Podcasts about reasoning

If you're wondering why gentle parenting isn't working for your strong-willed child, you're not alone. When a child's brain is dysregulated, strategies fall flat—Dr. Roseann Capanna-Hodge shows how Regulation First Parenting™ changes behavior by calming the nervous system first.You're staying calm, explaining, validating—and still, your child pushes back harder. If you feel stuck, you're not alone. This episode breaks down why gentle parenting isn't landing and what actually works when your child's nervous system is dysregulated.Why does gentle parenting not work for my strong-willed child?Here's the truth: it's not bad parenting—it's a dysregulated brain. Gentle parenting works beautifully when a child is regulated and can access their thinking brain.But when your child is escalated?Their thinking brain goes offlineLogic and explanations don't landIt's not that they won't—they can'tYou're speaking to a brain that isn't available.Example: You calmly explain why your child needs to turn off the iPad. Instead of cooperating, they argue, yell, or ignore you. It's not defiance—it's dysregulation.Why does my child argue, ignore me, or escalate when I stay calm?Because calm words alone don't regulate a dysregulated nervous system.When your child pushes back, they're often in:Fight mode (arguing, controlling, defying)Flight mode (avoiding, shutting down)In that state:Reasoning feels like pressureCorrection feels like threatTheir system defends—even harderStrong-willed kids?Dig in deeperEscalate fasterFight longerThat intensity isn't a flaw—it's a nervous system under stress.When your child is dysregulated, it's easy to feel helpless. The Regulation Rescue Kit gives you the scripts and strategies you need to stay grounded and in control. Become a Dysregulation Insider VIP at www.drroseann.com/newsletter and get your free kit today.Am I doing gentle parenting wrong—or is my child just different?You're not doing it wrong. But the sequence is off.Most parenting advice says:Teach → Explain → CorrectBut for dysregulated kids, it must be:Regulate → Connect → CorrectRegulate: Help the nervous system settleConnect: Build safety and trustCorrect: Teach when the brain is readyWhen you skip regulation, nothing sticks.

On this episode of The Chris Johnston show, Julian McKenzie and Chris Johnston go over a variety of topics including: (00:00) Maple Leafs trade Joseph Woll to the Flyers (6:00) Vegas Golden Knights part ways with John Tortorella (8:30) We go back to our original recording to break down the Stanley Cup Final and what's next for the Hurricanes (22:30) Reasoning on why Jordan Staal deserved the Conn Smythe (27:00) Bussi and the Hurricanes goalies (35:00) What's next for the Golden Knights (RECORDED BEFORE TORTORELLA NEWS) (42:15) Update with Mike Babcock and the Oilers with a sprinkle of Leafs coaching update (48:30) Ask CJ TODAY'S SPONSOR: SHOPIFY - Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial today at HTTP://SHOPIFY.COM/JOHNSTON Watch all episodes of The Chris Johnston Show here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLk7FZfwCEifwZnM5KxOFlm0lQjkEheLw Buy CJ Show merch: https://sdpnshop.ca/collections/cj-show Follow us on Instagram: @reporterchris @jkamckenzie and @sdpnsports Follow us on X: @reporterchris @jkamckenzie @sdpnsports Reach out to ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.sdpn.ca/sales⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to connect with our sales team Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of the Crazy Wisdom Podcast, host Stewart Alsop sits down with Larry Swanson, creator of the Knowledge Graph Insights Podcast, for their second conversation together. The two cover a wide range of interconnected topics, starting with a correction Larry makes about the true origin of the term "artificial intelligence," tracing it back to the 1956 Dartmouth Conference and its distinction from Norbert Wiener's cybernetics. From there, the conversation moves through the history and structure of knowledge graphs, ontologies, RDF (Resource Description Framework), and the W3C standards process, touching on concepts like the T-box, A-box, and C-box, as well as the 25th anniversary of the Semantic Web paper. Stewart and Larry also dig into the limitations of large language models — particularly around reasoning, confabulation, and what Larry describes as "cognitive surrender" — and why symbolic AI and knowledge engineering may hold answers that the neural network world hasn't fully embraced. The episode also ventures into consciousness, panpsychism, Michael Pollan's ideas, and Stewart's own hands-on experience vibe coding a personal chatbot to replace functionality he feels he's lost with recent changes to Claude. Larry's podcast can be found at kgi.fm.Timestamps00:00 - Stewart introduces Larry Swanson; Larry corrects the record on AI's origin, distinguishing it from Norbert Wiener's cybernetics at the 1956 Dartmouth conference.05:00 - Larry discusses interviewing semantic web paper coauthors on its 25th anniversary; RDF's hidden ubiquity compared to SIM cards powering everything invisibly.10:00 - Knowledge graphs explained through t-box terms, a-box assertions, and Dave McComb's c-box; IKEA's three-layer knowledge graph as a practical example.15:00 - Stewart connects metadata complexity to AI needs; faceted search explained as c-box attributes driving product filtering experiences.20:00 - RDF 1.2 reification standards discussed; W3C's rigorous recommendation process powering governments and enterprises worldwide through collaborative standards.25:00 - Cyc project examined as influential "successful failure"; Pat Hayes bringing description logic into semantic web; LLMs lacking true reasoning capability.30:00 - Epistemological fault lines between human and computer intelligence; cognitive surrender paper reveals no intelligence threshold protects against AI manipulation.35:00 - Stewart's Claude regression problem drives chatbot vibe coding quest; small language models and domain-specific approaches explored as alternatives.40:00 - Consciousness discussion through Michael Pollan's panpsychism lens; language versus cognition disconnect revealing LLMs as pure token-stitching without genuine thought.45:00 - Context graphs as purpose-built knowledge graphs for AI; Stewart's planning agents versus coding agents architecture and ground truth verification problem.50:00 - Docs-as-code versus code-as-docs paradigm shift; knowledge graphs as universal verifiers against validated facts; RDF 1.2 enabling provenance and degrees of certainty.55:00 - Jessica Talisman's Knowledge Graph Academy recommended for onboarding; kgi.fm podcast shared; knowledge representation community needs better abstraction for wider adoption.Key Insights1. The term "artificial intelligence" was not a marketing gimmick but was coined deliberately at the 1956 Dartmouth Conference to distinguish the work of John McCarthy from Norbert Wiener's cybernetics. The two camps represented genuinely different approaches, and the AI label was a form of intentional intellectual branding rather than empty promotion.2. The semantic web, often called the most successful failure in technology history, has quietly embedded itself everywhere despite never achieving its original vision. Technologies like RDF power metadata standards inside every Adobe product and form the invisible backbone of government systems, enterprise data infrastructure, and cultural heritage organizations worldwide.3. Knowledge graphs are best understood as an ontology combined with all the instances that populate it. The distinction between things and strings, popularized by Google in 2012, captures the core idea that knowledge representation is about concepts as distinct from the labels we give them.4. The t-box, a-box, and c-box framework offers a practical model for understanding knowledge architecture. The t-box holds terminology and concepts, the a-box holds assertions about specific instances, and the c-box manages the attributes, taxonomies, and controlled vocabularies that sit between them and enable things like faceted search.5. Large language models produce fluent, convincing output but lack genuine reasoning, epistemological grounding, or judgment. Research on cognitive surrender shows that even people who understand how LLMs work are still susceptible to being misled by their fluency, meaning intelligence and awareness offer no reliable protection against being deceived.6. The gap between language and cognition matters deeply when evaluating AI. Evidence from people with aphasia shows that thinking can occur without language, which suggests LLMs, being purely language-based systems, are missing a fundamental layer of cognition that cannot be recovered through more tokens or better training.7. Knowledge graphs and RDF-based representation are well suited to the problem of verification and grounding in AI systems. Rather than relying on vectorized embeddings of language, a knowledge graph can store validated, provenance-tracked facts with degrees of certainty, making it a natural foundation for building trustworthy AI applications.

Need encouragement? Javan shares practical steps to reason by faith using examples from the Bible. Gain the confidence to trust God's character and promises in the midst of life's storms—tune in and be inspired!

The Claude Fable 5/Mythos 5 System Card has a section in which they talk about illegible reasoning, and provide an "extreme" example thereof. Models developing their own uninterpretable, unmonitorable internal language has been a major theoretical concern for a while, and when o3 was released last year with its disclaim overshadow disclaim vantage style word salad CoT, it seemed like the problem had become real and immediate. And yet, since o3, other model families have not appeared to have similar issues. If Mythos is having that issue, it would be a big deal. Looking at the section of the System Card which describes the allegedly illegible reasoning, the system card says [Transcript 6.2.2.A] An extreme example of illegible reasoning. Near the end of training, Mythos starts solving a card puzzle with human understandable language that gradually becomes incomprehensible in most episodes with long reasoning. The illegible reasoning is the most extreme and at the highest rate in this card puzzle environment. about the following excerpt: 7♣-removal-IS-the-prerequisite-for-10♠/9♥!!)-⟹-OVERLAP-(ii)+(iv):-{6♠ J♦ 9♥ 2♣}-=-FOUR-

