Set of activities associated with the governance of a country or territory
Is there any surprise that there are Liberal connections to the ongoing political persecution of Tamara Lich, one of the organizers behind the Freedom Convoy protest? Our Rebel in Ottawa, William Diaz-Berthiaume, joins this episode of The Gunn Show to reflect on covering Lich's latest bail hearing.
Trouble at the core of Britain's leadership has sparked concern over the country's economy. The pound has slumped, and economists fear the situation could hinder long-term growth prospects. A former Treasury official, Jeevun Sandher, provides an insider's perspective - and explains why it could damage consumer and investor sentiment. There's turbulence worldwide, with market volatility exacerbated by recession warnings and fluctuating oil prices. Washington-based industry expert, Dr Sara Vakhshouri, walks through the factors. The French government looks to fully nationalise the country's energy giant, EDF, and the European Union looks to gas and nuclear in order to secure supplies. Peter Morici has your daily markets update, and Alex Bell looks at the latest business headlines with Sam Fenwick.
It didn't take long for keyboard warriors to assign blame for the horrific shooting in Highland Park, Illinois on July 4th to people with opposing political views. This fails to recognize the true cause—spiritual evil, which will not be defeated at the ballot box. 5) Alleged July 4th shooter posted video claiming he's “like a sleepwalker” who “can't be stopped”; 4) Another Russian Oligarch found dead under mysterious circumstances; 3) Russia demands that Israel stop air strikes in Syria; 2) Seattle arrests street preacher for reading from Bible at LGBT pride event; 1) Mayor of small town in southern Mexico marries female alligator representing a powerful goddess.
Advocates for the striking down of Roe by the Supreme Court say this will improve our politics by allowing people's preferences to be better represented at the State level. But do State and local governments accurately match the preferences of their citizens when responding to their demands? It's a difficult question to answer, but one paper by NYU political scientist Julia Payson, “Locally controlled minimum wages are no closer to public preferences” provides a possible answer by way of locally set minimum wages. When local governments increase their minimum wages, do they accurately match local preferences? The answer is surprising, and has implications for policies beyond just minimum wage.
On this week's episode of Lever Time: David speaks with Democratic strategist Mark Longabaugh about what a potential Biden 2024 presidential run could mean for the future of the Democratic Party (7:46). Then, he's joined by the hosts of 5-4 Pod for an in-depth conversation about how the Supreme Court methodically legalized corruption, culminating in the recent decision in FEC v. Ted Cruz For Senate (32:24). Finally, David chats with president of Planned Parenthood, Alexis McGill Johnson, to discuss the overturning of Roe and the organization's plan for dealing with the fallout (1:02:25). If you'd like access to Lever Time Premium, which includes extended interviews and bonus content, head over to LeverNews.com to become a supporting subscriber.If you'd like to leave a tip for The Lever click the following link. It helps us do this kind of independent journalism. levernews.com/tipjarA rough transcript of this episode is available here.PlannedParenthood.orgAbortionFinder.org
The Highland Park shooting suspect's digital footprint may fit into a new emerging profile of extremists. A Georgia grand jury subpoenas several of former President Trump's political allies and legal advisers. Boris Johnson's government is in turmoil as two of the top cabinet ministers quit.
Brittney Griner, the American W.N.B.A. star who has been detained in Russia since February, recently sent a letter to President Biden. “I'm terrified I might be here forever,” she wrote.The White House vowed to use “every tool” to bring Ms. Griner back to the United States, but organizing her release is a tricky proposition, complicated not least by Washington's break with Moscow over the war in Ukraine.Guest: Michael Crowley, a diplomatic correspondent for The New York Times.Want more from The Daily? For one big idea on the news each week from our team, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: Brittney Griner has endured months in a Russian prison and faces the threat of years more.Her letter to Mr. Biden asked him to keep her case in mind. “I realize you are dealing with so much, but please don't forget about me and the other American detainees. Please do all you can to bring us home,” she wrote.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
Michael Steele is joined by Pennsylvania State Representative Malcolm Kenyatta to discuss the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the January 6th hearings, separating Church and State and the moral, political and legal questions surrounding the current state of the nation.If you enjoy this podcast, make sure to give it five stars on Apple Podcasts!
This week the excellent Nick Dixon co-hosts. We talk about the big political news, then the Sunak & Javid resignations happen while we're recording and we say 'Blimey' a lot. Also chatting about Macy Gray & Bette Midler wading into the Trans debate and plenty more besides. Funny episode. Support the Podcast, keep it weekly & AD-FREE https://www.patreon.com/geoffnorcott?fan_landing=true 2022 Edinburgh Fringe tickets livenation.uk/puvz30rmxK4 Order my BOOK amzn.to/2TNsKOU
Much has been written, published and broadcast about a Divided America—especially now, with the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Political divisions, often bitter, however, have existed since the Founding. But how can we know whether the so-called Divided America is something new, something traditional that has become more noticeable due to the ease of […]
Tune in as hosts Andrew DeBartolo and Michael Thiessen look back on the Canada Day weekend news and the allegations surrounding RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, and her use of the mass shooting in Halifax in 2020 to further political ends. Weekend Review:Tamara Lich was arrested a second time and in jail until her hearing today: https://tnc.news/2022/06/27/lich-arrested1; https://tnc.news/2022/06/30/lich-july-5 James Topp arrives in Ottawa before Canada Day: https://www.iheartradio.ca/bounce/winnipeg/veteran-james-topp-arrives-in-ottawa-to-protest-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-1.18112552 Protesters flood the streets in front of Parliament Hill on Canada Day: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ottawa-kicks-off-canada-day-expecting-anti-government-protests [Story 1] Corruption and dirty politics in the RCMP: Brenda Lucki jeopardizes mass shooting investigation: https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/rcmp-commissioner-brenda-lucki-tried-to-jeopardize-mass-murder-investigation-to-advance-trudeaus-gun-control-efforts/ Brenda Lucki uses RCMP to further Liberal gun control legislation: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-who-has-less-shame-the-liberals-or-brenda-lucki Justice Department hides RCMP political interference: https://tnc.news/2022/06/28/rcmp-scandal-notes Sick of Mainstream Media Lies? Please Support us in bringing you real, truthful reporting and analysis from a Christian perspective. Subscribe to our various shows:LIBERTY DISPATCH PODCAST: https://libertydispatch.podbean.com OPEN MIKE WITH MICHAEL THIESSEN: https://openmikewithmichaelthiessen.podbean.com THE LIBERTY LOUNGE WITH TIM TYSOE: https://rumble.com/c/c-1639185 Stay up-to-date on all things LCC: Gab: https://gab.com/libertycoalitioncanada Telegram: https://t.me/libertycoalitioncanadanews Instagram: https://instagram.com/libertycoalitioncanada Facebook: https://facebook.com/LibertyCoalitionCanada Twitter: @LibertyCCanada - https://twitter.com/LibertyCCanada Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/LibertyCoalitionCanada YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLb1yNIeJ-2bSuHRW4oftRQ You can also find us on Spotify & Apple Podcasts and just about every other podcastcatcher! Please LIKE, SUBSCRIBE, RATE & REVIEW and SHARE it with others!
