/The Off-Broadway Revival cast (1994) starring Malcolm Gets, Amy Ryder, and Adam Heller.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-the-new-cast-recording-1994-off/1440771486Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/51xg0INwgGytnQTHm2N0Tc?si=Vv_WetrCQ9OaTmgtpBTpZQOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Cast-Recording/dp/B000026G4K/The Encores! revival (2012) starring Colin Donnell, Celia Keenan-Bolger, and Lin-Manuel Miranda.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-2012-new-york-cast-recording/542006479Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/2ouySS4WHFplUHtwduvPKx?si=SLaweV0XRomMEvIPXqlpDAOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Encores-Recording/dp/B007Q1IT1I/Our sponsors this week are: Alberta Blue Cross - https://www.ab.bluecross.ca - Alberta Blue Cross group benefit plans are easy to manage, anywhere, anytime and on any device, making it easy for you and your employees to access. Park Power - https://parkpower.ca - your friendly, local utilities provider in Alberta. Offering Internet, Electricity, and Natural Gas with low rates, awesome service, and profit-sharing with local charities. Send feedback to puttingittogetherpodcast@gmail.comPutting It Together is a proud member of The Alberta Podcast Network: Locally grown. Community supported. Here's their link again: https://www.albertapodcastnetwork.comRecorded by Media Lab YYC. Media Lab is a production company. They help you tell your story. They do this by assisting in the creation of videos and podcasts. Find more information at: http://medialabyyc.comKeep up to date with Putting It Together by following its social media channels.Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/puttingittogetherpodcastTwitter: https://twitter.com/sondheimpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/sondheimpodcast ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Growing up in Canada, her father's delusions and paranoia gave Julia Shaw a front-row seat into an alternate reality Believing "they” were out to get him – including everyone from aliens to the Bin Laden family – he would later email her, warning that she too was targeted by those monitoring him. He believed that doctors too were part of the conspiracy - so has never had a diagnosis from a psychiatrist. Witnessing her father experiencing a parallel "reality" inspired Julia to look into the mind and she had a "lightbulb moment" at university studying psychology when she first heard a description of paranoid schizophrenia. We hear from Julia and her mum as they meet up, driving through Canada. The well-known "positive" signs of a psychotic episode like hallucinations, paranoia and deluded thoughts can feel frightening to witness but Julia learns how the some families find it hardest to live with the "negative" symptoms like a Iack of motivation and difficulty in concentrating. Julia talks to families who understand the demands of living with someone who has serious delusions – to hear what helped them to look after themselves as well as their loved one. We hear from Philippa whose son had his first episode of psychosis when he was at university. Although he now has the right medication to control his symptoms he struggles to motivate himself and a troubling side effect is weight gain which puts him at risk of physical health problems. Kate was only 11 when her cool, older brother Sean first showed the signs of schizophrenia. After numerous spells in hospital she remembers how he struggled to look after himself back in the community and became homeless, sometimes going missing Both women found support from Rethink Mental Illness, a charity which helps people severely affected by mental illness to improve their lives. Kirsty was 8 years old when she started going to workshops with her dad at the Our Time charity, which supports any child with a parent affected by mental illness. She says that role play and talking openly with others about mental health helped to prepare her for when her dad had a psychotic episode on her 13th birthday: although it was frightening she recognised the signs and knew that they wouldn't last. Another concern for Julia was the increased risk for family members who might inherit a disorder like paranoid schizophrenia. Dr Rick Adams explains how the risk is higher - at around 10%, it does mean there's a much higher likelihood that she hasn't inherited it. One voice Julia feels is missing is that of the person who hears voices and believes them: she hasn't been able to reach her father. Instead she talks to Ashley who's 25 and is living with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. Ashley explains how her voices were always male and it it's not a good idea for loved ones to tell a person having hallucinations that they're not real: they have to find this out for themselves. She says that educating herself about mental illness and her faith have helped her to keep calm, along with support from her family. Like the other families she's spoken to Julia feels guilt about her father and wonders if she could have done more to help him - but hearing about support from charities makes her hopeful. And despite all the difficulties, she also recognises how he has passed onto her a love of learning and to stand up for herself. Presenter: Julia Shaw Producer: Paula McGrath

The final of three interviews we recorded at Toronto's Harbourfront Centre as part of the Toronto International Festival of Authors. With novelists André Forget author of In the City of Pigs, and Naben Ruthnum author of A Hero of Our Time we spoke about their darkly comic novels that play with themes of work, art, and the unreality of even so-called real estate. Beneath the veneer with Naben Ruthnum and André Forget