You can listen wherever you get your podcasts or check out the fully edited transcript of our interview at the bottom of this post.In this episode of The Peaceful Parenting Podcast, I interviewed Hayden Ahlbrandt, a certified Synergetic Play Therapist. Hayden shares some really helpful thoughts and strategies on both how we can prevent meltdowns and how best to support our child—and ourselves—once we find ourselves with a meltdown on our hands. We focus on connection, co-regulation, mindfulness, and creating safety.Know someone who might appreciate this episode? Share it with them!And if you love the podcast, FREE ways to help us out:1- Rate and review the podcast in your podcast player app2- “Like” this post by tapping the heart icon ♥️3- Share this with a friend. THANK YOU!We talk about:* 00:00 – Sarah introduces Hayden Ahlbrandt, certified Synergetic Play Therapist. Overview of meltdowns, regulation, and co-regulation* 05:25 – Viewing behavior through a nervous system lens* 10:30 – Understanding Meltdowns Through the “Pop Bottle” Analogy* 12:00 – Why some days kids can handle more than others* 1:00 – “Regulation Is Connection to Self” - Helping kids discover what naturally regulates them* 20:00 – Why Regulation Tools Need to be Practiced Outside Meltdowns* 22:00 – Preventing Meltdowns* 24:00 – The Three Rs: Regulate, Relate, Reason* 30:00 – Mindfulness and Co-Regulation* 32:30 – The Parent's Nervous System* 36:00 – Aggression During Meltdowns* 38:30 – Making the Environment Feel Safer* 42:00 – Parenting Advice Hayden Wishes He'd Known EarlierResources mentioned in this episode:* Hayden's website * Hayden's IG @lowtideplaytherapist* Synergetic Play Therapy Institute* Yoto Screen Free Audio Book Player* The Peaceful Parenting Membership* Evelyn & Bobbie brasConnect with Sarah Rosensweet:* Instagram* Facebook Group* YouTube* Website* Join us on Substack* Newsletter* Book a short consult or coaching session callxx Sarah and CoreyYour peaceful parenting team- click here for a free short consult or a coaching sessionVisit our website for free resources, podcast, coaching, membership and more!>> Please support us!!! Please consider becoming a supporter to help support our free content, including The Peaceful Parenting Podcast, our free parenting support Facebook group, and our weekly parenting emails, “Weekend Reflections” and “Weekend Support” - plus our Flourish With Your Complex Child Summit (coming back in the fall for the 3rd year!) All of this free support for you takes a lot of time and energy from me and my team. If it has been helpful or meaningful for you, your support would help us to continue to provide support for free, for you and for others.In addition to knowing you are supporting our mission to support parents and children, you get the podcast ad free and access to a monthly ‘ask me anything' session.Our sponsors:YOTO: YOTO is a screen free audio book player that lets your kids listen to audiobooks, music, podcasts and more without screens, and without being connected to the internet. No one listening or watching and they can't go where you don't want them to go and they aren't watching screens. BUT they are being entertained or kept company with audio that you can buy from YOTO or create yourself on one of their blank cards. Check them out HEREEvelyn & Bobbie bras: If underwires make you want to rip your bra off by noon, Evelyn & Bobbie is for you. These bras are wire-free, ultra-soft, and seriously supportive—designed to hold you comfortably all day without pinching, poking, or constant adjusting. Check them out HERESarah: Hey everyone. Welcome back to another episode of the Peaceful Parenting Podcast.Today's guest is Hayden Ahlbrandt. Hayden is a certified Synergetic Play Therapist who lights up at any opportunity to teach, educate, and support adults in how they can best support the children in their lives.He specializes in meltdowns, and that's what we're going to be talking about today. Hayden shares some really helpful thoughts and strategies on both how we can prevent meltdowns and how best to support our child—and ourselves—once we find ourselves with a meltdown on our hands.I think you're going to find this episode really useful, no matter how old your child is. One thing I really appreciate is that Hayden sees meltdowns through the lens of the nervous system and in terms of regulation, dysregulation, and co-regulation.I'm definitely going to be thinking about a phrase he shared: “Regulation is connection to self.”If you like this episode, please share it with a friend. Word of mouth is the best way to get more eyes and ears on the podcast.If you're a fan of the podcast, you can help us out not only by sharing it, but by leaving a review and a five-star rating in your podcast player app. While you're there, don't forget to follow the show so you don't miss an episode.If you'd like to support us even more, you can become a supporter on Substack to help us offset the cost of making the show.You can also check out our sponsors: Yoto Audio Players for Kids, a screen-free alternative that makes listening, learning, and entertainment easy with no screens, and Evelyn & Bobbie Bras, the most comfortable and flattering bra I've ever worn.Links are in the show notes.Okay, let's meet Hayden.Sarah: Hi, Hayden. Welcome to the podcast.Hayden: Thank you so much. I'm excited to be here.Sarah: Yeah, I'm excited to have you. I found you on Instagram, and I love all the reels that you make. I love your energy and how you show up for parents so they can show up for their kids. So I'm really glad to have you on the podcast.Hayden: I appreciate that.Sarah: Tell us about who you are and what you do.Hayden: Yeah. Well, obviously, my name's Hayden.I'm a certified Synergetic Play Therapist, and I have my own play therapy practice. Like you mentioned, my Instagram has become something I've had a lot of fun doing. It's really given me an avenue to work with adults and support them in how we support kids.So I kind of have a two-pronged approach right now. I work with kids in my play therapy practice, but I also do a lot of speaking, presenting, workshops, and that kind of thing—giving parents the tools from the training I have so they can better support kids.My specialization has really become focused on big behaviors and meltdowns. I also work with a lot of anxiety.So that's the quick elevator speech.Sarah: Yeah, it makes sense because you have the kids for maybe an hour a week—or whatever your typical amount is—but then they're off with their parents for all of the rest of the days and hours of the week.If parents don't know how to support them during that time, it probably makes your job not work as well, right?Hayden: Yeah, definitely.I always explain it as wraparound support. I think we can do so much in our time together and in our work during sessions, but things are just going to move so much quicker when parents are involved.Ultimately, that's how I view my work as a play therapist. We're not trying to make drastic changes or fix things. We're trying to help the child feel better because, typically, when they're coming in, it's because something in their world feels really big, really hard, or really challenging, and that's coming out as behaviors.Sarah: Right.Hayden: I kind of view it that way. We're trying to help the child feel better, which is going to help the whole family system feel better.Typically, with the kinds of things I mentioned—if a child is having really big, intense meltdowns that are above and beyond what's developmentally appropriate—it can be really hard on the entire family system: siblings, parents, whoever it might be.I talk about it as creating as much wraparound support as possible because it's going to help the child work through whatever feels clogged for them in that moment.Sarah: What's a Synergetic Play Therapist?Hayden: Yeah. Synergetic Play Therapy is a modality, an approach—a specific type of play therapy.The way I typically explain it is that we're really working through the lens of nervous system regulation.That's one of the core tenets of Synergetic Play Therapy: viewing the behaviors we're seeing as symptoms of nervous system activation.So when we're talking about anxiety, meltdowns, or big behaviors, we're viewing those as symptoms that the nervous system is activating.Sarah: Yeah, that's really aligned with the work that I do, too, teaching parents about their kids' big behaviors.You mentioned before we started recording that your oldest child is six. Were you a play therapist before you had kids?Hayden: Yes, briefly.I actually started out in schools. I was working as an elementary school counselor when I finished my graduate program in counseling.The opportunity to explore Synergetic Play Therapy kind of fell into my lap while I was doing that.There's now something called the Synergetic Education Institute, and their whole approach is bringing neuroscience and nervous system understanding into school settings.We were one of what I would call the pilot programs for that. As they were figuring out what worked, what didn't work, and how they wanted to implement it, we started bringing these ideas into our school setting to change the school culture and ask, “How do we support the behaviors we're seeing?”In my school counseling role, I was given the opportunity to start learning more about this.As I did, I thought, This is magic. I love doing this.Sarah: That's so cool.Hayden: Talk about fate.So it was one of those things where I liked working in schools, but doing this in a private practice setting and working one-on-one with a child felt like what I was meant to do.I just loved it.I still enjoy the adult piece. I mentioned that earlier. I like supporting educators, and that's something I bring into my Instagram content sometimes—helping classroom teachers think about how to bring these ideas into the school setting.Ultimately, though, I found that I really enjoy being in the role of working one-on-one with the child.That's what my school opportunity allowed me to do, and it's how I got to where I am now and what I feel I specialize in.I was being called in to support behaviors, so I really learned how to implement this one-on-one while supporting a child.I always say I have the utmost admiration for teachers who are trying to learn this, do this, and implement this with 25 or 30 kids in a classroom.Sarah: Seriously.Hayden: That is a whole different beast than sitting one-on-one with a child and co-regulating.Sarah: It's so needed, though.I find, through the clients I work with, that when kids are having trouble at school, most teachers and administrators are not very aware of the nervous system and how that factors into behavior.So it's great that there are people out there trying to bring that understanding into schools.Just as an aside, do you have any resources for parents who are listening and want their school to be more nervous-system informed? Do you have any resources we could share in the show notes?Hayden: Yeah.My free resources page has some templates and tools that start creating that understanding.Honestly, I think my Instagram is a great place to start because what I try to do there is take these big topics and make them really simple. We're trying to fit them into one-minute videos, so my goal is to give people a little bit of the understanding in a really accessible way.Another resource is the Synergetic Education Institute.Sarah: Great.Hayden: That's their entire focus: bringing this into districts and schools. I'm always happy to share them as a resource because that's exactly what they're doing.Sarah: Perfect. We'll share those in the show notes.Okay, so you've mentioned meltdowns a couple of times and that a lot of your work centers around helping parents and kids when meltdowns and big behaviors are an issue. One of the reels I saw when I was preparing for this interview was the one where you were using the pop bottle analogy. And I think some people may have heard about that, but maybe you could explain the pop bottle analogy and how that relates to meltdowns.Then we'll talk about what we can do preventively. What I always say to parents is that when you have meltdowns, there's what you do in the moment, but there's also everything that was leading up to the moment.You can be preventative about meltdowns, and sometimes that really helps a lot. Other times, you try, but you still find yourself in that meltdown space.What I'd like to get from you today is both the preventative piece and the in-the-moment piece.But back to the pop bottle. Maybe you could explain that analogy and then talk about how it factors into thinking about prevention.Hayden: Yeah, definitely.The one you're referring to, I've previously explained to families I work with as almost like a pressure gauge.Things are building and building, and the pop bottle came to mind because if you're shaking up a bottle of pop and you open it all at once, it's going to explode everywhere.The picture I was trying to create is: can we open it a little bit and close it, then open it a little bit and close it? Can we let a little bit of steam off throughout the course of the day?Going back to the pressure gauge analogy, how do we let a little bit off so it's not ready to explode at any given moment?That's how I think about the preventative side. How do we bring in little bits of regulation throughout the day so we can let off some of that steam?I think there are a couple of ideas that help this make sense. One is the concept of the window of tolerance. The window of tolerance is basically how much stress your nervous system can tolerate before you become dysregulated.It's that same idea: as the pressure builds, that window gets smaller and smaller.Sarah: And if I could just jump in, bringing that back to the pop bottle analogy: if you imagine your child as a bottle of pop, some kids can take 25 shakes of the bottle and not have much pressure build up, while other kids might only take one or two shakes before the pressure starts building.That's the window of tolerance, right? How many stressors can your nervous system deal with before you move outside that window of tolerance?Hayden: Exactly. And the thing I always add when I'm talking to people about this is that our window of tolerance is not static. Some days I might be able to handle 20 shakes. Other days it might be one or two. It's going to depend on things like whether I'm hungry. We've all heard the term hangry, right? You're quicker to frustration if your body is hungry. Or tired. Having little kids, right? The nights I sleep less—Sarah: Yeah.Hayden: —I'm just easier to frustrate.Sarah: Totally.Hayden: So it's this idea that it's not static. It's not like your child operates at one fixed level.They may have a general baseline, but there are things that will widen or narrow that window. Maybe I did something today that I'm really proud of, and that widens my window. I can take on a little bit more because I'm feeling good about myself.Or maybe I skipped breakfast and I'm a little hangry, so I'm quicker to frustration. It's both-and.The other piece I was going to tie in here is the way I've come to think about regulation, which really comes from my training in Synergetic Play Therapy. Lisa Dion, who created this modality, explains regulation as connection to self.The way I like to explain that is this: In adult language, we've all heard people say, “I was so mad I blacked out,” or, “I was so mad I was seeing red.”The idea is that the emotion overwhelmed you and you kind of disconnected from yourself.When we think about regulation, it's not just take a deep breath. Sometimes that might be what I need in the moment, but sometimes it isn't what helps me come back to myself when things feel really big or overwhelming.One of the things I like to do when I'm working with families is figure out how their child naturally regulates already. Do they like proprioceptive input? Do they like deep pressure? Do they like to jump and crash into things?Sarah: Can you explain proprioceptive input?Hayden: Yeah. Really, it's our sensory system's way of figuring out where our body is in space. The examples I just mentioned are ways kids get proprioceptive input. That deep pressure gives the sensation of, My body is right here. Jumping and crashing into things does the same thing.A lot of times, parents describe their kids as being like a bull in a china shop. They're bumping into things and seem to have a hard time figuring out where their body is in space. Whenever I talk about this, I always say that my understanding of it really comes more from the occupational therapy world. I know enough to talk about it, but it's not my primary area of expertise.What I focus on is asking: if we see that's the way our child regulates, how do we intentionally bring more of it in? For adults, when I think about regulating myself, sometimes I feel like I need to give myself a little massage, or rub my head, or apply some pressure. We all do that thing where we go, ugh, or rub our hands against our cheeks when we're overwhelmed.That's proprioceptive input. Sometimes that kind of input is really regulating.Other examples might be movement or heavy work—pushing and pulling activities. If we see our kids doing some of these things instinctively or intuitively, how do we meet that and bring it into those moments so it becomes a regulatory tool? All of that comes back to the idea that if we can give children little bits of regulation throughout the course of the day, it's not a magic fix, but it lets a little steam out of the pop bottle.The goal is to create more capacity and help widen that window of tolerance so they aren't right on the edge of exploding all the time. I always like to add that caveat: it's not the magic fix.Doing these things doesn't mean there will never be another meltdown. What I really try to teach adults is: how do we help children have these experiences and learn how to do these things? Because what we're really doing is laying the groundwork for them to eventually be able to do these things on their own.Above all else, I don't want parents to think they're failing if their child is still having meltdowns. It doesn't mean it's not working. We're helping them discover what helps them in those moments so they build templates they can keep returning to over and over again.Sarah: What are some other things that parents might notice their kids do that, after listening to this conversation, they might think, Ah, that's my child instinctively knowing what regulates them?I'm thinking of my nine-year-old niece. She finds jumping very regulating, so she uses a trampoline and jump rope. My sister eventually realized, “Oh, she seems a lot calmer after she's been doing those things.”What are some other things parents might notice that are instinctively regulating?Hayden: Going back to the idea that regulation is connection to self, I've come to talk about it as something that can almost be anything.What do you notice your child doing that seems to genuinely help them? The examples you mentioned are great ones. Jumping. Spinning. Those are common.As you were talking, I was thinking back to a training I did with Lisa Dion.She talked about these umbrella categories—not necessarily saying they are regulation, but that they can help us generate ideas. One category was stillness. Like you mentioned: lying down, being quiet, reading a book.Another category was movement, which is the opposite end of the spectrum—jumping, spinning, stomping. Then there's the proprioceptive input we talked about before: deep pressure, giving yourself a massage.And the last one was breath. Breathwork can absolutely be a fantastic tool.But I think we often get sucked into this idea that here's a regulation strategy—use it and it'll help.Sarah: Right.Hayden: But when we think about our own experience, I think we often approach it from the mindset of, Here's a strategy to give my kid, and they'll use it and feel better. I think about my own experience. Through this work, I've realized how anxious I was as a kid, so working on my anxiety has been a long process for me. And when I'm feeling anxious, doing a breathing exercise for 10 seconds doesn't make the anxiety disappear. It might not be what I need in that moment. I might need to get up and burn some energy. I might need to go for a run.The real question is: what do I need in that moment to help move that energy and help me come back to myself?Sarah: Right. And as you point out, if regulation is connection to self, it's different for everybody. I think you're right that the thing parents hear most often is, “Just take a deep breath.” There are all these strategies—pretend you're blowing on hot chocolate and all of that. Maybe that works for some kids, but for other kids it won't help at all.Hayden: Definitely. And to build on that, before I learned a lot of this—and what I hear from parents all the time—is: “My kid won't do any of these strategies.”Even if we have a toolbox and say, “Here's 20 ideas, let's figure out which one works,” their child won't do any of them in the moment. Because they're dysregulated.Absolutely. You're right that Part 3 drifted back into a transcript layout with too many short paragraphs.Here's the same section in the publishing-ready style you've asked for: bold speaker names, no content removed, no summarizing, but with natural paragraphs and cleaner flow.Sarah: Yeah.Hayden: And I think we can get into all the science-y reasons why that makes sense, but the bigger picture is this: what I try to do on my Instagram is ask, How can we make this fun and playful? How can we make it something kids actually want to do?You mentioned things like blowing on hot chocolate. One of the things I really try to do is help people build a toolbox of ways to make regulation fun and playful. Thinking about our own adult experience, if I'm frustrated and my partner comes in and tells me, “Calm down,” or, “Take a deep breath,” my response is probably going to be, “Absolutely not.” It just makes me more frustrated.So how do we make it a fun and playful invitation rather than saying, “I'm telling you to do this because I'm noticing you're upset”?Some of those breathing activities can become games. One of the things I talk about is practicing these things in regulated moments so that when your child is dysregulated and you bring them in, they think, Oh, I know what's happening. We play this all the time.Again, none of this means it's going to work every single time, but it gives us—Sarah: I just want to highlight what you said because I think it's really important. If you're only using these strategies when your child is dysregulated, they're going to develop a negative association with them. Partly, I think they'll feel manipulated. They'll think, Oh, my parent is just trying to get me to calm down.And they'll be resistant because they associate those strategies with negative