62 Minutes PG-13 Z Man is a prolific writer and host of the Z Blog Power Hour podcast Pete asked Z Man to come on to talk about the many factions in American politics. He gives his negatives and positives of Libertarians, Conservatism, the Dissident Right and the two kinds of Leftists. He then talks about how he sees society eventually overcoming the regime. Today's Sponsor Expat Show Podcast The Zman dot com Get Autonomy 19 Skills PDF Download The Monopoly On Violence Support Pete on His Website Pete's Patreon Pete's Substack Pete's Subscribestar Pete's Paypal Pete on Facebook Pete on Twitter
Political theorist and professor of political science Dr. Jodi Dean joins DOSED to diagnose our dystopian hellscape as “neofeudalism.” Listen to this full episode of DOSED free wherever you stream podcasts: https://linktr.ee/dosedshow
The President/General of the Universal Afrikan Peoples Organization, Zaki Baruti, checks into our classroom on Tuesday morning. Brother Zaki will examine the changing Social & Political landscapes to determine what, if anything, they mean for the mid-term elections. Before Brother Zaki, Maryland Civil rights activist Carl Snowden previews this weekend's conference on The Crisis in the Black Community. Before Carl, Brother Dahwoud in captivity reaches out to us from an undisclosed detention facility. The Big Show starts on WOL 95.9 FM & 1450 AM, 1010 AM WOLB and woldcnews.com at 6 am ET., 5 am CT., 3 am PT., and 11 am BST. Call in # 800 450 7876 to participate, & listen live See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Much has been written, published and broadcast about a Divided America—especially now, with the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade.Political divisions, often bitter, however, have existed since the Founding. But how can we know whether the so-called Divided America is something new, something traditional that has become more noticeable due to the ease of spreading information, or maybe a combination of the two? Join us for a special webinar presentation from Dr. John S. Baker, Professor Emeritus, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State University.Featuring:Dr. John S. Baker, Professor Emeritus, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, Louisiana State UniversityModerator: Dean Reuter, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, The Federalist Society
Tune in as hosts Andrew DeBartolo and Michael Thiessen look back on the Canada Day weekend news and the allegations surrounding RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki, and her using of the mass shooting in Halifax in 2020 to further political ends. Weekend Review: Tamara Lich was arrested a second time and in jail until hearing today: https://tnc.news/2022/06/27/lich-arrested1; https://tnc.news/2022/06/30/lich-july-5 James Topp arrives in Ottawa before Canada Day: https://www.iheartradio.ca/bounce/winnipeg/veteran-james-topp-arrives-in-ottawa-to-protest-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-1.18112552 Protesters flood the streets in front of Parliament Hill on Canada Day: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ottawa-kicks-off-canada-day-expecting-anti-government-protests [Story 1] Corruption and dirty politics in the RCMP: Brenda Lucki jeopardizes mass shooting investigation: https://www.halifaxexaminer.ca/featured/rcmp-commissioner-brenda-lucki-tried-to-jeopardize-mass-murder-investigation-to-advance-trudeaus-gun-control-efforts/ Brenda Lucki uses RCMP to further Liberal gun control legislation: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-who-has-less-shame-the-liberals-or-brenda-lucki Justice Department hides RCMP political interference: https://tnc.news/2022/06/28/rcmp-scandal-notes Sick of Mainstream Media Lies? Please Support us in bringing you real, truthful reporting and analysis from a Christian perspective. Subscribe to our various shows: LIBERTY DISPATCH PODCAST: https://libertydispatch.podbean.com OPEN MIKE WITH MICHAEL THIESSEN: https://openmikewithmichaelthiessen.podbean.com THE LIBERTY LOUNGE WITH TIM TYSOE: https://rumble.com/c/c-1639185 Stay up-to-date on all things LCC: Gab: https://gab.com/libertycoalitioncanada Telegram: https://t.me/libertycoalitioncanadanews Instagram: https://instagram.com/libertycoalitioncanada Facebook: https://facebook.com/LibertyCoalitionCanada Twitter: @LibertyCCanada - https://twitter.com/LibertyCCanada Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/LibertyCoalitionCanada YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLb1yNIeJ-2bSuHRW4oftRQ You can also find us on Spotify & Apple Podcasts and just about every other podcast catcher! Please LIKE, SUBSCRIBE, RATE & REVIEW and SHARE it with others!
Aotearoa's best food and wine was on display at a glamorous dinner on Melbourne's waterfront last night. The Prime Minister ended the second day of her trade mission in Australia wining and dinning at a special event showcasing New Zealand food and beverage. Political reporter Anneke Smith filed this report from a dining table in Melbourne.
In today's second hour, Dom welcomes former State Senator Vince Fumo back onto the Dom Giordano Program, to discuss his role in launching the Mayoral career of Jim Kenney. First, Fumo cuts straight to the topic at hand, explaining why he decided to help ‘Jimmy' get his spot on City Council, telling of the initial intentions of the later Mayor. Fumo speaks highly of the Mayor he once knew, but tells that even he is shocked at what Mayor Kenney has become. Then, Fumo further expands into local politics, discussing how things have changed since he served Philadelphia. In addition, Fumo offers an update on the Columbus Statue in South Philadelphia. (Photo by Neilson Barnard/Getty Images for New York Times)
In this episode, Dinesh discusses the prospects of Trump versus DeSantis for the GOP nomination in 2024. Dinesh reflects on a July 4 "anti-party" to ask what the Democratic Left cherishes most about America. Dinesh examines the fallout of the Supreme Court's climate and abortion decisions. Political scientist Richard Samuelson joins Dinesh to talk about what is most unique and admirable about the American founders. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
In conversation with Ashraf Jabbar Qureshi - One of the founding members of PTI(Pakistan Tehreek e Insaaf) which brought us many insights and stories related to the political situation in Karachi, PTI's background and its journey and Mr. Ashraf's manifestations related to the political landscape of Pakistan.
Yesterday, Brian Deese - economic and political advisor for the Biden Administration - in a CNN interview was asked what he would say to American families struggling because of gas prices. His response included a line that left many people stunned. He said, "This is about the future of the liberal world order and we have to stand firm." What exactly did he mean by "liberal world order?" Logan and the rest of the Sekulow team give their analysis. This and more today on Sekulow.
Tuesday on Political Rewind: The team is back with a live show. The Fourth of July brought out some of our country's best and worst realities. A mass shooting in Highland Park, Ill., turned a joyous celebration into a scene of carnage. Meanwhile, candidates on the November ballot showed no signs of slowing down over the holiday. Chuck Williams — Reporter, @chuckwilliams, WRBL-TV, Columbus Kenya Hunter — Reporter, @KenyaTheHunter, Capital B Atlanta Stephen Fowler — Political reporter, @stphnfwlr, GPB News Tamar Hallerman — Senior reporter, @TamarHallerman, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Timestamps: 0:00- Introductions 3:42- Highland Park shooting cast shadow on Fourth of July holiday 19:36- Fulton County probe into Donald Trump moves forward 32:37- Where does GA stand on abortion law? 43:30- More national money is coming into the governor's race Please be sure to download our newsletter: www.gpb.org/newsletters. And subscribe, follow and rate this show wherever podcasts are found.