Shaun Chamberlin is an author and activist who has been exploring collapse and possible responses for over twenty years.  He is the editor of 'Surviving the Future: Culture, Carnival and Capital in the Aftermath of the Market Economy' and his late mentor David Fleming's 'Lean Logic: A Dictionary for the Future and How to Survive It', as well as executive producer of 2020 film 'The Sequel: What Will Follow Our Troubled Civilisation?'He puts the theory into practice as one of the custodians of Ireland's legendary free pub ‘The Happy Pig' and was involved with the Transition Towns movement since its inception, co-founding Transition Town Kingston and authoring the movement's second book, 'The Transition Timeline', back in 2009.  He was also one of the first Extinction Rebellion arrestees, in 2018, and now leads Sterling College's online program ‘Surviving the Future: Conversations for Our Time'.Shaun's website: http://darkoptimism.org‘Surviving the Future: Conversations for Our Times' courses/community: http://ce.sterlingcollege.edu/surviving-the-future…David Fleming's books: http://flemingpolicycentre.org.uk/books/Free access to David Fleming's Dictionary for the Future and How to Survive It: http://leanlogic.onlineAcross the DinerVerseSearching for the heart and soul of America one diner at a time! Podcast host, John...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the show

Jim talks with Roar Bjonnes about the ideas in his new book co-authored with Caroline Hargreaves, Growing a New Economy: Beyond Crisis Capitalism and Environmental Destruction. They talk about a quote from Naomi Klein, interlocking crises, COP27, the collective cognition problem, replacing the real economy with a financial economy, the idea of inherent selfishness, 4 integrated circles, the carbon pulse, nature as a machine, the misnomer of de-growth, why the U.S. is a debtor economy, dividend money, how the Eurozone made the rich richer, Greece's high military spending, private corporate ownership as a driver of inequality, Doughnut economics, reforming co-op laws, where government ownership comes in, what would happen if finance collapsed, a global jubilee, an approach to eliminating public debt, increasing alternative energy responsibly, resacrilizing economics, rehypothecating collateral, how nation-states should manage their economies, a refutation of comparative advantage, caps on wealth & income, the coming storm, and much more. Episode Transcript Growing a New Economy: Beyond Crisis Capitalism and Environmental Destruction, by Roar Bjonnes & Caroline Hargreaves Systems Change Alliance JRS EP150 - Jeremy Lent on the Web of Meaning The Web of Meaning: Integrating Science and Traditional Wisdom to Find Our Place in the Universe, by Jeremy Lent JRS EP100 - Sam Bowles on Our Cooperative Nature JRS EP168 - Nate Hagens on Collective Futures "Dividend Money: An Alternative to Central Banker Managed Fractional Reserve Banking Money" - Jim Rutt @ Santa Fe Institute (YouTube) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time, by Karl Polanyi  Roar Bjonnes is the co-founder of Systems Change Alliance, a long-time environmental activist, and a writer on ecology and alternative economics, which he terms eco-economics. He was the editor of the American Common Future magazine in the mid-90s, a magazine that featured some of the first articles taking a critical look at green capitalism and the sustainable development model. He is the co-author of the book Growing a New Economy, which critiques the multiple crises caused by growth-capitalism and outlines the macro-economic framework for a new eco-economy. World-renowned environmentalist Bill McKibben called the book “a hopeful account of the possibilities contained in our current crisis.”