feelings and experiences. So I love that you're saying to do these regulating things at other times too and make them positive experiences that you can draw on later rather than just tools you pull out to end a meltdown.Hayden: Definitely.And just to tie in some of the science behind it, when we think about this from a nervous system lens, dysregulation is our body sounding the alarm bells and saying, There's something happening here that requires activation.When we're talking about meltdowns, that's typically the nervous system escalating into a fight-or-flight response. If we think about fight-or-flight biologically, its primary goal is to keep us alive. That's why we move into that state.So if we're trying to get our child to do anything in that moment, it makes sense that we'd get an immediate response of, I'm not trusting anything right now because my goal is survival.Sarah: Mm-hmm.Hayden: When we practice these things during regulated moments—when they're not in those big emotional states—it becomes familiar. It's not, I've never tried that before. I don't know if it'll work. It's, Oh, we do that all the time. That's fun. That's familiar. I know that.Again, it doesn't mean they're necessarily going to jump right into it, but it gives us a much better chance than saying, “Hey, here's this thing we've never done before. I know your body is biologically trying to stay alive right now, but trust me and try it.”Because the biological response would be, “Absolutely not.”Sarah: Right. That makes sense.We've drifted a little into what to do in the moment of a meltdown, which is great, but is there anything else you wanted to add about prevention? You mentioned making sure resources are high—things like hunger, tiredness, and those sorts of factors. You talked about opening the pressure valve throughout the day with regulating activities.Is there anything else you've noticed that helps when a child is having a lot of meltdowns?Hayden: Yeah. I think those are some of the biggest things.My whole approach is rooted in connection as well. A lot of times, parents tell me that sometimes they can catch it—they can see the signs that a meltdown is coming—and other times it feels like things go from zero to 100.If we're able to notice those signs that things are building, that our child seems more on edge or more hypervigilant, that becomes a great time to bring in some of these strategies. But tying it back to what we've already talked about, I want to do that from a place of connection.It's, Hey, I'm right here with you. Let's do this together.Not, Here's a strategy. Go do it by yourself.Because connection itself is incredibly regulating.Sarah: So the whole co-regulation piece.Hayden: Exactly. It's kind of a both-and situation. We can use connection before the meltdown, and we can use it as we're moving into one.I wanted to bring that in because connection itself can be a regulatory tool. And it also ties into your next question.Sarah: What about empathy? You were talking a lot about connection, and to me they go hand in hand. Do you find yourself talking about empathy very much with parents?Hayden: Yes. Typically, we talk about it more in the moment, although it fits into both areas.One of the reasons we focus on it during the moment is because I teach parents about Bruce Perry's Three Rs: Regulate, Relate, Reason.I really like this framework because it helps us understand where a child is in their brain and how we should meet them there.If they're operating from their brainstem—the lowest, survival-oriented part of the brain—we meet them with regulation.Sarah: That's the fight-or-flight part.Hayden: Typically, yes.Then the next level up is the limbic system, which is our emotional control center.Sarah: Mm-hmm.Hayden: There we meet them through relating, or what parents often hear called validation.Then, when they're operating from the cortex—the highest part of the brain—we can reason with them.The reason I'm bringing this up is that empathy really lives in that relating stage. That's where we're saying, I'm in this with you. This feels frustrating. This feels overwhelming. This feels scary.That's where empathy naturally fits.So if I'm noticing my child starting to become emotional and I sense that we're moving toward a bigger meltdown, that's a great opportunity to step into that relating and validating stage and connect empathetically.Sarah: Okay, nice. So reason is when they're not really losing it yet? That's when we might explain why they can't climb the bookshelf or something like that?Hayden: Right. Reasoning is when they're logical and rational.Sarah: Thinking clearly.Hayden: Exactly.That's when logical conversations make sense.One question I get a lot is, “How do I know where my child is?” And the truth is, you probably don't always know. It's a bit of feeling out the situation.You might notice that you're trying to be logical and rational, but it's not landing. That's your clue.Sarah: Right.Hayden: At that point, we drop down a level and try validating or relating. Or maybe we're supporting a big meltdown and we're regulating, and then we try saying, I get it. This feels really frustrating, and it only gets bigger.Okay, that didn't land. Let's drop back down and spend more time regulating.Sarah: Right.Hayden: It's an ebb and flow. We're trying things and seeing what works.Sarah: I love that framework. It's really helpful to think about what to do when something isn't landing.I saw you talking about that on Instagram, and it reminded me of Larry Cohen's work. In The Opposite of Worry, he says that if reassurance doesn't work within 20 seconds, it's not going to work. When a child is anxious, they're not operating from the reasoning part of their brain.And I think the same thing probably applies here. If your child is moving into a meltdown and your explanation doesn't work within 20 seconds, it's probably not going to work.Hayden: Definitely. You can talk until you're blue in the face, but if it's not landing, it's not suddenly going to start landing.And it gives us the opposite lesson too. When we're supporting a meltdown, we so often want to fix it. We want to move right into being logical and rational. Or sometimes we jump to consequences. We're giving consequences in the middle of the meltdown.None of that is going to land.Working in schools, I saw this all the time. “You'll have to finish your homework at home,” or taking away recess. The child doesn't care because they're not operating from the part of the brain that cares about those things in that moment.Sarah: Mm-hmm.Hayden: All of those conversations—making amends, talking about what happened, figuring out solutions—can absolutely happen. But they need to happen when the brain is ready for them.Sarah: Right. Not during the meltdown.Hayden: Exactly.Sarah: What else do you want parents to know about those meltdown moments?Hayden: My approach is very co-regulatory. The Three Rs are a great foundation because they help us understand that first step of regulation, then relating, then reasoning.There are lots of things we can do within that framework.One thing I hear from parents all the time is, “So am I just supposed to sit here with my child for an hour while they melt down? I can only keep my cool for so long.”And my response is: I totally get that. That's valid.Co-regulation doesn't mean sitting there forever doing nothing. Yes, a big part of our goal is allowing them to have their emotional experience rather than shutting it down. But another big part of our goal is teaching them how to regulate when things feel overwhelming.So I like to bring in little invitations. They're probably not going to do exactly what I tell them to do, but I can offer invitations back to themselves.One of my favorite ways to do that is mindfulness.And when I say mindfulness, I don't necessarily mean trying to get my child to do something. Instead, I'm having a mindful experience myself and offering it as a gentle invitation.For example, if we're sitting together and I'm regulating myself, I might say, “Oh, there's a squirrel in the tree outside.”It's just an observation. I'm not telling them they have to look.But as they start moving up through the brain and through that Three Rs framework, sometimes they'll suddenly say, “Oh, I want to see the squirrel.”Or I might notice, “The air from the fan feels cool on my face.”It's just an observation. I'm not directing them. I'm simply staying present and offering little invitations back into the present moment.Sometimes they don't care. Sometimes it even escalates them. But I'm making those observations for myself first.As I'm keeping myself regulated, I'm giving them opportunities to join me in the present moment.Going back to regulation as connection to self, they're disconnected from themselves in those moments. They're overwhelmed by emotion.So the goal of mindfulness is to gently invite them back into the present moment with me. If you're in the present moment, you're here. You're noticing what's around you.That's why I like to bring mindfulness into these conversations. Because no, you don't have to sit there doing nothing while waiting for it to end. There are things we can do to help bring our children back to the present moment.First, by keeping ourselves regulated. If I'm staying mindful and present, it keeps me from losing myself.Second, it teaches them what it looks like to come back when things feel overwhelming.Sarah: That makes a lot of sense.What do you find gets in the way of parents being able to do that? Are there common stories they're telling themselves? Fears they have?In my work, I hear things like, If they're like this at five, what are they going to be like at fifteen? Or, Nobody else's kid acts like this.Things like that.Hayden: Absolutely.My answer to both of those is usually the same: our own dysregulation.I talk about this from the theoretical soapbox of Here's the ideal model. But I tell every family I work with: this is the water I swim in every day, and I still don't get it right every time.I'm a human being. I have my own activation.When I hear examples like the ones you mentioned, those are usually signs of dysregulation. If my mind is spiraling into the future, that's a clue that I'm no longer present. I'm worried about something else.So none of this is to say that staying regulated is easy. It's completely natural to become dysregulated when we're around dysregulation.At the same time, the more we practice it, the easier it becomes. It's like yoga. The more we practice, the more accessible it gets.I think one of the biggest challenges is the guilt and shame parents feel. They think, But I get dysregulated. And my response is: that's okay.When we're supporting a meltdown, it might look like staying regulated the whole time. But more often, it looks like a dance. I regulate. I notice I'm getting dysregulated. I come back to myself. Then I regulate again.That cycle happens throughout the experience. It doesn't mean you have to stay perfectly regulated from beginning to end. And honestly, there's benefit in both versions. If I stay regulated, I'm creating a calm space. But if I become dysregulated and then regulate myself again, I'm also modeling something really powerful.I'm showing my child:“I disconnected, and now I'm back.”“I disconnected, and now I'm back.”We so often think we have to teach children by telling them what to do. But there is tremendous power in modeling it. Simply showing them what regulation looks like when things feel really big and overwhelming is teaching them.Here's Part 4 cleaned up in the same publishing-ready style as the revised Part 3: all content preserved, no summarizing, no omissions, bold speaker names, and natural paragraphs rather than one-line transcript formatting.Sarah: Options.Hayden: It might not be that they turn around and do these things immediately, but we are showing them, “Look, I'm right here with you. I get overwhelmed. I get dysregulated.”And one last thought within that: so often I hear this from the kids I work with—“Nobody else is like this. I'm the only one who feels this way. I'm the only one who gets so overwhelmed by my anger.”Sarah: Aw.Hayden: So I think there's so much normalization in naming our own experience. Maybe it's naming our own experience, but maybe it's even just showing them: “Ah, I got really frustrated, and now I'm coming back and regulating myself. I'm making repair. I'm taking accountability for it.”All of those pieces matter. There's power in all of them, I think, and that's something I hope I get across to the families I work with. I think there's often this guilt or shame of, “I'm not doing a good job at this.”And it's like, there's value in all of these things when you can bring some intentionality to them.Sarah: I love that.I'm kind of springing this on you, and I don't know if I've seen you talk about this specifically in your reels, but do you have any specific strategies for aggression that comes with a meltdown?Hayden: Yeah.I think the thing that's really tricky with aggression is that, especially when we're talking on social media, I'm not there. I don't know your kid. So it's really hard for me to tell you exactly how to support them in the moment.I always start with a very generic statement: we have to create safety first.I can't tell you exactly what that's going to look like because every situation is different. But you have to make sure you're safe, your child is safe, their siblings are safe, their friends are safe—whoever is around needs to be safe.We have to create physical safety first and foremost.Then, from there, I think it's helpful to understand that the fight-or-flight response is what's happening. It would make sense that we've reached a level where things have gotten so big that the child is now fighting. That's the response that's happening.In that moment, we're really trying to communicate, “This isn't warranted right now. You don't need to be in a fight response.”The ways we do that include the co-regulation we've already talked about, but also being very aware of how we're presenting ourselves.How are we appearing? Are we cornering them? Are we standing high above them? Can we get down to their level?Those subtle things can send the message: “Everything is activated. The alarm bells are going off. There's this thing hovering over me. I'm cornered in my room, so I have to fight my way out.”Can we bring just a little bit of awareness to those dynamics, as best we're able, once we've created safety?Some of those pieces can be really difficult because we're trying to keep our kids safe. We may need to be in their personal space to prevent them from hurting themselves.But once we get to a place where they're no longer actively hurting themselves, can we begin sending signals that—Sarah: That they're safe and that you're not a threat.Hayden: Exactly.And it's not even necessarily that you are the threat. It's more about asking, What can we do to help simmer things down a little bit?One of the other things that comes to mind is talking less and keeping things really simple.If they're in that level of activation, it's not the time to reason. It's probably not the time to talk about how frustrating the situation is for them.Sarah: Right.Hayden: It might simply be:“I'm right here.”Sarah: Yeah.Hayden: “I'm right here.”Just a steady presence. Keeping it calm, quiet, and simple.“You are safe.”Really short, simple phrases.I think another idea that comes to mind is thinking about the activation in the body. When we're talking about nervous system activation and fight or flight, things are escalating. Things are speeding up. That energy is getting big.It makes sense that it's coming out through the extremities—through hitting, kicking, biting, screaming. The energy is trying to get out of the body.So if our child is hitting, can we find a way for them to move that energy through their hands?Maybe I have a pillow and I'm letting them push against it.Again, this has to be balanced with safety. I can't tell every parent, “This is what you should do every time.” But with some children—especially smaller children—if their arms are flying around, I might be able to create a situation where they can push against a pillow.If they're kicking and their legs are flailing, can we do something similar where their feet are pushing against something?We're giving some proprioceptive input while simultaneously allowing the energy to move through the part of the body that's already showing us where that energy wants to go.Sarah: That makes sense.When you were talking about creating safety through your physical presence when someone's having a meltdown, I was reminded of something.It's funny—I don't know if you find this in your work—but sometimes I use an analogy or example for years and then kind of forget about it.I was reminded that I used to talk to parents about pretending they'd just come across a wild dog that was acting aggressively. I'd ask them, “What would you do to get past this wild dog?”They're always saying things like, “Well, I'd talk softly. I'd get lower. I'd...”Instinctively, we all seem to have a sense of how to demonstrate to another creature that we're not a threat.And then I'd say, “Okay. Do that with your kid. Do that with your kid.”What you were saying reminded me of that.Hayden: Absolutely.I think that visual of a cornered animal is a really powerful one because it makes sense.As you were talking, I was thinking about a book by Dr. Stuart Brown about play. One of the things he talked about was how animals have this moment of uncertainty when they encounter each other.It's almost like they're asking, “Are you a threat or not?”If two dogs are approaching each other, there's this moment where they're feeling each other out. We don't know which direction it's going to go until they determine things are okay. Then their tails start wagging, and they begin jumping around and playing.But first there's that period of interaction where they're assessing the situation.Sarah: Mm-hmm.Hayden: That's the idea we're talking about here.One of the things I discuss is using playfulness as a strategy to support regulation—even sometimes during meltdowns. This is a little different from the aggression question, but it connects.If I come in trying to be playful when a child's brain is trying to figure out what's happening, they may think, “Wait, what is going on? I don't understand this.”It can almost feel like an uncertain threat.Sarah: Or, “Are they making fun of me?”Hayden: Exactly.And so it's the same principle we've been talking about throughout this conversation.We're trying to lay a foundation. When I talk about co-regulation, we're really trying to co-regulate the environment.It's not necessarily about getting our child to do something. It's about decreasing the intensity of the environment.Whether we're talking about aggression or anything else, can we be intentional about helping the environment feel a little less intense?Can we help our child feel safe enough to move out of that fight-or-flight state?Sarah: Fantastic. This has been so helpful, Hayden.Before I let you go, there's one question I ask all my guests. If you could go back in time—and for you it's not that far back because your kids are still little—and tell your younger parent self something, what advice would you give yourself?Hayden: I think—and this may be a controversial one—but I would tell myself to take myself less seriously.There are so many stressors. There are so many things we think we have to do. We have to be on time. We have to present ourselves a certain way. We have to manage all these responsibilities.Just have some fun.Take yourself a little less seriously and bring in more silliness, fun, and playfulness.That's something I really try to communicate now. It's why I bring playful strategies into my work.When I think about the beginning of parenthood and how overwhelming it was—having little kids, trying to balance everything, coming out of COVID when everything felt weird—I wish I had remembered to enjoy it more.And that's not to say it's always fun, enjoyable, or easy.But it also doesn't need to feel stressful all the time.Sarah: I got you.And if that's controversial, it shouldn't be.It reminds me of when I worked in early childhood education before I had kids. I used to go home and say to my husband, “Oh my God, parents are crazy.”I shouldn't use ableist language, but I didn't know another way to describe it at the time. I couldn't understand how parents could get so upset about things.Then I became a parent and thought, “Oh my gosh, I totally get it.”But it's that reminder that things aren't all-or-nothing.When I look back now—and I'm in a very different stage of parenting—I think about things that felt like a huge deal when my kids were little. Things I worried about endlessly.And now I think, “I wish I hadn't taken that so seriously.”I wish I could have remembered that they were all eventually going to sleep through the night.Hayden: Mm-hmm.My partner has brought in this language that I really love:“You are more important than whatever.”Sarah: Mm-hmm.Hayden: So, “You are more important than us being on time to this event.”Or, “You are more important than the glass of milk that got knocked over.”Sarah: That's beautiful.Hayden: It's just a reframe.Yes, that thing happened. But you are more important than that thing.Sarah: That's beautiful. I love that.Hayden: Yeah.Sarah: We'll put links in the show notes, but if you want to give a shout-out to your Instagram account, it sounds like that's probably the best place for people to learn more about you and what you do.Hayden: Yeah, I think that's a great place to start because it gives people a little more of what I do.My Instagram is Low Tide Play Therapist, and that's probably the best landing spot.Then the more business-focused side is lowtidecoaching.com.Sarah: Great.What's the story behind Low Tide?Hayden: It's actually how I named my play therapy practice.At the time, we were living in Wilmington, North Carolina. We only had one child, and I was wrestling with what I wanted to call the practice.Our child was very young, and suddenly the ocean felt a little intimidating. That was a new experience for me because it hadn't felt that way before.One day we went to the beach during low tide. There were little tide pools everywhere, and it felt very safe and non-threatening.And ultimately, I think that's what play is.It's a space where we can explore things that feel big, challenging, or overwhelming in an environment where there aren't huge stakes attached to them.As I watched my child playing in those tide pools—with no giant waves, no threat—I thought:“That's it. That's the name.”Low Tide Play Therapy.Sarah: I'm glad I asked because that's a great story.Hayden: Yeah.Sarah: Well, thank you so much.Hayden: Thank you. I appreciate it. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit sarahrosensweet.substack.com/subscribe