AgCountry SVP of Government and Public Affairs Howard Olson outlines the current political environment. In addition, Olson previews a Midwest Ag Council event and an executive-level conference about the next five years in agriculture.
On abortion. After the US Supreme Court ruling, where does this leave women in the US? Political theorist Alex Gourevitch joins us to discuss Roe v Wade, and how the fact it rooted abortion in a right to privacy was problematic. How can we ground the right to abortion in an argument for freedom in general? And is the US really faced with a rising tide of reaction, as liberals claim? Are same-sex marriage and contraception imperilled by the decision. Reading: Wrong Life and Abortion, Ethan Linehan, Sublation The Left killed the pro-choice coalition, Kat Rosenfield, Unherd A Defence of Abortion, Judith Jarvis Johnson How to Win the Abortion Argument, Helen Lewis, The Atlantic
Welcome to The Times of Israel's Daily Briefing, your 15-minute audio update on what's happening in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world, from Sunday through Thursday. Political correspondent Tal Schneider and Diaspora affairs correspondent Judah Ari Gross join host Amanda Borschel-Dan on today's episode. A gunman on a rooftop in Chicago's Highland Park neighborhood opened fire on a Fourth of July parade yesterday, killing six and wounding dozens. Gross updates us on what we currently know about the victims. Schneider brings an exclusive report on a study conducted by Israel's National Security Council which concluded that the country must include more women in decision-making capacities. We hear why that's probably not going to happen. In videos that are burning up Israeli social media, Labor party leader MK Merav Michaeli is seen dancing with MK Moshe Gafni's granddaughter in the women's section of her wedding. We hear why the sex-segregated dancing images are problematic for both sides. Late last week, a fracas ensued at the pluralistic pavilion next to the Western Wall as three families attempted to conduct egalitarian bar and bat mitzvah ceremonies. Gross explains how the State of Israel let these Diaspora families down. Discussed articles include: Synagogue staffer, Mexican grandfather among 6 shot dead in Chicago's Highland Park In first, National Security Council report blasts lack of women in decision-making roles Israeli lawmakers unite for one evening at wedding for MK Gafni's granddaughter Labor's Michaeli won't nix sitting with ultra-Orthodox, rules out merger with Meretz Haredim interrupt Americans' Western Wall bar, bat mitzvahs, tear up prayer books Subscribe to The Times of Israel Daily Briefing on iTunes, Spotify, PlayerFM, Google Play, or wherever you get your podcasts. IMAGE: Ultra-Orthodox youths interrupt a bar mitzvah ceremony at the egalitarian section of the Western Wall on June 30, 2022. (Laura Ben-David) See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
On the Border: The Rise and Decline of the Most Political Club in the World (Pitch Publishing, 2022) by Shaul Adar is the compelling tale of a football club sited in one of the most volatile places on earth. The book explores the radicalisation of Beitar and the fight for the soul of the club between the racists and open-minded fans. It is also a story of Jerusalem and how the holy city and the influence of religion have shaped Beitar. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. 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
On the Border: The Rise and Decline of the Most Political Club in the World (Pitch Publishing, 2022) by Shaul Adar is the compelling tale of a football club sited in one of the most volatile places on earth. The book explores the radicalisation of Beitar and the fight for the soul of the club between the racists and open-minded fans. It is also a story of Jerusalem and how the holy city and the influence of religion have shaped Beitar. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/middle-eastern-studies
On the Border: The Rise and Decline of the Most Political Club in the World (Pitch Publishing, 2022) by Shaul Adar is the compelling tale of a football club sited in one of the most volatile places on earth. The book explores the radicalisation of Beitar and the fight for the soul of the club between the racists and open-minded fans. It is also a story of Jerusalem and how the holy city and the influence of religion have shaped Beitar. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/israel-studies
On the Border: The Rise and Decline of the Most Political Club in the World (Pitch Publishing, 2022) by Shaul Adar is the compelling tale of a football club sited in one of the most volatile places on earth. The book explores the radicalisation of Beitar and the fight for the soul of the club between the racists and open-minded fans. It is also a story of Jerusalem and how the holy city and the influence of religion have shaped Beitar. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose doctoral work focused on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sports
On this week's episode of the Pulse Pod, Chris is joined by Cygnal's President and Founder, pollster Brent Buchanan, and Noah Wyhof-Rudnick, Director of Sampling and Innovation. Together, they share key insights concerning Cygnal's June National Survey and discuss how the electoral environment is taking shape as we continue to come closer to election day in November.