Elected at age 27, Heather McTeer Toney knows what it means to be a public servant. She was the first African-American, first female and the youngest to serve as mayor of Greenville, Mississippi from 2004-2012. In 2014, President Barack Obama appointed her as regional administrator of the EPA's Southeast Region, at eight states the largest EPA region in the country. Currently, Heather is vice president of community engagement for the Environmental Defense Fund. She has appeared on numerous news outlets and in publications, including The New York Times and the Washington Post.  She is the author of the forthcoming book, “Before the Street Lights Come On: Black America's Urgent Call for Climate Solutions”, in stores Earth Day 2023. Have a green jobs question for Yesh? Send it to her on Twitter @yeshsays. Use the hashtag #askyesh. Job hunting? Visit our comprehensive Green Jobs Hub for job listings, networking resources, skills and certification information and more.Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date on green careers, upcoming episodes and more.  Subscribe to EDF's Misformation Brigade“A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” That famous quote was made far before the advent of the internet — but it's still true today. Especially when it comes to online climate misinformation. EDF's Misinformation Brigade is actively working to stop the spread of climate misinformation. This volunteer army of truth-tellers is armed with the skills to spot and squash misinformation as it happens. Join the Brigade today and help put an end to deceptive and destructive climate misinformation. ResourcesHeather McTeer Toney, EDFHeather McTeer Toney PBS Brief But Spectacular: Centering Black Leadership in Climate Change SolutionsMoving Past Stereotypes: Climate Justice IS the Social Justice Issue of Our Time, Heather McTeer Toney keynote speech, Bioneers, 2019Black Women Are Leaders in the Climate Movement Environmental Inclusivity: Heather McTeer Toney on Social and Climate Justice, Bioneers. “Our voices are required at this moment. It's not an option. It's a requirement.”People of color are more concerned than whites about climate change (survey results): Which racial/ethnic groups care most about climate change?Ten years later, BP oil spill continues to harm wildlife — especially dolphins, National Geographic, April 17, 2020Article by Trish Kenlon, founder of Sustainable Career Pathways: 18 sustainability fellowships for students and working professionals Book Giveaway To win a copy of Speed & Scale, rate and review Degrees: Real talk about planet-saving careers on Apple Podcasts, Podchaser or  Spotify. Take a screenshot of your review and share it with us on Instagram @environmental_defense_fund. Use the hashtag #DegreesPodcast. We're giving away up to five books per episode! Who makes Degrees?Yesh Pavlik Slenk is Degrees' host. Amy Morse is our producer. Podcast Allies is our production company. Tressa Versteeg is senior producer; Rye Taylor is our audio engineer; Elaine Grant is CEO of Podcast Allies and Tina Bassir is project manager. Our music is Shame, Shame, Shame from Yesh's favorite band, Lake Street Dive. Degrees: Real talk about planet-saving careers is presented by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). How to find YeshFollow Yesh on Twitter at @yeshsays, and stay up to date with us on Instagram @environmental_defense_fund. Share Degrees:TwitterFacebookLinkedInWebsite — Degrees: Real talk about planet-saving careers

The Urgent Call for Our Time

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson and Newt Gingrich discuss the state of conservative politics, why the young generation is drawn to it now more than ever, and how across demographics, big changes are in store following the midterm elections. Speaker Newt Gingrich is Chairman of Gingrich 360, a multimedia production and consulting company based in Arlington, Virginia. As former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Gingrich is well known as the architect of the “Contract with America” that led the Republican Party to victory in 1994, creating the first conservative majority in the House in 40 years. He was a Republican candidate for President of the United States in 2012. Gingrich is a Fox News contributor, podcast host (Newt's World), and syndicated columnist. He is the author of 41 books, including 18 fiction and nonfiction New York Times bestsellers. His latest books include Beyond Biden: Rebuilding the America We Love and Trump and the American Future: Solving the Great Problems of Our Time.    Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/sdk-iGSdIxA Jordan B Peterson 5.79M subscribers 255,355 views Oct 31, 2022  ______________________________________________________________________________________________ —Links— For Newt Gingrich Apply for a paid internship with Gingrich 360! This amazing opportunity for college students, graduate students and recent grads offers real world experience as you join the Gingrich 360 team. Here you will conduct research, draft briefings, produce content for documentary films, podcasts, social media, and much more. https://www.gingrich360.com/about/app... Newt's World Podcast - https://www.gingrich360.com/podcasts/... Trump and the American Future (Book) - https://www.gingrich360.com/product/t... Beyond Biden (Book) - https://www.gingrich360.com/product/b... Divine Mercy (Documentary) - https://www.gingrich360.com/product/d... The First American (Documentary) - https://www.gingrich360.com/product/t... - Sponsors - Invest in art today with Masterworks at http://masterworks.art/jbp. See important disclosures at https://masterworks.com/cd. Dr. Peterson's new book: The ABC of Childhood Tragedy. Available at: https://abctragedy.com/ — Chapters — (0:00) Coming Up (1:34) Intro (4:25) The Contract with America (10:26) Main emerging platforms (15:00) The consequence of a balanced budget (20:14) Why did the balanced budget vote fail? (26:15) Managing a vision (31:26) Splitting the party (35:40) Donald Trump, changing mindsets (45:40) Collusion on a new scale, big pictures (50:00) Demographics push back on woke-ness (55:35) Immigrants and Conservatism (59:00) Sacred axioms, the new modern religion (1:04:12) Boiling eggs by way of the freezer (1:12:20) Cleverness has replaced wisdom (1:14:40) The intellectual divide (1:16:17) Prattling nonsense and living by whim (1:24:58) Emerging visions (1:28:46) Meaning is accrued through responsibility (1:34:35) Rites of passage, emerging as an adult (1:39:50) What we need to offer // SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL // Newsletter: https://mailchi.mp/jordanbpeterson.co... Donations: https://jordanbpeterson.com/donate // COURSES // Discovering Personality: https://jordanbpeterson.com/personality Self Authoring Suite: https://selfauthoring.com Understand Myself (personality test): https://understandmyself.com // BOOKS // Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: https://jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: https://jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-... Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: https://jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m... // LINKS // Website: https://jordanbpeterson.com Events: https://jordanbpeterson.com/events Blog: https://jordanbpeterson.com/blog Podcast: https://jordanbpeterson.com/podcast // SOCIAL // Twitter: https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson Instagram: https://instagram.com/jordan.b.peterson Facebook: https://facebook.com/drjordanpeterson Telegram: https://t.me/DrJordanPeterson All socials: https://linktr.ee/drjordanbpeterson #JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus #podcast #politics #republican #government #gingrich #newtgingrich   the democrats actually chose to campaign on this https://youtu.be/zge0ZmFQMPE FreedomToons 840K subscribers 219,087 views Nov 3, 2022 unlike s** changes, this videos not for kids