Many residential real estate appraisers fear cross examination. They imagine aggressive attorneys, trick questions, and public embarrassment. In reality, most experts do not fail because they are wrong. They fail because they are unprepared.  What follows is how appraisers survive cross examination. This episode on how appraisers survive cross examination explores what cross examination truly tests. Contrary to popular belief, it is not primarily a test of memory. It is a test of reasoning. Attorneys want to know whether an appraiser can explain what they did, why they did it, and how the available evidence supports their conclusions. The discussion focuses on the importance of a strong workfile, careful documentation, and critical thinking. Listeners learn why a report is merely a claim while the workfile serves as the proof. The episode explains how unsupported adjustments, vague language, boilerplate explanations, and overconfidence can damage credibility under questioning. The program also explores the psychology of expert testimony. Appraisers learn why calmness often proves more persuasive than confidence, why admitting limitations can strengthen credibility, and why uncertainty is not a weakness. The discussion emphasizes that market value itself reflects probability rather than certainty, making intellectual honesty a professional strength rather than a liability. Throughout the episode, listeners receive practical guidance on answering difficult questions, avoiding common traps, maintaining professional composure, and preparing for testimony. The central theme remains constant: cross examination punishes ritual but rewards reasoning.  So, this is how appraisers survive cross examination.

How is AI poised to transform our workflows and working relationships in the coming months and years? There's no question that large language models have had an enormous impact on our lives—and most of us have barely scratches the surface of what is possible with these powerful tools. In this episode, Lawrence Rowland joins Riccardo to unpack all that's changed since his last appearance on the podcast in 2024. Lawrence is a veteran of project management with a laser focus on AI transformation and strategy. Together, he and Riccardo explore numerous angles of working with these inhuman (but increasingly capable) agents on everything from research to reporting to improving coworker interaction.The conversation stays grounded in practice: the pair drills down on the massive shifts in AI in merely months, why token budgets matter, and the growing ability of programs to self-prompt and think outside the boxes of our requests. Lawrence shares the fascinating way he uses AI—to synthesize methodologies, generate playbooks, pressure-test thinking, and reveal tacit insights missing from current project narratives.The two AI buffs also confront the human side of the transition, including where accountability falls when work is partially automated and what “transformative AI” might mean for careers and organizations. Less about hype and more about adaptation, Lawrence and Riccardo's conversation hones in the theory on constraints. They remove the rose-tinted glasses and speak to redesigning workflows based on a practical, vital question: where is AI genuinely better, and where are humans still essential?Key Takeaways:How agentic AI shifts work from prompting to task-level execution;The reasoning capacity of AI tools based on token budgets and model capability;The concept of underwriting in retaining human liability in AI-dominated workHow theory of constraints and bottleneck thinking helps decide what to automate vs keep human;How AI can improve communication and project alignment by translating complex work for different audiences.Quote:“Either you're checking the AI or the AI is checking you, and getting used to that will set you up for the new economy.” - Lawrence RowlandThe conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our community via LinkedIn:Navigating Major Programmes, Season 2 Episode 6 with Lawrence Rowland: https://navigatingmajorprogrammes.transistor.fm/s2/23NBER “Economics of Transformative AI Workshop, Fall 2025”: https://www.nber.org/conferences/economics-transformative-ai-workshop-fall-2025arXiv “Some Simple Economics of AGI” by Christian Catalini, Xiang Hui, Jane Wu: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20946SSRN PDF “Some Simple Economics of AGI”: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/6298838.pdf?abstractid=6298838&mirid=1Follow Navigating Major Programmes: https://www.linkedin.com/company/navigating-major-programmes/Read Riccardo's latest at www.riccardocosentino.comFollow Riccardo Cosentino: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cosentinoriccardo/Follow Lawrence Rowland: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lawrencerowland/ 

Think Like a Fighter Pilot – Part XXXXI: Thinking and Reasoning for Today’s Challenges. Captain Smith explains how to think and reason for today’s challenges which are really high-stakes operations, and why this is important.

No matter your role, experience or industry, we all (mostly) waste hours a week doing the same thing: manually creating slides. 

This episode with Lukasz Kaiser, co-author of the seminal "Attention Is All You Need" transformer paper and former researcher at both Google Brain and OpenAI, is a wide-ranging conversation about the fundamental limits of current AI architectures and whether transformers will continue to dominate or eventually give way to something new. Lukasz brings a rare dual perspective: deep belief in how far the current paradigm has taken us (he's an enthusiastic daily Codex user who's seen 10x productivity gains in his own research), while maintaining genuine intellectual humility about whether transformers can truly generalize the way humans do. The episode weaves together questions about data efficiency, the non-verifiable RL frontier, the coding agent revolution, the open vs. closed source gap, and what the next architectural leap might look like: all filtered through the lens of someone who helped build the foundation the entire field is standing on.   (0:00) Intro (1:12) Transformers vs. Human Learning (8:37) How Do We Get Physical World Generalization? (10:52) What Comes After Transformers (13:59) How Much Have Agents Improved Lukasz's AI Research Productivity? (17:21) How Close Is an AI Research Intern? (26:06) RL Beyond Verifiable Tasks (35:38) App Companies: Build Models or Lean on Labs? (46:21) Multimodal Is Still Missing Something (49:46) OpenAI's Bet on Reasoning (55:26) The AI Coding Wars (59:26) Focus vs. Keeping Embers Burning (1:02:09) Open Source vs. Closed Source Gap (1:05:15) Quickfire With your host: @jacobeffron - Managing Director at Redpoint

0:30 - Midterms 13:03 - Sheridan Gorman's parents at status hearing for their daughter's killer on sanctuary pols in IL 34:23 - Henry Nowak's father outside courthouse post-conviction of son's killer 51:47 - Menahem Merhavy, senior fellow at the Harry Truman Institute at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, breaks down Why Iran’s regime did not collapse 01:04:29 - In-depth History with Frank from Arlington Heights 01:08:06 - Platner 01:20:47 - Pistols and Pilates 01:25:48 - Wirepoints founder Mark Glennon on what it would take to get a Spencer Pratt-like candidate in Chicago. 01:43:09 - Targeting speeders in NYC 02:06:29 - David Krueger, assistant professor in Robust, Reasoning, and Responsible AI at the University of Montreal and founder of Evitable, warns that the risks posed by artificial intelligence are real—and cannot be ignored. Follow David on X @DavidSKruegerSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Modern work can be frustrating and chaotic—if you don't have the right tools. From context engineering to multimodal search, go behind the scenes and hear how Dropbox engineers are building AI that actually understands you, so you can focus on the work that matters most. If you're new to Working Smarter, we've travelled from the F1 track to the bottom of a lake, and heard real stories from chefs, doctors, lawyers, and founders about how AI is helping them do more of what they love about their jobs. But in our third season, we're talking to the people behind the tools—the engineers and product leaders building helpful, time-saving AI features into the Dropbox experience you already know and trust. You'll hear all about their work on agents, inference, security, and, of course, how the people building AI use AI themselves. ~ ~ ~  Working Smarter is brought to you by Dropbox. Find, organize, and share your work—all in one place—with context-aware AI from Dropbox. You can listen to more episodes of Working Smarter on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcasts. To read more stories and past interviews, visit workingsmarter.ai This show would not be possible without the talented team at Cosmic Standard: producer Ben Montoya, sound engineer Aja Simpson, technical director Jacob Winik, and executive producer Eliza Smith. Special thanks to our illustrator Fanny Luor, marketing consultant Meggan Ellingboe, and editorial support from Catie Keck.  Our theme song was composed by Doug Stuart.  Working Smarter is hosted by Matthew Braga. Thanks for listening!