I flew to the Bahamas to interview Sam Bankman-Fried, the CEO of FTX! He talks about FTX’s plan to infiltrate traditional finance, giving $100m this year to AI + pandemic risk, scaling slowly + hiring A-players, and much more.Watch on YouTube, or listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.Timestamps(00:18) - How inefficient is the world?(01:11) - Choosing a career(04:15) - The difficulty of being a founder(06:21) - Is effective altruism too narrowminded?(09:57) - Political giving(12:55) - FTX Future Fund(16:41) - Adverse selection in philanthropy(18:06) - Correlation between different causes(22:15) - Great founders do difficult things(25:51) - Pitcher fatigue and the importance of focus(28:30) - How SBF identifies talent(31:09) - Why scaling too fast kills companies(33:51) - The future of crypto(35:46) - Risk, efficiency, and human discretion in derivatives(41:00) - Jane Street vs FTX(41:56) - Conflict of interest between broker and exchange(42:59) - Bahamas and Charter Cities(43:47) - SBF’s RAM-skewed mindUnfortunately, audio quality abruptly drops from 17:50-19:15TranscriptDwarkesh Patel 0:09Today on The Lunar Science Society Podcast, I have the pleasure of interviewing Sam Bankman-Fried, CEO of FTX. Thanks for coming on The Lunar Society.Sam Bankman-Fried 0:17Thanks for having me.How inefficient is the world?Dwarkesh Patel 0:18Alright, first question. Does the consecutive success of FTX and Alameda suggest to you that the world has all kinds of low-hanging opportunities? Or was that a property of the inefficiencies of crypto markets at one particular point in history?Sam Bankman-Fried 0:31I think it's more of the former, there are just a lot of inefficiencies.Dwarkesh Patel 0:35So then another part of the question is: if you had to restart earning to give again, what are the odds you become a billionaire, but you can't do it in crypto?Sam Bankman-Fried 0:42I think they're pretty decent. A lot of it depends on what I ended up choosing and how aggressive I end up deciding to be. There were a lot of safe and secure career paths before me that definitely would not have ended there. But if I dedicated myself to starting up some businesses, there would have been a pretty decent chance of it.Choosing a careerDwarkesh Patel 1:11So that leads to the next question—which is that you've cited Will MacAskill's lunch with you while you were at MIT as being very important in deciding your career. He suggested you earn-to-give by going to a quant firm like Jane Street. In retrospect, given the success you've had as a founder, was that maybe bad advice? And maybe you should’ve been advised to start a startup or nonprofit?Sam Bankman-Fried 1:31I don't think it was literally the best possible advice because this was in 2012. Starting a crypto exchange then would have been…. I think it was definitely helpful advice. Relative to not having gotten advice at all, I think it helps quite a bit.Dwarkesh Patel 1:50Right. But then there's a broader question: are people like you who could become founders advised to take lower variance, lower risk careers that in, expected value, are less valuable?Sam Bankman-Fried 2:02Yeah, I think that's probably true. I think people are advised too strongly to go down safe career paths. But I think it's worth noting that there's a big difference between what makes sense altruistically and personally for this. To the extent you're just thinking of personal criteria, that's going to argue heavily in favor of a safer career path because you have much more quickly declining marginal utility of money than the world does. So, this kind of path is specifically for altruistically-minded people.The other thing is that when you think about advising people, I think people will often try and reference career advice that others got. “What were some of these outward-facing factors of success that you can see?” But often the answer has something to do with them and their family, friends, or something much more personal. When we talk with people about their careers, personal considerations and the advice of people close to them weigh very heavily on the decisions they end up making.Dwarkesh Patel 3:17I didn't realize that the personal considerations were as important in your case as the advice you got.Sam Bankman-Fried 3:24Oh, I don’t think in my case. But, it is true with many people that I talked to.Dwarkesh Patel 3:29Speaking of declining marginal consumption, I'm wondering if you think the implication of this is that over the long term, all the richest people in the world will be utilitarian philanthropists because they don't have diminishing returns of consumption. They’re risk-neutral.Sam Bankman-Fried 3:40I wouldn't say all will, but I think there probably is something in that direction. People who are looking at how they can help the world are going to end up being disproportionately represented amongst the most and maybe least successful.The difficulty of being a founderDwarkesh Patel 3:54Alright, let’s talk about Effective Altruism. So in your interview with Tyler Cowen, you were asked, “What constrains the number of altruistically minded projects?” And you answered, “Probably someone who can start something.”Now, is this a property of the world in general? Or is this a property of EAs? And if it's about EAs, then is there something about the movement that drives away people who took could take leadership roles?Sam Bankman-Fried 4:15Oh, I think it's just the world in general. Even if you ignore altruistic projects and just look at profit-minded ones, we have lots of ideas for businesses that we think would probably do well, if they were run well, that we'd be excited to fund. And the missing ingredient quite frequently for them is the right person or team to take the lead on it. In general, starting something is brutal. It's brutal being a founder, and it requires a somewhat specific but extensive list of skills. Those things end up making it high in demand.Dwarkesh Patel 4:56What would it take to get more of those kinds of people to go into EA?Sam Bankman-Fried 4:59Part of it is probably just talking with them about, “Have you thought about what you can do for the world? Have you thought about how you can have an impact on the world? Have you thought about how you can maximize your impact on the world?” Many people would be excited about thinking critically and ambitiously about how they can help the world. So I think honestly, just engagement is one piece of this. And then even within people who are altruistically minded and thinking about what it would take for them to be founders, there are still things that you can do.Some of this is about empowering people and some of this is about normalizing the fact that when you start something, it might fail—and that's okay. Most startups and especially very early-stage startups should not be trying to maximize the chances of having at least a little bit of success. But that means you have to be okay with the personal fallout of failing and that we have to build a community that is okay with that. I don't think we have that right now, I think very few communities do.Is effective altruism too narrowminded?Dwarkesh Patel 6:21Now, there are many good objections to utilitarianism, as you know. You said yourself that we don't have a good account of infinite ethics—should we attribute substantial weight to the probability that utilitarianism is wrong? And how do you hedge for this moral uncertainty in your giving?Sam Bankman-Fried 6:35So I don't think it has a super large impact on my giving. Partially, because you'd need to have a concrete proposal for what else you would do that would be different actions-wise—and I don't know that that I've been compelled by many of those. I do think that there are a lot of things we don't understand right now. And one thing that you pointed to is infinite ethics. Another thing is that (I'm not sure this is moral uncertainty, this might be physical uncertainty) there are a lot of sort of chains of reasoning people will go down that are somewhat contingent on our current understanding of the universe—which might not be right. And if you look at expected-value outcomes, might not be right.Say what you will about the size of the universe and what that implies, but some of the same people make arguments based on how big the universe is and also think the simulation hypothesis has decent probability. Very few people chain through, “What would that imply?” I don't think it's clear what any of this implies. If I had to say, “How have these considerations changed my thoughts on what to do?”The honest answer is that they have changed it a little bit. And the direction that they pointed me in is things with moderately more robust impact. And what I mean by that is, I'm sure one way that you can calculate the expected value of an action is, “Here's what's going to happen. Here are the two outcomes, and here are the probabilities of them.” Another thing you can do is say - it's a little bit more hand-wavy - but, “How much better is this going to make the world? How much does it matter if the world is better in generic diffuse ways?” Typically, EA has been pretty skeptical of that second line of reasoning—and I think correctly. When you see that deployed, it's nonsense. Usually, when people are pretty hard to nail down on the specific reasoning of why they think that something might be good, it’s because they haven't thought that hard about it or don't want to think that hard about it. The much better analyzed and vetted pathways are the ones we should be paying attention to.That being said, I do think that sometimes EA gets too narrow-minded and specific about plotting out courses of impact. And this is one of the reasons why that people end up fixating on one particular understanding of the universe, of ethics, of how things are going to progress. But, all of these things have some amount of uncertainty in them. And when you jostle them, some theories of impact behave somewhat robustly and some of them completely fall apart. I’ve become a bit more sympathetic to ones that are a little robust under thoughts about what the world ends up looking like.Political