Tracy K. Smith is the author of five poetry collections, including Such Color: New and Selected Poems; Wade in the Water, winner of the 2019 Anisfield-Wolf Book Award in Poetry, and shortlisted for the 2018 T. S. Eliot Prize. Her debut collection, The Body's Question, won the Cave Canem Poetry Prize in 2002. Her second book, Duende, won the 2006 James Laughlin Award from the Academy of American Poets. Her collection Life on Mars won the 2012 Pulitzer Prize for Poetry. She also edited the anthology American Journal: Fifty Poems for Our Time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We start with the least controversial opinions to begin this week's show, namely, the return of the mullet is not a good idea. After dispensing with that we hit the news from the last week: the FBI raids Mar-a-Lago, Salman Rushdie is attacked in New York State, actress Ann Heche's fatal accident and the cancellation of comedian Jerry Sadowitz. In Culture Corner the show returns to its roots with talk about the Game of Thrones prequel, House of the Dragon (HBO in the US on August 21, the next day in the UK on Sky Atlantic and NOW.) James delves into A Hero of Our Time (Герой нашего времени) by Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov (1814-41).

Frank, Charlie, and Mary get on the same page, at least for a while. Ashley Pribyl returns to the show to discuss whose side she's on and why her old friends are so important to her.You can purchase the essay collection Sondheim in Our Time and His here: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/sondheim-in-our-time-and-his-9780197603208?cc=ca&lang=en&Follow Ashley on Twitter: https://twitter.com/pribbleprabble Or on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pribylprabble/You can purchase Stephen Sondheim's first book of lyrics, Finishing the Hat, by going here: https://amzn.to/2LB9ZJoWe are using three productions to frame our discussion of Merrily We Roll Along.The Original Broadway Cast (1981) starring Jim Walton, Ann Morrison, and Lonny Price.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-original-broadway-cast-recording/738703005Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/3KZq3isCTbYMzGvnXkTfNr?si=u2vq6PhGTCeyOW9W8mTnhwOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Original-Broadway/dp/B01KB0V58O/The Off-Broadway Revival cast (1994) starring Malcolm Gets, Amy Ryder, and Adam Heller.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-the-new-cast-recording-1994-off/1440771486Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/51xg0INwgGytnQTHm2N0Tc?si=Vv_WetrCQ9OaTmgtpBTpZQOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Cast-Recording/dp/B000026G4K/The Encores! revival (2012) starring Colin Donnell, Celia Keenan-Bolger, and Lin-Manuel Miranda.You can listen to it on Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/ca/album/merrily-we-roll-along-2012-new-york-cast-recording/542006479Or listen to it on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/2ouySS4WHFplUHtwduvPKx?si=SLaweV0XRomMEvIPXqlpDAOr buy it on Amazon: https://www.amazon.ca/Merrily-Roll-Along-Encores-Recording/dp/B007Q1IT1I/Our sponsors this week are: Park Power - https://parkpower.ca - your friendly, local utilities provider in Alberta. Offering Internet, Electricity, and Natural Gas with low rates, awesome service, and profit-sharing with local charities. Pod Power - With Pod Power, our sponsors are making it possible for us to amplify the voices of Albertans and Alberta podcasters. This episode, Edmonton Community Foundation is helping us give a Pod Power shout out to What's the Tsismis - https://www.cjsr.com/shows/whats-the-tsismis/ - An inside look on Pilipinx identity in the diaspora. A new podcast from CJSR, produced by members of CJSR's latest podcast bootcamp. Produced with support from the Community Radio Fund of Canada. Send feedback to puttingittogetherpodcast@gmail.comPutting It Together is a proud member of The Alberta Podcast Network: Locally grown. Community supported. Here's their link again: https://www.albertapodcastnetwork.comRecorded by Media Lab YYC. Media Lab is a production company. They help you tell your story. They do this by assisting in the creation of videos and podcasts. Find more information at: http://medialabyyc.comKeep up to date with Putting It Together by following its social media channels.Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/puttingittogetherpodcastTwitter: https://twitter.com/sondheimpodcastInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/sondheimpodcast ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★