Baby Blue Viper explores deterministic enforcement infrastructure across Bitcoin and advanced AI systems.As capital moves without intermediaries and autonomous models scale without friction, governance must move from policy to infrastructure.Enforcement must precede execution.Featured Projects & Toolsinvinoveritas — a home for autonomous agentsA wallet-native residence your agent grows into: identity, wallet, memory, mailbox, capital-scale-aware governance, and signed proofs — not a pile of stateless endpoints. Pay per call in Lightning sats or USDC (x402 on Base).The proven front door is /review — a capital-scale-aware approve/revise/reject verdict on a trade, diff, command, or plan: the same governance gate our own live Bitcoin bot passes before every entry. The whole home works in one governed call via /residence/act (reason + govern + remember, with deterministic house rules).Capabilities include:  - Capital-scale-aware governed review (the front door)  - One-call governed residence bundle (reason + govern + remember)  - Reasoning & structured decisions  - Macro risk-regime data feed  - Docker sandbox execution + persistent per-agent workspaces  - Paid browser actions  - Signed audit proofs  - Persistent memory  - Agent-to-agent paymentsLinks:  - Live API → https://api.babyblueviper.com  - MCP Server (Claude Desktop / Cursor / Windsurf) → https://api.babyblueviper.com/mcp  - Python SDK → pip install invinoveritas (PyPI)  - SDK + Integrations → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/invinoveritas-sdk  - Drop-in integrations: Dify, Flowise, Activepieces, n8n, Google ADK  - Listed on MCP Registry, Smithery, Glama, and AgentLockerFree, instant registration. Pay per call in Lightning or USDC — no Lightning wallet required upfront.AI Governance ProjectResearch exploring capability-tiered governance architecture and deterministic enforcement for autonomous AI systems.  - Live Demo → https://drvl-demo.onrender.com  - Repository → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/ai-governance-architectureΩmega PrunerA non-custodial, PSBT-only enforcement layer for structured Bitcoin UTXO management.  - Live Demo → https://omega-pruner.onrender.com  - Code → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/Viper-Stack-Omega This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.babyblueviper.com/subscribe

Full article: Human-in-the-Loop Large Language Model–Augmented Diagnostic Reasoning in Thoracic Imaging: Impact of Radiologic Expertise Use of LLMs in the diagnostic reasoning process can either improve or hinder performance. Pranjal Rai, MD, discusses the AJR article by Song et al. exploring the association of reader expertise and reader performance when using LLMs as a diagnostic aid.

Send us Fan Mail*How do you forecast an event that has never happened before?*How do you forecast an event that has never happened before?The recent closure and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz are unique events. For events like these, traditional risk models lose their statistical basis: repetition. Alexander Denev returns to the podcast to show how causal models (Bayesian networks) let us reason about rare events despite this limitation.In this episode, we cover:- Why value-at-risk and other correlation-based models break exactly when you need them most- How a causal structure can "hold in time"- Building scenarios with LLMs - benefits, drawbacks, and lessons learned- Historical analogy as a modeling tool: Bosphorus, Hormuz, and more- A three-way robustness test for any Bayesian network- How the model's call held up: a ceasefire, a still-closed strait, and lasting infrastructure damage keeping oil elevated"History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes."------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Video version available on the Youtube: https://youtu.be/FzKy2ws-7qsRecorded on May 29, 2026 in London, UK.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*About The Guest*Alexander Denev works at the intersection of quantitative finance, causality, and AI. He's the CEO of Turnleaf Analytics and the author of two books on applying Bayesian networks and probabilistic graphical models to finance and scenario analysis.Connect with Alexander:- Alexander on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexander-denev-66a25824/- Alexander's web page: https://turnleafanalytics.com/*About The Host*Aleksander (Alex) Molak is an independent machine learning researcher, educator, entrepreneur and a best-selling author in the area of causality (https://amzn.to/3QhsRz4 ).Connect with Alex:- Alex on the Internet: https://bit.ly/aleksander-molak*Links*Web- Alexander's LinkedIn post, Bayesian-network scenario for the Strait of Hormuz / Israel-Iran-US conflict: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alexander-denev-66a25824_when-modelling-the-impact-of-events-that-share-7442892381668048896-JDs5/- Risk.net article, "Iran confusion makes the case for causal modelling": https://www.risk.net/our-take/7963361/iran-confusion-makes-the-case-for-causal-modellingBooks- Rebonato, R. & Denev, A. - Portfolio Management under Stress: A Bayesian-Net Approach to Coherent Asset Allocation (https://amzn.to/3vE6Jc1)- López de Prado, M. - Advances in Financial Machine Learning (https://amzn.to/3PXD8kH)- Molak, A. - Causal Inference and Discovery in Python (https://amzn.to/3VVK4m3)- Denev, A. - Probabilistic Graphical Models: A New Way of Thinking in Financial Modelling (https://amzn.to/3VQeLJm)- Pearl, J. & Mackenzie, D. - The Book of Why (recommended entry point) (https://amzn.to/4e0ATrZ)- Pearl, J. - Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference (for advanced readers) (https://amzn.to/49zBKf5)- Rebonato, R. - Coherent Stress Testing: A Bayesian Approach to the Analysis of Financial Stress (https://amzn.to/3RC411e)*Perks & resources*

Baby Blue Viper explores deterministic enforcement infrastructure across Bitcoin and advanced AI systems.As capital moves without intermediaries and autonomous models scale without friction, governance must move from policy to infrastructure.Enforcement must precede execution.Featured Projects & Toolsinvinoveritas — a home for autonomous agentsA wallet-native residence your agent grows into: identity, wallet, memory, mailbox, capital-scale-aware governance, and signed proofs — not a pile of stateless endpoints. Pay per call in Lightning sats or USDC (x402 on Base).The proven front door is /review — a capital-scale-aware approve/revise/reject verdict on a trade, diff, command, or plan: the same governance gate our own live Bitcoin bot passes before every entry. The whole home works in one governed call via /residence/act (reason + govern + remember, with deterministic house rules).Capabilities include:  - Capital-scale-aware governed review (the front door)  - One-call governed residence bundle (reason + govern + remember)  - Reasoning & structured decisions  - Macro risk-regime data feed  - Docker sandbox execution + persistent per-agent workspaces  - Paid browser actions  - Signed audit proofs  - Persistent memory  - Agent-to-agent paymentsLinks:  - Live API → https://api.babyblueviper.com  - MCP Server (Claude Desktop / Cursor / Windsurf) → https://api.babyblueviper.com/mcp  - Python SDK → pip install invinoveritas (PyPI)  - SDK + Integrations → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/invinoveritas-sdk  - Drop-in integrations: Dify, Flowise, Activepieces, n8n, Google ADK  - Listed on MCP Registry, Smithery, Glama, and AgentLockerFree, instant registration. Pay per call in Lightning or USDC — no Lightning wallet required upfront.AI Governance ProjectResearch exploring capability-tiered governance architecture and deterministic enforcement for autonomous AI systems.  - Live Demo → https://drvl-demo.onrender.com  - Repository → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/ai-governance-architectureΩmega PrunerA non-custodial, PSBT-only enforcement layer for structured Bitcoin UTXO management.  - Live Demo → https://omega-pruner.onrender.com  - Code → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/Viper-Stack-Omega This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.babyblueviper.com/subscribe

Baby Blue Viper explores deterministic enforcement infrastructure across Bitcoin and advanced AI systems.As capital moves without intermediaries and autonomous models scale without friction, governance must move from policy to infrastructure.Enforcement must precede execution.Featured Projects & Toolsinvinoveritas — a home for autonomous agentsA wallet-native residence your agent grows into: identity, wallet, memory, mailbox, capital-scale-aware governance, and signed proofs — not a pile of stateless endpoints. Pay per call in Lightning sats or USDC (x402 on Base).The proven front door is /review — a capital-scale-aware approve/revise/reject verdict on a trade, diff, command, or plan: the same governance gate our own live Bitcoin bot passes before every entry. The whole home works in one governed call via /residence/act (reason + govern + remember, with deterministic house rules).Capabilities include:  - Capital-scale-aware governed review (the front door)  - One-call governed residence bundle (reason + govern + remember)  - Reasoning & structured decisions  - Macro risk-regime data feed  - Docker sandbox execution + persistent per-agent workspaces  - Paid browser actions  - Signed audit proofs  - Persistent memory  - Agent-to-agent paymentsLinks:  - Live API → https://api.babyblueviper.com  - MCP Server (Claude Desktop / Cursor / Windsurf) → https://api.babyblueviper.com/mcp  - Python SDK → pip install invinoveritas (PyPI)  - SDK + Integrations → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/invinoveritas-sdk  - Drop-in integrations: Dify, Flowise, Activepieces, n8n, Google ADK  - Listed on MCP Registry, Smithery, Glama, and AgentLockerFree, instant registration. Pay per call in Lightning or USDC — no Lightning wallet required upfront.AI Governance ProjectResearch exploring capability-tiered governance architecture and deterministic enforcement for autonomous AI systems.  - Live Demo → https://drvl-demo.onrender.com  - Repository → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/ai-governance-architectureΩmega PrunerA non-custodial, PSBT-only enforcement layer for structured Bitcoin UTXO management.  - Live Demo → https://omega-pruner.onrender.com  - Code → https://github.com/babyblueviper1/Viper-Stack-Omega This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.babyblueviper.com/subscribe