givingDwarkesh Patel 9:57In the May 2022 Oregon Congressional Election, you gave 12 million dollars to Carrick Flynn, whose campaign was ultimately unsuccessful. How have you updated your beliefs about the efficacy of political giving in the aftermath?Sam Bankman-Fried 10:12It was the first time that I gave on that scale in a race. And I did it because he was, of all the candidates in the cycle, the most outspoken on the need for more pandemic preparedness and prevention. He lost—such is life. In the end, there are some updates on the efficacy of various things. But, I never thought that the odds were extremely high that he was going to win. It was always going to be an uncertain close race. There's a limit to how much you can update from a one-time occurrence. If you thought the odds were 50-50, and it turns out to be close in one direction or another, there's a maximum of a factor-of-two update that you have on that. There were a bunch of sort of micro-updates on specific factors of the race, but on a high level, it didn’t change my perspective on policy that much.Dwarkesh Patel 11:23But does it make you think there are diminishing or possibly negative marginal returns from one donor giving to a candidate? Because of the negative PR?Sam Bankman-Fried 11:30At some point, I think that's probably true.Dwarkesh Patel 11:33Continuing on the theme of politics, when is it more effective to give the marginal million dollars to a political campaign or institution to make some change at the government level (like putting in early detection)? Or when is it more effective to fund it yourself?Sam Bankman-Fried 11:47It's a good question. It's not necessarily mutually exclusive. One thing worth looking at is the scale of the things that need to happen. How much are things like international cooperation important for it? When you look at pandemic prevention, we're talking tens of billions of dollars of scale necessary to start putting this infrastructure in place. So it's a pretty big scale thing—which is hard to fund to that level individually. It’s also something where we’re going to need to have cooperation between different countries on, for example, what their surveillance for new pathogens looks like. And vaccine distribution If some countries have a great distribution of vaccines and others don't, that's not good. It's both not fair and not equitable for the countries that get hit hardest. But also, in a global pandemic, it's going to spread. You need global coverage. That's another reason that government has to be involved, at least to some extent, in the efforts.FTX Future FundDwarkesh Patel 12:55Let's talk about Future Fund. As you know, there are already many existing Effective Altruist organizations that do donations. What is the reason you thought there was more value in creating a new one? What's your edge?Sam Bankman-Fried 13:06 There's value in having multiple organizations. Every organization has its blind spots, and you can help cover those up if you have a few. If OpenPhil didn't exist, maybe we would have created an organization that looks more like OpenPhil. They are covering a lot of what we’re looking at—we're looking at overlapping, but not identical things. I think having that diversity can be valuable, but pointing to the ways in which we intentionally designed to be a little bit different from existing donors:One thing that I've been really happy about is the re-granting program. We have a number of people who are experts in various areas to who we've basically donated pots that they can re-grant. What are the reasons that we think this is valuable? One thing is giving more stakeholders a chance to voice their opinions because we can't possibly be listening to everyone in the world directly and integrating all those opinions to come up with a perfect set of answers. Distributing it and letting them act semi-autonomously can help with that. The other thing is that it helps with a large number of smaller grants. When you think about what an organization giving away $100 million in a year is thinking about, “if we divided that up into $25,000 grants, how many grants would that mean?” 4,000 grants to analyze, right? If we want to give real thought to each one of those, we can't do that.But on the flip side, sometimes the smaller grants are the most impactful per dollar and there are a lot of cases where someone really impressive has an exciting idea for a new foundation or a new organization that could do a lot of good for the world and needs $25,000 to get started. To rent out a small office, to be able to cover salaries for two employees for the first six months. Those are the kind of cases where a pretty small grant can make a huge change in the development of what might ultimately become a really impactful organization. But they're the kind of things that are really hard for our team to evaluate all of, just given the number of them—but the re-grantor program gives us a way to do that. Instead, we have 10, 50, or 100 re-grantors, who are going out and finding a lot of those opportunities close to them, they can then identify those and direct those grants—and it gives us a much wider reach. It also biases it less towards people who we happen to know, which is good.We don't want to just like overfund everyone we know and underfund everyone that we don’t. That's one initiative that I've been pretty excited about that we're going to keep doing. Another thing we've really tried to have a lot of emphasis on making the (application) process smooth and clean. There are pros and cons to this. But it drops the activation energy necessary for someone to decide to apply for a grant and fill out all of the forms. We’ve really tried to bring more people into the fold.Adverse selection in philanthropyDwarkesh Patel 16:41If you make it easy for people to fill out your application and generally fund things that other organizations wouldn't, how do you deal with the possibility of adverse selection in your philanthropic deal flow?Sam Bankman-Fried 16:52It's a really good question. It’s a worry that Bob down the street might see a great book case study that he wants and wonder if he can get funding for this bookcase as it’s going to house a lot of knowledge. Knowledge is good, right? Obviously, we would detect that pretty quickly. The basic answer is that we still vet all of these. We do have oversight of them. But, we also do a deep dive into both all of the large ones, but also into samplings of all the small ones. We do deep dives into randomly sampled subsets of them—which allows us to get a good statistical sense of whether we are facing significant adverse selection in them. So far, we haven't seen obvious signs of it, but we're going to keep doing these analyses and see if anything worrying comes out of those. But that's a way to be able to have more trusted analyses for more scaled-up numbers of grants.Correlation between different causesDwarkesh Patel 18:06A long time ago, you wrote a blog post about how EA causes are multiplicative, instead of additive. Do you still find that's the case with most of the causes you care about? Or are there cases where some of the causes you care about are negatively multiplicative? An example might be economic growth and the speed at which AI takes off.Sam Bankman-Fried 18:24Yeah, I think it’s getting more complicated. Specifically around AI, you have a lot of really complex factors that can point in the same direction or in opposite directions. Especially if what you think matters is something like the relative progress of AI safety research versus AI capabilities research, a lot of things are going to have the same impact on both of those, and thus confusing impact on safety as a whole.I do think it's more complicated now. It's not cleanly things just multiplying with each other. There are lots of cases where you see multiplicative behavior, but there are cases where you don't have that. The conclusion of this is: if you have multiplicative cases, you want to be funding each piece of it. But if you don't, then you want to be trained to identify the most impactful pieces and move those along. Our behavior should be different in those two scenarios.Dwarkesh Patel 19:23If you think of your philanthropy from a portfolio perspective, is correlation good or bad?Sam Bankman-Fried 19:29Expected value is expected value, right? Let's pretend that there is one person in Bangladesh and another one in Mexico. We have two interventions, both 50-50 on saving each of their lives. Suppose there’s some new drug that we could release to combat a neglected disease. This question is asking, “are they correlated?” “Are these two drugs correlated in their efficacy?” And my basic argument is, “it doesn't matter, right?” If you think about it from each of their perspectives, the person in Mexico isn't saying, “I only want to be saved in the cases where the person in Bangladesh is or isn't saved.” That’s not relevant. They want to live.The person in Bangladesh similarly wishes to live. You want to help both of them as much as you can. It's not super relevant whether there’s alignment or anti-alignment between the cases where you get lucky and the ones where you don't.Dwarkesh Patel 20:46What’s the most likely reason that Future Fund fails to live up to your expectations?Sam Bankman-Fried 20:51We get a little lame. We give to a lot of decent things. But all the cooler or more innovative things that we do, don't seem to work very well. We end up giving the same that everyone else is giving. We don’t turn out to be effective at starting new things, we don't turn out to be effective at thinking of new causes or executing them. Hopefully, we'll avoid that. But, it's always a risk.Dwarkesh Patel 21:21Should I think of your charitable giving, as a yearly contribution of a billion dollars? Or should I think of it as a $30 billion hedge against the possibility that there's going to be some existential risk that requires a large pool of liquid wealth?Sam Bankman-Fried 21:36It's a really good question, I'm not sure. We've given away about 100 million so far this year. We're going to start doing that because we think there are really important