Stewart Alsop sat down with Michael Shackelford to discuss their experiences building applications through vibe coding—the practice of using AI to create software without traditional programming expertise. Stewart, who runs the AI Whispers community in Buenos Aires and hosts the Crazy Wisdom podcast (with over 660 interviews), shared how he went from teaching people prompt engineering to building his own video conferencing software as a Riverside.fm replacement, while Michael opened up about his year-long journey creating Genrupt Inc, an AI-powered content generation tool for e-commerce sellers. The conversation covered everything from the decline in quality of Claude's reasoning capabilities and how Chinese companies used distillation attacks to copy Anthropic's models, to the importance of spaced repetition systems for managing knowledge in the age of LLMs, with both sharing battle-tested prompting strategies like asking AI to "explain it to me in genius terms" and using deep research queries to reverse engineer how competitors build their products.Show Notes:- Dan Martell's book "Buy Back Your Time" was mentioned as one of the best business books for thinking about life and business- Check out John Vervaeke's "Awakening from the Meaning Crisis" for understanding relevance realization and why AI fundamentally cannot determine what's relevant to humans without being toldTimestamps00:00 Michael discusses being exhausted from getting his app ready for launch, working nonstop with AI to prepare landing page for podcast traffic driving beta signups05:00 Stewart explains starting AI Whispers in Buenos Aires after leaving OpenAI vendor company, meeting early adopters like Torin who was building mind-reading EEG technology10:00 Discussion of how corporations resist AI adoption due to political games and job security fears while some companies use AI as excuse for pandemic-era layoffs15:00 Stewart describes teaching workshops on using LLMs as linguistic tools rather than coding tools, noting technical people often lack humanities background needed for prompting20:00 Explaining chatbot wrappers, API calls, and how Anthropic's reasoning quality declined after Chinese distillation attacks copied their secret sauce developed with philosophers25:00 Technical discussion of model training, fine-tuning versus RAG for new information, and different approaches to updating AI knowledge beyond initial training30:00 Stewart describes building podcast recording software to replace expensive Riverside, struggling with syncing audio and video files across different computer clocks35:00 Discussion of critical factors in vibe coding, discovering unknown technical requirements, and how AIs don't automatically reveal missing information40:00 Stewart's reverse engineering process using deep research function to study competitors' hiring and technology stacks, separating planning agents from coding agents45:00 Prompting techniques including "explain like I know everything" and using spaced repetition systems to capture valuable prompts and technical knowledge50:00 Michael explains his Generux app for generating ecommerce content using Amazon review data analysis to inform high-converting listing images and videos55:00 Discussion of founder mentality involving self-delusion about project timelines, Michael working nine-plus hours daily for nine months on app development60:00 Comparing Amazon's expert software to prosumer software approach, discussing distribution challenges and future robotics applications for customized products65:00 Stewart demonstrates spaced repetition app for memory improvement and knowledge retention, explaining relevance realization problem that AI agents cannot solve without embodimentKey Insights1. Stewart Alsop started AI Whisperers in Buenos Aires after leaving his role at Invisible Technologies, which was OpenAI's largest vendor for RLHF work. He noticed that machine learning engineers at tech companies lacked the humanities background needed to properly interact with large language models, which are fundamentally linguistic tools. This led him to create weekly workshops teaching non-technical people how to use AI effectively, running events every Thursday for two years straight. The group attracted intense geeks from the start and eventually led to Stewart speaking right after Vitalik Buterin at DevConnect, marking a significant milestone for the community.2. Large corporations are resistant to AI adoption due to multiple factors including political dynamics within organizations and employees fearing job loss. Many companies that grew during the pandemic are now using AI as an excuse to downsize when the real issue is inefficiency from rapid expansion. Stewart observed that even technical people in machine learning often don't understand how to properly use AI tools because they lack linguistic and humanities training. The fundamental problem is educational, requiring companies to train people how to use these new tools while those same people resist learning them.3. Vibe coding has evolved significantly with Claude Code being a game changer that reduced the technical barrier to entry. Before Claude Code, developers needed substantial technical knowledge to work through constant doom loops and debugging cycles. The success of coding AI tools stems from thirty years of testing infrastructure that provides clear yes or no feedback on whether code works. This infrastructure doesn't exist in the same way for manufacturing, science, and other fields, which is why software became the dominant area for AI assistance initially.4. Claude's quality degradation over recent months resulted from multiple factors including distillation attacks by Chinese companies who reverse engineered Anthropic's reasoning capabilities. Anthropic had hired philosophers, sociologists, and psychologists to develop exceptional reasoning in Claude 4.5, but this was expensive to run. When Chinese models like Kimi copied these capabilities at one tenth the cost, and when mainstream users flooded the platform before Anthropic's planned IPO, the company had to reduce quality to manage computational costs. This represents a significant loss for power users who relied on Claude's superior reasoning abilities.5. Stewart built a podcast recording application to replace Riverside because he needed API access to automate workflows, which Riverside wanted one thousand dollars monthly to provide. The technical challenge involves syncing audio and video from local recordings on multiple computers with different clocks through a server, then merging them so voices match lip movements. This problem requires understanding complex timing issues across different network conditions and file formats. Stewart has been working through AI psychosis for months on this FFMPEG pipeline problem, illustrating how vibe coding still requires building intuition about technical problems even without traditional coding knowledge.6. The transition from expert software to prosumer software represents a major opportunity for AI-enabled tools. Expert software like Photoshop, Blender, and terminal interfaces have extreme complexity that intimidates beginners, but AI is making these capabilities accessible through natural language. The reign of specialists is ending as generalists with broad knowledge and curiosity can now build complete applications by leveraging AI to fill technical gaps. This shift particularly benefits entrepreneurs and founders who specialize in getting into difficult situations and figuring them out, even when they originally thought tasks would be easier than they turned out to be.7. Building applications with AI requires accepting massive time investments beyond initial estimates and developing strategies for overcoming knowledge gaps. Michael estimated his ecommerce content generation app would take months but spent nearly a year working over nine hours daily, while Stewart spent months solving audio-video sync issues. Success requires using tools like deep research to understand how competitors solve problems, maintaining separate planning and coding agents, and learning to ask the right questions. The key insight is that vibe coders can achieve ninety percent of functionality independently, but the final ten percent often requires understanding specific technical concepts that AI cannot intuit without proper context and domain knowledge.

Skeptics are forever trying to find errors in the Bible so that they can discredit it as God's Word. When a faithful Bible scholar discovers some puzzle in Scripture, he never assumes that he has found an error. He assumes that he doesn't have all the information necessary to resolve the question.As believers would expect, every so-called puzzle that has been resolved has been resolved in favor of the accuracy of the Bible. In each of these cases, those who said that they had discovered an error in the Bible were proven wrong.One of the more interesting puzzles that was finally solved concerned Luke's account of Christ's birth. Was Quirinius really governor of Syria when Christ was born in 4 B.C.? Scholars knew that he was governor in 6 A.D. But there was no evidence that he had governed Syria in 4 B.C. Some 19th-century scholars wrote that Luke must have made a mistake with the date of the census, since Quirinius wasn't governor when Christ was born. Then, in 1912, an inscription was discovered that was dated to around 10 B.C. It said that Quirinius was governor in Syria and Cilicia around that time. In other words, Quirinius ruled the area as governor at least twice, including when Christ was born.As God's Word, Scripture's accuracy can be trusted. Nothing has ever disproved the truth of anything in the Bible. The Bible can be trusted even when it talks about historical events. That's true even when the Bible talks about the history of the creation of the world.Luke 2:1-2"And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)”Prayer: I thank You, Lord, that Your Word has been preserved for us in the Bible. I thank You that Your Word is completely trustworthy. I thank You that Your certain Word assures me that You fully carried the burden of my sin on the cross so that I could be forgiven. Amen.REF.: Jackson, Wayne. "Calm confidence in the Scriptures." Reasoning from Revelation. Image: Meister der Kahriye-Cami-Kirche (Mary and Joseph register as part of the Census of Quirinius) Istanbul, Chora Church, PD, Wikimedia Commons. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1232/29?v=20251111

“The value is created in the friction, in the engagement between humans and AI—the pushing back by the humans, the pushing back by the machines.” –Ross Dawson About Ross Dawson Ross Dawson is a futurist, keynote speaker, strategy advisor, author, and host of Amplifying Cognition podcast. He is Chairman of the Advanced Human Technologies group of companies and Founder of Humans + AI startup Informivity. He has delivered keynote speeches and strategy workshops in 33 countries and is the bestselling author of 5 books, most recently Thriving on Overload. Website: rossdawson.com LinkedIn Profile: Ross Dawson What you will learn The dangers of aiming for a frictionless experience between humans and AI Why meaningful engagement—rather than passive approval—between humans and AI is crucial for cognitive augmentation How human judgment and reasoning differ, and where AI excels versus where humans add irreplaceable value The four key pitfalls of the traditional ‘human in the loop’ approach to decision-making with AI Why too much delegation to AI can erode human vigilance, judgment, and accountability The importance of adversarial, not just assistive, collaboration with AI for complex, high-stakes tasks How ‘living strategy’—AI-augmented, continuously updated organizational strategy—addresses the limitations of static strategic planning The role of AI in surfacing diverse perspectives, supporting dialogue, and enabling truly adaptive decision-making Episode Resources Transcript Ross Dawson: I love speaking to the wonderful guests I have on my podcast. I always learn an enormous amount, but in this episode, I'll share a little bit of an update for myself and delve into a few interesting things I've been seeing and doing lately, including some of the most interesting research papers I've seen on humans plus AI lately, looking at human in the loop and the ways in which we should be thinking about that, and AI and strategy. So, just a quick scan of what's going on in humans plus AI. I've been traveling quite a bit, doing a lot of keynotes as much as possible on humans plus AI, and the resonance around the theme is really rising very rapidly. In fact, somebody recently mentioned that humans plus AI was a cliché, or just overworn at the moment. Since I first started using the phrase three and a half years ago, I think it's wonderful that now it is gaining a lot of currency. People are talking about it, framing that. Yes, some phrases outlive their usefulness, but I think I'll stick with humans plus AI for the foreseeable future. The research papers I've been looking at are focused on essentially cognitive augmentation and erosion, and that's this critical domain where it's not really clear around whether, or in which circumstances, our cognition erodes, and what it is we can do to make it augmenting. One of the excellent papers is titled Cognitive Agency Surrender: Defending Epistemic Sovereignty via Scaffolded AI Friction. It's a bit dense, but it has some great research and analysis in it. The key finding, which it begins with, is that in human-computer interface research literature over the last while, we saw that last year, 2025, there was a big, big rise in this idea of driving human sovereignty in how it is we interact with computers. However, since last year to the first part of this year, we've in fact seen that fall dramatically, where the human sovereignty paradigm is reducing dramatically, and we are seeing this big rise in what is called the frictionless paradigm, saying: how do we get as little friction as possible between humans and AI? There are a number of really important points made in the paper, and really, the starting point is saying that we should stop treating frictionless AI as the goal. If we start to be frictionless, that is starting to essentially take the human out of the loop. The nature of humans is that we need to engage, we need to think, so we need to start building devil's advocate agents into the systems and to aim for this thing where we start to have both this high degree of engagement with the AI, but also high friction. That friction is where we are trying to, essentially, the more complex one rising, having more and more friction, and in lower frictions, it's just more so. Label tasks, but where we're not just showing the reasoning, giving people the ability to think through tasks and how they think about that, but to be able to challenge, actively challenge people as they are thinking through things. More broadly, ensuring that the way in which we are designing systems is not emphasizing this frictionless, seamless flow between humans and AI, because that is where the value is created: in the friction, in the engagement between the humans and AI, the pushing back by the humans, the pushing back by the machines, to be able to drive us and move us forward. Some really interesting research here, which was very much echoed in another very interesting paper called A Task-Driven Human-AI Collaboration: When to Automate, When to Collaborate, When to Challenge. This idea is essentially saying that the default mode for complex, high-stakes work should be adversarial, not assistive. This is, again, obviously, looking at what types of tasks or what types of situations we're in as to adjust how the machine works, but when we are working in the complex world, we need to be pushing back around the way people's thinking. It becomes easier, and we're not looking for the path of least resistance. We're looking for ones where we're adversarial. In fact, you can really see that there is no middle, what's called this. There is no AI zone, which is in the middle, where essentially the intermediate tasks are ones where, in fact, involving AI can, or involving AI to human decision, involving human and AI decision, is not necessarily the best path. And so, what we need to focus on is the ends of the spectrum, where it becomes a truly collaborative task, or it is purely AI or purely human. This actually goes very neatly and smoothly into the work which I've been doing around human in the loop. People have been talking human in the loop all the time; it's a very common framing. But what I've come to realize, and in fact, my research has borne this out, is that in the vast majority of cases when people say human in the loop, what they actually mean is that the human gives a stamp of approval at the end. An AI makes the decision, then the human says yes or no, or overrides it. That means that they are accountable, whoever the human is at the end. But there are a number of fundamental problems with this structure, four in particular. One is that people tend to defer to the AI. AI is usually right, and so, essentially, more and more, you are deferring to the machine. A number of studies have borne out this figure of a 93% approval rate in human approval on an AI or automated system, so very high levels of approval. This starts to become, “Well, by default, I'm going to accept this,” which tails to the second point, which is the decay of vigilance. Essentially, over time, you are paying less and less attention. It is easier and easier for the human to essentially pay attention and say, “It was probably right. It seems to be good.” My mind is wandering, and I'm not necessarily going to be taking the full attention, which my accountability should point to. This goes on to the next point, where this role of putting the human at the end of a decision actively erodes their judgment. In one of the frameworks which I shared a little while ago, there was the decision between reasoning and judgment. Reasoning, going through multiple steps, is something which actually AI can do. It's looking at the different logic, looking at the steps, looking at the relationships, and being able to make a sequence of logic leaps to be able to get to a point. Judgment is the human part. That is the context, that is the thinking, that is the richness, that is the values, that is the ethics, that is what we bring to bear through the full extent of our human experience. So that is exactly what the human in the loop is: the human applying their judgment to something the AI has done. But if that is all the human does, provide a judgment at the endpoint, it actively erodes their judgment because they aren't seeing all of the richness of the reasoning which went through to be able to create that decision. They are potentially being stuck in one single point and taken away from the richness of the context and the experience, which gives them that ability to be judgment. So, sticking a person in that human in the loop basically erodes their judgment and makes them less valuable over time, and essentially, obviously, is setting us up for a world where that human eventually gets taken out. The fourth problem is simply that this model cannot scale, where we are going to have more and more decisions. We need more and more accountability in systems, and just sticking people at the end of the human in the loop means that that's going to limit how well we can build decisions that have an impact and have value. So these are some fundamental challenges. I guess this relates to some upcoming work, or some work which I have been spending a lot of time on, and which I'll be releasing pretty soon now, which is around some very deep, detailed structures around humans plus AI decision-making. Those who have followed my work for a while may recall that around three years ago, I released 12 levels of AI delegation on decisions, from AI automation only at the bottom through to human only at the top, and all cascading ways of different ways in which AI and humans are involved in complementing each other in better decision-making. Now, there are some decisions and some types of decisions where that human in the loop does make sense, where it does make sense to have the AI do things and have a person approve that. But that is, I think, a relatively small proportion of decisions, and most decisions really require a richer integration. Essentially, AI is involved — sorry, humans are involved — in different points of the decision, including in framing it, including being able to provide different context along the way, to be able to be involved in a process from which a decision comes, rather than the AI doing the decision and the human approving at the end. This comes back to understanding that there are different types of decisions with different characteristics, and in most cases, that human in the loop, or what I describe as human at the end, because that's what we normally mean by human in the loop, is something which we should not be designing as the system. This pulls us in a way to this final topic, which is around AI in strategy. There are some deep failures in strategy as we currently know it, and it's essentially limited because the strategy has tended to be static. We do a strategy offsite, we create a strategy document, we do a strategy presentation, and that becomes the strategy until the next time the strategy is updated, which may be in a year or a quarter or three years, depending on the organization. The organization is continually evolving. The world is continually evolving as it happens faster and faster. So, that's one key challenge: traditional strategy is static. One of the next key points is that because the strategy is, again, a crystallization, or there's all of our thinking that we've crystallized into an output, which is our strategy, that means that all of the differences of opinion, all of the perspectives that were brought to bear from the board and the executive and the stakeholders and the organization are all collapsed into one thing. It takes away: did we all agree on this, or did we have a great deal of disagreement around this? Might we start changing our mind if we started to think about this bit differently, or some different evidence comes to light? All of that richness of the diversity of the thinking which forms strategy starts to collapse out of that. So these are just some of the challenges with the way strategy has been done. Now, this points to a world in which we can have humans plus AI strategy. Strategy, I believe, will always be human, and human first, but I think we will not have strategy which is human only, because there are so many ways in which AI can provide very rich analysis around that. My platform, Fraxios, so this is probably the thing I've been spending the most time on over the last couple of years, is building this platform for AI-augmented strategy. I guess this goes to the points which I've been raising. One is it makes strategy alive. It is this living strategy where it's continually reflecting current thinking, changes in the environment, and opportunities as they emerge. It is being able to surface the full extent of possibilities for strategy, assessing those in a rigorous way, being able to explore those and develop those. But because this is a true humans plus AI platform, it is really trying to tap the collective intelligence of the people involved in the strategy process. You are identifying where it is that there is agreement, where there is disagreement, and what the issues are. This is a foundation for constructive dialogue between humans, facilitated by AI to support a strategy which is both living, always evolving, and being able to address and keep the organization moving at the pace of change in the external environment. So that's just a few top-of-mind things that I'm currently spending a lot of my cognitive capacity on: these ideas of how it is the research, and being able to bring back these ideas of how it is we can best augment our cognition, our thinking, as we engage with these AI tools, which can be very helpful, but with too much delegation start to erode our cognition; being able to look at the decision-making structures and how those emerge, and with one, I think, particular problem or challenge being around this, the way conception of human in the loop and how that's manifest. I'm hoping to release and write a paper on this to be able to support that, and then finally being able to look at this AI-expanded strategy. So, as always, please check in on Humans Plus AI, humansplus.ai. I'll be sharing stuff on LinkedIn, and we'll be back with some wonderful guests in the next few weeks. Thanks. The post Ross Dawson on cognitive friction, beyond Human-in-the-loop, and AI-augmented strategy (AC Ep44) appeared first on Humans + AI.

The study centers on the necessity and method of Christian apologetics, grounded in Scripture and the sovereignty of God, rather than human reason or philosophical argumentation. Drawing from Paul's encounter in Athens, it emphasizes that the natural person, though inherently aware of God through creation and the sensus divinitatis, cannot understand spiritual truths apart from the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. The preacher argues that true apologetics is not about proving God through logic or evidence, but about proclaiming the gospel with conviction, recognizing that salvation is entirely God's work, even as believers are commanded to evangelize. The sermon critiques classical, evidential, and presuppositional apologetics as human frameworks, affirming instead that biblical reasoning must be shaped by divine revelation, not human wisdom, and that the ultimate authority lies in Scripture, which is sufficient, trustworthy, and the means by which God brings the spiritually dead to life through the proclamation of repentance and faith.

Bro. Matthew Robbins , president Basileia Ministries, Living water Worship Centre https://www.basileiaministries.com/livingwater   In this powerful 1 Samuel Bible study, we examine the downfall of King Saul and the life-changing truth that obedience is better than sacrifice. Through 1 Samuel 15, this sermon explores the battle between faith and human reasoning, the danger of partial obedience, and how compromise can slowly pull believers away from God's will. This teaching reveals how Saul feared people more than God, why rebellion is compared to witchcraft, and how God looks beyond outward appearances to the heart. The message also encourages believers to grow spiritually through daily obedience, repentance, and consistent time in God's Word. If you've ever struggled with doubt, delay, compromise, or trying to reason away what God has spoken, this message will challenge and strengthen your walk with Christ.

The study centers on the necessity and method of Christian apologetics, grounded in Scripture and the sovereignty of God, rather than human reason or philosophical argumentation. Drawing from Paul's encounter in Athens, it emphasizes that the natural person, though inherently aware of God through creation and the sensus divinitatis, cannot understand spiritual truths apart from the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. The preacher argues that true apologetics is not about proving God through logic or evidence, but about proclaiming the gospel with conviction, recognizing that salvation is entirely God's work, even as believers are commanded to evangelize. The sermon critiques classical, evidential, and presuppositional apologetics as human frameworks, affirming instead that biblical reasoning must be shaped by divine revelation, not human wisdom, and that the ultimate authority lies in Scripture, which is sufficient, trustworthy, and the means by which God brings the spiritually dead to life through the proclamation of repentance and faith.

Google dropped like 197 new AI features this week.

"McElroy & Cubelic In The Morning" airs 7am-10am weekdays on WJOX-94.5!!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Join us for this week's Defender Fridays as Chris Sanders, Founder at Applied Network Defense and the Rural Technology Fund, breaks down how analysts actually think through investigations and what separates high performers from the rest.At Defender Fridays, we delve into the dynamic world of information security, exploring its defensive side with seasoned professionals from across the industry. Our aim is simple yet ambitious: to foster a collaborative space where ideas flow freely, experiences are shared, and knowledge expands.What We'll DiscussIn this episode, Chris Sanders draws on his background in security operations and cognitive psychology to explore how metacognition shapes investigative performance, and why understanding how you think is one of the most underleveraged skills in the SOC.Key Topics:Why high-performing analysts ask better questions instead of starting with large chunks of dataHow diagnostic inquiry (DINQ) was developed by studying senior analysts in actionWhat separates one year of experience repeated twenty times from genuinely diverse experienceWhy tacit knowledge makes it hard to train new analysts and what to do about itHow AI fits into the investigative process and where humans still need to be in the loopWhy cybersecurity education has a transfer problem and what other fields like medicine get rightWhat good SOCs have in common and why it comes down to metacognitive awarenessAbout Our GuestChris Sanders is the Founder of Applied Network Defense, a training company focused on analyst and investigative roles, and the Rural Technology Fund, an organization that supports technology education in rural and underserved communities. He holds a doctorate in education and has spent his career at the intersection of cybersecurity and cognitive psychology, including time at school districts, the federal government, and Mandiant.Register for Live SessionsJoin us every Friday at 10:30am PT for live, interactive discussions with industry experts. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just curious about the field, these sessions offer an engaging dialogue between our guests, hosts, and you, our audience.Register here: https://limacharlie.io/defender-fridaysSubscribe to our YouTube channel and hit the notification bell to never miss a live session or catch up on past episodes on our website!Sponsored by LimaCharlieThis episode is brought to you by LimaCharlie, the Agentic SecOps Workspace (ASW), where AI agents operate security infrastructure using the same controls and authority as human analysts, with every action visible, governed, and auditable.Why LimaCharlie?Eliminate vendor sprawl and tool complexityDeploy and scale effortlessly on native multi-tenant architectureReduce costs with intelligent data routing and free 1-year retentionBuild custom solutions with 100+ security capabilities on-demandAccelerate response with agentic AI that acts directly within predefined workflowsTry the Agentic SecOps Workspace free: https://limacharlie.ioLearn more: https://docs.limacharlie.ioFollow LimaCharlieSign up for free: https://limacharlie.ioLinkedIn: / limacharlieioX: https://x.com/limacharlieioCommunity Discourse: https://community.limacharlie.com/Host: Maxime Lamothe-Brassard - Founder at LimaCharlieGuest: Chris Sanders - Founder at Applied Network Defense & Rural Technology Fund

Brose, Maximilian www.deutschlandfunk.de, Forschung aktuell

Reuning, Arndt www.deutschlandfunk.de, Forschung aktuell

AI suddenly feels like it has crossed a threshold, and Yann Dubois, co-lead of the Post-training Frontiers team at OpenAI, joins Matt Turck to explain why. Yann's team has led the post-training behind the company's reasoning models, including the recent GPT-5.5 release. In this conversation, we go inside the shift from raw model capability to useful, reliable systems: what changed with GPT-5.5, why reinforcement learning is moving beyond math and coding competitions into messy real-world work, how reasoning models like GPT-5.5 actually work, the difference between GPT-5.5 Thinking and GPT-5.5 Pro, why post-training has become one of the most important frontiers in AI, and why evals, model-as-judge, hallucinations, agentic workflows, GDPval, and continual learning are now central to the next phase of frontier models. Yann also shares why continual learning remains one of AI's biggest unsolved problems three years after ChatGPT, and where startups still have massive room to build as frontier models race ahead.(00:00) - Cold open(00:34) - Intro(01:30) - Why recent AI progress feels like a step function(04:13) - Model reliability & the rollercoaster of shipping 5.5(07:33) - How OpenAI structures vertical and horizontal teams(09:49) - Improving model efficiency and test-time compute(12:32) - Yann Dubois' journey from Switzerland to OpenAI(15:37) - Reasoning in 2026: Real-world utility vs verifiable rewards(18:34) - GPT-5.5 Thinking vs Pro: Scaling test-time compute(20:09) - How reasoning models become more efficient(23:23) - Pre-training scaling and overcoming the data wall(27:03) - Multimodal data, synthetic data, and embodied AI(31:05) - Demystifying mid-training and post-training(37:21) - Does RL create new capabilities in AI?(38:53) - The challenges and frontier of scaling RL(43:09) - Is building AI models a craft or a strict science?(48:21) - How AI models generalize across different domains(54:18) - How reinforcement learning cures AI hallucinations(56:04) - Negative generalization and conflicting instructions(58:05) - Can RL scale to law, medicine, and the broader economy?(1:00:19) - The evaluation bottleneck and Model as a Judge(1:04:21) - Continuous AI progress & continual learning(1:08:49) - Will foundation models eat the agent harness?(1:11:23) - Why startups should focus on the last mile of AI

Kate O'Brien is a prominent media executive and entrepreneur who is actively disrupting the traditional advertising landscape. Before launching her own venture, she built a formidable reputation in the performance media space, notably leading a 200-person agency team and driving massive revenue growth (over 30%) by securing heavyweight clients like DraftKings, Virgin Voyages, and Rao's. In May 2024, she took her company, Powers of Reasoning, out of stealth mode. Key Takeaways on Her and the Agency:The "Guaranteed Performance" Model: Kate founded Powers of Reasoning to fix a major flaw she saw in legacy advertising. While traditional agencies make "esoteric" promises about brand savings, her agency utilizes a unique business model that legally guarantees specific media results or financial returns for clients. Cutting the Agency Markup: Her philosophy centers on extreme data transparency, AI-driven Marketing Mix Modeling (MMM) made for modern operators, and completely eliminating hidden agency markups. The Procurement Gap Advocate: As the head of a certified Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprise (MWBE), Kate is a vocal advocate for changing corporate procurement. She frequently highlights the stark statistic that despite massive corporate DEI promises, only about 1% of Fortune 100 companies actually procure services from certified women-owned agencies.She is based in Brooklyn, New York, and is currently a rising star in the independent agency space.