things to fund and to start scaling up those systems. We notice opportunities as they come and we have systems ready in place to give to them. But it's something we're really actively discussing internally—how concentrated versus diffuse we want that giving to be, and storing up for one very large opportunity versus a mixture of many.Great founders do difficult thingsDwarkesh Patel 22:15When you look at a proposal and think this project could be promising, but this is not the right person to lead it, what is the trait that's most often missing?Sam Bankman-Fried 22:22Super interesting. I am going to ignore the obvious answer which is that the guy is not very good and look at cases where it's someone pretty impressive, but not the right fit for this. There are a few things. One of them is how much are they going to want to deal with really messy s**t. This is a huge thing! When I was working at Jane Street, I had a great time there. One thing I didn’t realize was valuable until I saw the alternative—if I decided that is a good trade to buy one share of Apple stock on NASDAQ, there's a button to do that.If you as a random citizen want to buy one share of Apple stock directly on an exchange, it'll cost you tens of millions of dollars a year to get set up. You have to get a physical colo(cation) in Secaucus, New Jersey, have market data agreements with these companies, think about the sip and about the NBBO and whether you’re even allowed to list on NASDAQ, and then build the technological infrastructure to do it. But all of that comes after you get a bank account.Getting a bank account that's going to work in finance is really hard. I spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours of my life, trying to open bank accounts. One of the things at early Alameda that was really crucial to our ability to make money was having someone very senior spend hours per day in a physical bank branch, manually instructing wire transfers. If we didn't do that, we wouldn't have been able to do the trade.When you start a company, there are enormous amounts of s**t that looks like that. Things that are dumb or annoying or broken or unfair, or not how the world should work. But that’s how the world does work. The only way to be successful is to fight through that. If you're going to be like, “I'm the CEO, I don't do that stuff,” then no one's going to do that at your company. It's not going to get done. You won't have a bank account and you won't be able to operate. One of the biggest traits that are incredibly important for a founder and for an early team at a company (but not important for everything in life) is willing to do a ton of grunt work if it’s important for the company right then.Viewing it not as “low prestige” or “too easy” for you, but as, “This is the important thing. This is a valuable thing to do. So it's what I'm going to do.” That's one of the core traits. The other thing is asking if they’re excited about this idea? Will they actually put their heart and soul into it? Or are they going to be not really into it and half-ass? Those are two things that I really look for.Pitcher fatigue and the importance of focusDwarkesh Patel 25:51How have you used your insights about pitcher fatigue to allocate talent in your companies?Sam Bankman-Fried 25:58Haha. When it comes to pitchers, in baseball, there's a lot of evidence that they get worse over the course of the game. Partially, because it's hard on the arm. But, it's worth noting that the evidence seems to support the claim that it depends on the pitchers. But in general, you're better off breaking up your outings. It's not just a function of how many innings they pitch that season, but also extremely recently. If you could choose between someone throwing six innings every six days, or throwing three innings every three days, you should use the latter. That's going to get the better pitching on average, and just as many innings out of them—and baseball has since then moved very far in that direction. The average number of pitches thrown by starting pitchers has gone down a lot over the last 5-10 years.How do I use that in my company? There’s a metaphor here except this is with computer work instead of physical arm work. You don't have the same effect where your arm is getting sore, your muscles snap, and you need surgery if you pitch too hard for too long. That doesn't directly translate—but there's an equivalent of this with people getting tired and exhausted. But on the other hand, context is a huge, huge piece of being effective. Having all the context in your mind of what's going on, what you're working on, and what the company is doing makes it easier to operate effectively. For instance, if you could have either two half-time employees or one full-time employee, you're way better off with one full-time employee because they're going to have more context than either of the part-time employees would have—thus be able to work way more efficiently.In general, concentrated work is pretty valuable. If you keep breaking up your work, you're never going to do as great of work as if you truly dove into something.How SBF identifies talentDwarkesh Patel 28:30You've talked about how you weigh experience relatively little when you're deciding who to hire. But in a recent Twitter thread, you mentioned that being able to provide mentorship to all the people who you hire is one of the bottlenecks to you being able to scale. Is there a trade-off here where if you don't hire people for experience, you have to give them more mentorship and thus can't scale as fast?Sam Bankman-Fried 28:51It's a good question. To a surprising extent, we found that the experience of the people that we hire has not had much correlation with how much mentorship they need. Much more important is how they think, how good they are at understanding new and different situations, and how hard they try to integrate into their understanding of coding how FTX works. We actually have by and large found that other things are much better predictors of how much oversight and mentorship they’re going to need then.Dwarkesh Patel 29:35How do you assess that short of hiring them for a month and then seeing how they did?Sam Bankman-Fried 29:39It's tough, I don't think we're perfect at it. But things that we look at are, “Do they understand quickly what the goal of a product is? How does that inform how they build it?” When you're looking at developers, I think we want people who can understand what FTX is, how it works, and thus what the right way to architect things would be for that rather than treating it as an abstract engineering problem divorced from the ultimate product.You can ask people like, “Hey, here's a high-level customer experience or customer goal. How would you architect a system to create that?” That’s one thing that we look for. An eagerness to learn and adapt. It's not trivial to ask for that. But you can do some amount of that by giving people novel scenarios and seeing how much they break versus how much they bend. That can be super valuable. Specifically searching for developers who are willing to deal with messy scenarios rather than wanting a pristine world to work in. Our company is customer-facing and has to face some third-party tooling. All those things mean that we have to interface with things that are messy and the way the world is.Why scaling too fast kills companiesDwarkesh Patel 31:09Before you launched FTX, you gave detailed instructions to the existing exchanges about how to improve their system, how to remove clawbacks, and so on. Looking back, they left billions of dollars of value on the table. Why didn't they just fix what you told them to fix?Sam Bankman-Fried 31:22My sense is that it’s part of a larger phenomenon. One piece of this is that they didn't have a lot of market structure experts. They did not have the talent in-house to think really deeply about risk engines. Also, there are cultural barriers between myself and some of them, which meant that they were less inclined than they otherwise would have been to take it very seriously. Ignoring those factors, there's something much bigger at play there. Many of these exchanges had hired a lot of people and they got in very large. You might think they were more capable of doing things with more horsepower. But in practice, most of the time that we see a company grow really fast, really quickly, and get really big in terms of people, it becomes an absolute mess.Internally, there's huge diffusion of responsibility issues. No one's really taking charge. You can't figure out who's supposed to do what. In the end, nothing gets done. You actually start hitting the negative marginal utility of employees pretty quickly. The more people you have, the less total you get done. That happened to a number of them to the point where I sent them these proposals. Where did they go internally? Who knows. The Vice President of Exchange Risk Operations (but not the real one—the fake one operating under some department with an unclear goal and mission) had no idea what to do with it. Eventually, she passes it off to a random friend of hers that was the developer for the mobile app and was like, “You're a computer person, is this right?” They likely said, “I don’t know, I'm not a risk person,” and that's how it died. I’m not saying that’s literally what happened but sounds kinda like that’s probably happened. It's not like they had people who took responsibility and thought, “Wow, this is scary. I should make sure that the best person in the company gets this,” and pass it to the person who thinks about their risk modeling. I don't think that's what happened.The future of cryptoDwarkesh Patel 33:51There're two ways of thinking about the impact of crypto on financial innovation. One is the crypto maximalist view that crypto subsumes tradfi. The other is that you're basically stress-testing some ideas in a volatile, fairly unregulated market that you're actually going to bring to tradfi, but this is not going to lead to some sort of decentralized utopia. Which of these models is more correct? Or is there a third model that you think is the correct one?Sam Bankman-Fried 34:18Who knows exactly what's going to happen? It's going to be path-dependent. If I had to guess I would say that a lot of properties of what is happening crypto today will make their way into Trad Fi to some extent. I think blockchain settlement has a lot of value and can clean up a lot of areas of traditional market structure. Composable applications are super valuable and are going to get more important over time. In some areas of this, it's not clear what's going to happen. When you think about how decentralized ecosystems and regulation intersect, it's a little TBD exactly where that ends up.I don't want to state with extreme confidence exactly what will or won't happen. Stablecoins becoming an important settlement mechanism is pretty likely. Blockchains in general becoming a settlement mechanism, collateral clearing mechanism, and more assets getting tokenized seem likely. There being programs written on blockchains that people can add to that can compose with each other seems pretty likely to me. A lot of other areas of it could go either way.Risk, efficiency, and human discretion in derivativesDwarkesh Patel 35:46Let's talk about your proposal to the CFTC to replace Futures Commission Merchants with algorithmic real-time risk management. There's a worry that without human discretion, you have algorithms that will cause liquidation cascades when they were not necessary. Is there some role for human discretion in these kinds of situations?Sam Bankman-Fried 36:06There is! The way that traditional future market structure works is you have a clearinghouse with a decent amount of manual discretion in it connected to FCMs. Some of which use human discretion, and some of which use automated risk management algorithms with their clients. The smaller the client, the more automated it is. We are inverting that where at the center, you have an automated clearing house. Then, you connect it to FCM, which could use discretionary systems when managing their clients.The key difference here is that one way or another, the initial margin has to end up at the clearinghouse. A programmatic amount of it and the clearinghouse acts in a clear way. The goal of this is to prevent contagion between different intermediaries. Whatever credit decisions one intermediary makes, with respect to their customers, doesn't pose risk to other intermediaries. This is because someone has to post the collateral to the clearinghouse in the end—whether it's the FCM, their customer, or someone else. It gives clear rules of the road and lack of systemic risk spreading throughout the system and contains risk to the parties that choose to take that risk on - to the FCMs that choose to make credit decisions there.There is a potential role for manual judgment. Manual judgment can be valuable and add a lot of economic value. But it can also be very risky when done poorly. In the current system, each FCM is exposed to all of the manual bespoke decisions that each other FCM is making. That's a really scary place to be in, we've seen it blow up. We saw it blow up with LME nickel contracts and with a few very large traders who had positions at a number of different banks that ended up blowing out. So, this provides a level of clarity, oversight, and transparency to this system, so people know what risk they are, or are not taking on.Dwarkesh Patel 38:29Are you replacing that risk with another risk? If there's one exchange that has the most liquidity om futures and there’s one exchange where you're posting all your collateral (across all your positions), then the risk is that that single algorithm the exchange is using will determine when and if liquidation cascades happen?Sam Bankman-Fried 38:47It’s already the case that if you put all of your collateral with a prime broker, whatever that prime broker decides (whether it's an algorithm or a human or something in between) is what happens with all of your collateral. If you're not comfortable with that, you could choose to spread it out between different venues. You could choose to use one venue for some products and another venue for other products. If you don't want to cross-collateralized cross-margin your positions, you get capital efficiency for cross-margining them—for putting them in the same place. But, the downside of that is the risk of one can affect the other. There's a balance there, and I don't think it's a binary thing.Dwarkesh Patel 39:28Given the benefits of cross-margining and the fact that less capital has to be locked up as collateral, is the long-run equilibrium that the single exchange will win? And if that's the case, then, in the long run, there won't be that much competition in derivatives?Sam Bankman-Fried 39:40I don't think we're going to have a single exchange winning. Among other things, there are going to be different decisions made by different exchanges—which will be better or worse for particular situations. One thing that people have brought up is, “How about physical commodities?” Like corn or soy? What would our risk model say about that? It's not super helpful for those commodities right now because it doesn't know how to understand a warehouse. So, you might want to use a different exchange, which had a more bespoke risk model that tried to understand how the human would understand what physical positions someone had on. That would totally make sense. That can cause a split between different exchanges.In addition, we've been talking about the clearing house here, but many exchanges can connect to the same clearinghouse. We're already, as a clearing house, connected to a number of different DCMs and excited for that to grow. In general, there are going to be a lot of people who have different preferences over different details of the system and choose different products based on that. That's how it should work. People should be allowed to choose the option that makes the most sense for them.Jane Street vs FTXDwarkesh Patel 41:00What are the biggest differences in culture between Jane Street and FTX?Sam Bankman-Fried 41:05FTX has much more of a culture of like morphing and taking out a lot of random new s**t. I don’t want to say Jane Street is an ossified place or anything, it’s somewhat nimble. But it is more of a culture of, “We're going to be very good at this particular thing on a timescale of a decade.” There are some cases where that's true of FTX because some things are clearly part of our core business for a decade. But there are other things that we knew nothing about a year ago, and now have to get good at. There's been more adaptation and it's also a much more public-facing and customer-facing business than Jane Street is—which means that there are lots of things like PR that are much more central to what we're doing.Conflict of interest between broker and exchangeDwarkesh Patel 41:56Now in crypto, you're combining the exchange and the broker—they seem to have different incentives. The exchange wants to increase volume, and the broker wants to better manage risk, maybe with less leverage. Do you feel that in the long run, these two can stay in the same entity given the potential conflict of interest?Sam Bankman-Fried 42:13I think so. There's some extent to which they differ, but more that they actually want the same thing—and harmonizing them can be really valuable. One is to provide a great customer experience. When you have two different entities with two completely different businesses but have to go from one to the other, you're going to end up getting the least common denominator of the two as a customer. Everything is going to be supported as poorly as whichever of the two entities support what you're doing most poorly - and that makes it harder. Whereas synchronizing them gives us more ability to provide a great experience.Bahamas and Charter CitiesDwarkesh Patel 42:59How has living in the Bahamas impacted your opinion about the possibility of successful charter cities?Sam Bankman-Fried 43:06It's a good question. It's the first time and it’s updated positively. We've built out a lot of things here that have been impactful. It's made me feel like it is more doable than I previously would have thought. But it's a lot of work. It's a large-scale project if you want to build out a full city—and we haven’t built out a full city yet. We built out some specific pieces of infrastructure that we needed and we've gotten a ton of support from the country. They've been very welcoming, and there are a lot of great things here. This is way less of a project than taking a giant, empty plot of land, and creating a city in it. That's way harder.SBF’s RAM-skewed mindDwarkesh Patel 43:47How has having a RAM-skewed mind influence the culture of FTX and its growth?Sam Bankman-Fried 43:52On the upside, we've been pretty good at adapting and understanding what the important things are at any time. Training ourselves quickly to be good at those even if it looks very different than what we were doing. That's allowed us to focus a lot on the product, regulation, licensing, customer experience, branding, and a bunch of other things. Hopefully, it means that we're able to take whatever situations come up and provide reasonable feedback about them and reasonable thoughts on what to do rather than thinking more rigidly in terms of how previous situations were. On the flip side, I need to have a lot of people around me who will try and remember long-term important things that might get lost day-to-day. As we focus on things that pop up, it's important for me to take time periodically to step back and clear my mind and remember the big picture. What are the most important things for us to be focusing on? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.dwarkeshpatel.com
Our minds are constantly asked to consider voices from every direction. Political parties, advertisements, social media, friends, family—they all call for our attention. But in all of the noise, there is One who can easily get crowded out of our everyday thoughts—and His name—is Jesus. God's Word specifically calls us to consider Jesus. In this series, Consider Christ, we will be challenged to focus our thoughts on Him and to examine His life and ministry.
The Prime Minister says she's heading into a trade mission in Australia with "realistic" expectations about progress on 501 deportees. Jacinda Ardern is touring Melbourne and Sydney this week to promote trans-tasman trade and business, ahead of her annual bilateral meeting with her counterpart Anthony Albanese. Last month, she said there had been a "significant shift" in the the new Australian Government's attitude on the long-standing 501 rift but is now downplaying expectations there will be any progress on this trip. Political reporter Anneke Smith is in Melbourne.
Political division, sexual abuse and coverups, gun rights, abortion rights, COVID vaccine responses, immigration, racial injustice; these are just a few of the many issues that are ripping us apart, both as a society but also as individuals. And they continue to cloud this “Way of Jesus” faith that we belong to. There are days when we wonder if perhaps the church is causing more harm than good. That's a scary question, but it's a real one. If we were to peel back the layers and layers of our faith, what would we find at the center? Join us this week as Robert Grisham explores what our identity as part of the Family of God looks like.
Prayer reaffirmed a Constitutional Right. If you can kneel in protest we can kneel in prayer. SCOTUS just reinforced that constitutional right. Also Dark money being used by the Dems to back far right campaigns. Yes you read it right. Why?
We've got some big news on this special July 4th edition of Broken Simulation. Also this week, host Sam Tripoli continues mourning the loss of his wealth, and the guys talk Dane Cook and fast-food worker fights.Helix is offering up to $200 off all mattress orders AND two free pillows to our listeners at www.helixsleep.com/broken!The outro song is "Growing Growing Gone" by Fastball. Listen to it at www.patreon.com/fastball!More stuff:Get episodes early, and unedited, plus bonus episodes: www.rokfin.com/brokensimulationWatch Broken Simulation: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCob18bx1jaU1HYPCPNRnyogSocial media:Twitter: @fatdragonpro, @johnnywoodardInstagram: @samtripoli, @johnnyawoodard*In the Turks and Caicos Islands
Do you feel free with your life, or are you in pursuit of freedom only you understand? Have you ever thought about what attaining freedom really means? Freedom means different things to different people. Like other complex concepts, there's no one way to define freedom. However, there are foundations of freedom that can guide us toward living a free life in the bigger picture. In this episode, Tim discusses seven foundations of freedom. He talks about how others define the concept and its “ultimate” form in the spiritual sense. Finally, Tim shares the story of the 100-year-old Guinness World Record holder for working at one company for 84 years. If you'd like to learn how to work on your life's seven foundations of freedom, tune in to this episode! 3 Reasons to Listen: Reflect and understand your definition of freedom. Discover seven foundations of freedom. Learn why attaining spiritual freedom is key for aligning the foundations of freedom. Resourceshttps://timwinders.com/book (Coach: A Story of Success Redefined), a novel by Tim Winders https://www.morningbrew.com/daily (Morning Brew) https://www.morningbrew.com/daily/stories/Guinness-World-Record-longest-career-one-company (Morning Brew: Guinness World Record set for the longest career at one company) Episode Highlights[01:50] Tim's Foundations of FreedomTim identifies seven foundations of freedom. They're not in order nor definitive. What inspired the topic was a story Tim read in his newsletter. It's about the person who set a world record for having worked in one job for the longest period. [02:54] Seek, Go, Create Audience's Definition of FreedomTim turned to the podcast audience's definition of freedom. Some say that freedom is never free, life-changing, something you fight for, and only achieved in peace. Some also brought up the different types of freedom, i.e., spiritual and worldly. Others say it is another word for “nothing left to lose,” “found in Jesus,” “having choices,” and “elusive in this world.” [10:49] Freedom and Independence DayWe often associate the word with Independence Day. The events during the holiday are related to the word in many ways. But there are various layers to freedom, including spiritual, physical, financial, and political. [12:53] #1: Freedom is Not Specific to a Country, Politics, or Geographic LocationThis sentiment is near to Tim's heart because he and his wife do not have a geographic-specific location. The USA doesn't own the concept of freedom. There is freedom in other parts of the world. Many people feel limited in life because they believe their children must attend school in one geographic area. Homeschooling showed Tim that this is not the case. There's a certain degree of freedom in not believing that you have to live in one place. Political structures, in reality, are all about limiting a lot of freedom. No political party is “freer” than the other. [16:14] “There's a certain degree of freedom to not believing that you have to live in one place.” - https://ctt.ec/W55Gk (Click Here to Tweet This)[18:46] #2: Other People's Opinions Do Not Impact FreedomWe have the freedom not to allow what other people think about us to control us. Freedom has to do with the ability to control our world and life. Other people's opinions significantly impact the elements explored in the first foundation. The other side of the coin is allowing those opinions to control us. Social media has a huge role to play in this. It allows both positive and negative comments to impact what we think about ourselves. [18:51] “Freedom is not impacted by other people's opinions. In other words, we have the freedom to not allow what other people think about us to control us.” https://ctt.ec/O4_Wj (Click Here to Tweet This)[20:54] #3: Freedom from Emotional TurmoilWe often allow our emotions to control us. Relating to the second foundation, we allow what other people think of us to impact our...
Our minds are constantly asked to consider voices from every direction. Political parties, advertisements, social media, friends, family—they all call for our attention. But in all of the noise, there is One who can easily get crowded out of our everyday thoughts—and His name—is Jesus. God's Word specifically calls us to consider Jesus. In this series, Consider Christ, we will be challenged to focus our thoughts on Him and to examine His life and ministry.