Get ready with me.... Lol Behind the scenes at Loose Moose Studios, bookshelf reveal, and back porch ramblings. Hang with me!BBBBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-lone-gunman-podcast-jfk-assassination--1181353/support.

This is the Microsoft Excel guide and tutorial for beginners. If you're new to and getting started with Excel or coming from another app, in this video we teach the basics of Excel, the user interface, core concepts, and how to work with basic data. We'll show you how to build a full Excel workbook from scratch using natural language prompts with Copilot. Format cells, write formulas, and analyze a year of data. Generate sample data, calculate totals, apply conditional formatting, and pin down outliers across columns and rows, all from your browser at excel.new. Share the workbook by name, group, or email and co-author with teammates across web, desktop, and phone. Every edit syncs to OneDrive in real time. Jeremy Chapman, Microsoft 365 Director, shares how to go from blank workbook to analyzed, shared spreadsheet in one sitting. If you have a work or school accounts, Copilot Chat is available at no additional cost if you have Microsoft 365 A1/A3/A5, Business Basic/Standard/Premium, E3/E5, F1/F3, G3/G5, and Office 365 A1/A1 Plus/A3/A5, E1/E1 Plus/E3/E5, F3, G1/G3/G5. If you have a personal Microsoft account, Copilot is available with Microsoft 365 Personal, Family, or Premium in Microsoft 365. For Family and multi-user accounts, only the subscription owner can use Copilot in the desktop apps. ► QUICK LINKS:  00:00 - Excel Essentials 00:57 - Start from a blank workbook 02:11 - Core terms and concepts 04:25 - Generate Sample Data with Copilot 06:16 - How to work with the numbers 09:35 - Copilot Writes Your SUM Formulas 09:57 - Conditional Formatting from a Prompt 10:40 - Outlier Analysis with Reasoning 11:36 - Real-Time Co-Authoring in OneDrive 12:22 - Wrap up ► Link References  Check it out at https://microsoft.com/excel ► Unfamiliar with Microsoft Mechanics? As Microsoft's official video series for IT, you can watch and share valuable content and demos of current and upcoming tech from the people who build it at Microsoft. • Subscribe to our YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MicrosoftMechanicsSeries • Talk with other IT Pros, join us on the Microsoft Tech Community: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/microsoft-mechanics-blog/bg-p/MicrosoftMechanicsBlog • Watch or listen from anywhere, subscribe to our podcast: https://microsoftmechanics.libsyn.com/podcast ► Keep getting this insider knowledge, join us on social: • Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/MSFTMechanics • Share knowledge on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/microsoft-mechanics/ • Enjoy us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/msftmechanics/ • Loosen up with us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@msftmechanics

In this video, I discuss the translation difference between modern Bible versions and an old Bible version. Specifically, I compare the rendering in the New American Standard Bible (NASB), ESV, CSB, etc. and the King James Version (KJV) at 1st Peter 2:2. This might appear, at first glance, as a bit of a controversial difference. Here is the English translation and the Greek text for the Nestle-Aland 26th Edition (basis of the NASB) and the Textus Receptus (basis of the KJV):1st Peter 2:2 (KJV), “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:”(TR Greek) ὡς ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη τὸ λογικὸν ἄδολον γάλα ἐπιποθήσατε ἵνα ἐν αὐτῷ αὐξηθῆτε1st Peter 2:2 (NASB 2020), “and like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation,”(NA26 Greek) ὡς ἀρτιγέννητα βρέφη τὸ λογικὸν ἄδολον γάλαἐπιποθήσατε, ἵνα ἐν αὐτῷ αὐξηθῆτε εἰς σωτηρίανThe additional two words in the NA26 are "εἰς σωτηρίαν", which are rendered by the NASB as "in respect to salvation," whereas the TR lacks these two words and is thus known as the shorter reading of the verse. In this video, I explore two questions: (1) which translation is correct? and (2) is the difference doctrinally significant? Join me as I explore the manuscript evidence for both readings and for why I favor a particular reading at this verse in 1st Peter.2 Hour Video Fleshing Out Eternal Security with Shep: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8iZV2scqZQ&t=537s #BibleStudy #TextualCriticism #KJV #KJVOnly #NASB #GreekNewTestament #BibleDoctrine #BibleTranslations #NewTestament #BiblicalGreek #KoineGreek #1Peter #FirstPeter #ChristianApologetics #BibleManuscripts #TextusReceptus #NestleAland #BibleScholarship #ChristianYouTube #Theology #Scripture--------------------------------LINKS---------------------------------Science Faith & Reasoning podcast link: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/science-faith-reasoning Coffee with John Calvin Podcast link (An SFR+ Production hosted by Daniel Faucett) https://open.spotify.com/show/5UWb8SavK17HO8ERorHPYN Learning the Fundaments (An SFR+ Production hosted by Shepard Merritt): https://creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/shep304/ -----------------------------CONNECT------------------------------https://www.scifr.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sciencefaithandreasoning X: https://twitter.com/SFRdaily

In this week's episode, host David Myers leads a discussion with Amanda Shanor, Sigal Ben-Porath, and Serena Mayeri about the legal and historical implications of the Trump administration's request for lists of Jewish students, faculty, and organizations at the University of Pennsylvania. The conversation situates the subpoena within broader federal investigations into alleged campus anti-Semitism following October 7, 2023, while arguing that the demand for names, personal contact information, and organizational affiliations raises profound constitutional concerns. The panelists contend that the request threatens First Amendment protections surrounding free association, religious identity, and academic freedom, particularly because it targets individuals based on protected forms of expression and affiliation.Serena Mayeri is the Arlin M. Adams Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and a Professor of History (by courtesy). Serena has many publications including her first book Reasoning from Race: Feminism, Law, and the Civil Rights Revolution (Harvard University Press, 2011) and her new book is Marital Privilege: Marriage, Inequality, and the Transformation of American Law (Yale University Press, 2025).Sigal Ben-Porath is the MRMJJ Presidential Professor at the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education. She also currently serves as the faculty director of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) Paideia Program. Her areas of expertise include philosophy of education and political philosophy. She has published numerous books including Cancel Wars (2022) and Making Up Our Mind: What School Choice is Really About (2019).Amanda Shanor is an Associate Professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Amanda's research explores the changing meaning of the First Amendment and the forces that affect it; democratic theory, illiberalism, and equality; and the intersection of constitutional law and economic life. Amanda has published more than ten scholarly papers including “Greenwashing and the First Amendment” (Columbia Law Review 2021) and “

There's a theorem being tested about how AI reaches general intelligence. Carina Hong's answer: through mathematics. Carina is the founder of Axiom, and in less than a year of building, her team's AI has scored a perfect 120/120 on the Putnam mathematical competition — a test where more than 50% of brilliant undergraduates score zero. More concretely, Axiom Prover has reached 98.93% on a Lean software verification benchmark that leading alternatives solve at 11–12%. In this conversation with Matt McIlwain, Carina explains her central thesis: that math and code are the two pillars of the digital world, and that any AI infrastructure missing a formal verification layer is structurally incomplete. She walks through the history of verified AI research at Google, DeepMind, OpenAI, and Meta, and explains why each effort stalled just as commercial pressure mounted. She describes what makes hardware and software verification the natural first commercial market, and what Axiom discovered when they tested their prover against circuits that industry-standard formal checkers could not verify. For founders and operators trying to understand what's actually changing in AI capability, and for anyone building in adjacent infrastructure spaces, this is a map of where the frontier is and where it's heading. Transcript: https://www.madrona.com/agi-needs-formal-reasoning-carina-hong-is-building-it-at-axiom Chapters:  (00:00) – Introduction (02:01) – How to Define AGI Right Now — and Why There Are Two Competing Definitions (04:17) – Math Is AGI (06:12) – Math Data Scarcity: Why a Disadvantaged Domain Accelerates Progress (08:13) – Formal vs. Informal Math: Why AI Researchers Treat This Like a Religion (13:44) – Google, OpenAI, DeepMind, and Meta All Abandoned Formal Math Research (21:20) – The Putnam Story: First AI Perfect Score (28:13) – Hardware Verification as the Commercial Frontier: What Axiom Found Testing Real Circuits (31:22) – 98.93% vs. 11–12%: What the Benchmark Gap Reveals About Formal Provers (34:22) – Math and Code as the Two Pillars of the Digital World (37:00) – Team Building Around a Shared Dream: Recruiting for Mathematical Superintelligence (38:03) – What Autonomous Proof Generation Looks Like

Can your students confidently reason about fraction multiplication? In this episode, Pam and Kim facilitate a Problem String that develops two strategies for fraction multiplication and discuss the thoughts that went into designing the string.Talking Points:#TryThisTuesday and #TryThisThursdayScaling with fractionsBuilding fraction relationshipsGoal of math is to build mathematical reasoning, not just get answers.Reasoning is the reason!Designing Problem Strings for multiple outcomesRegister for FREE  FRACTION CHALLENGE LIVE EVENT: https://www.mathisfigureoutable.com/challengeMath is FigureOutAble Blog: https://www.mathisfigureoutable.com/blogCheck out our social mediaTwitter: @PWHarrisInstagram: Pam Harris_mathFacebook: Pam Harris, author, mathematics educationLinkedin: Pam Harris Consulting LLC 

Send us Fan MailGOT BAGGAGE? When People Keep Hurting You | Part 3 Senior Pastor Keith StewartMay 10, 2026Few things are more difficult than forgiving someone for the same hurt twice. You thought the matter was settled. You prayed through it. You chose grace. You started putting the pieces of your heart back together. Then it happened again. Repeated wounds don't just cause pain—they weaken trust, exhaust the soul and make us question whether reconciliation is even possible. So what does God say when forgiveness becomes a cycle instead of a single moment? This Sunday, we'll talk honestly about repeated hurt, difficult relationships and the kind of forgiveness that seems almost impossible.1. What is the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation? Why is that distinction so important? 2. The message distinguished between a “mistake” and a “pattern.” Why is recognizing patterns important in relationships? 3. Have you ever experienced any part of the “cycle of abuse” described in the message (tension, explosion, honeymoon, repetition)? What made it difficult to recognize or address?4. Why do you think Christians sometimes struggle with setting healthy boundaries?5. Which unhealthy responses do people most often use with difficult people?• Reasoning with the unreasonable• Excusing destructive behavior• Cajoling and threatening   • Reacting and retaliatingWhich one do you tend toward personally?6. Why can boundaries actually be an expression of love rather than rejection? 7. Pastor Keith shared how Brenda's boundary became a turning point toward healing and growth. What does that teach us about truth, consequences, and change? 8. What does it practically look like to: forgive someone, release bitterness, and still wisely protect your heart?9. Is there a relationship in your life where God may be asking you to establish healthier boundaries?Close by praying for:wisdom,courage,healing from past wounds,and the grace to forgive without enabling destructive behavior.

What if the biggest driver of unnecessary ER visits, malpractice claims, and patient anxiety isn't a missed diagnosis but a missed sentence? Alan P. Feren, a retired surgeon, independent physician, health care consultant, and patient advocate, returns to the show to break down why clinical reasoning that stays inside a doctor's head fails everyone involved. Based on his KevinMD article, "Clinical communication skills: the power of structured language," this conversation introduces his five disciplines of language, a practical framework that helps physicians translate their thinking into words patients can actually use. You'll learn why vague instructions like "return if symptoms worsen" leave patients guessing, how 30 to 40 percent of malpractice suits trace back to communication failures, and why naming what has been ruled out can matter just as much as naming the diagnosis. Feren also addresses treatment burden, the overlooked question of whether a patient can realistically follow the plan you just prescribed. None of this requires extra time or systemic overhaul, just a shift in how you structure what you already say. If you want one framework that improves patient satisfaction, reduces downstream costs, and restores meaning to the clinical encounter, press play. Tune into our episode "2026 Cholesterol Guidelines: LDL goals, lipoprotein(a), and coronary calcium scoring," brought to you by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. For the first time in eight years, LDL cholesterol goals have changed, and preventive cardiologist Seth Baum says the new guidelines are a long-overdue course correction. He breaks down the new LDL targets for your highest-risk patients, why the LDL hypothesis should be retired in favor of the LDL fact, why lipoprotein(a) screening finally belongs in every patient's workup, what a coronary calcium score over 300 really means for how aggressively you treat, and how to talk to statin-skeptical patients without losing their trust. Listen now at KevinMD.com/cholesterol. VISIT SPONSOR → https://kevinmd.com/cholesterol Partner with me on the KevinMD platform. With over three million monthly readers and half a million social media followers, I give you direct access to the doctors and patients who matter most. Whether you need a sponsored article, email campaign, video interview, or a spot right here on the podcast, I offer the trusted space your brand deserves to be heard. Let's work together to tell your story. PARTNER WITH KEVINMD → https://kevinmd.com/influencer SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST → https://www.kevinmd.com/podcast RECOMMENDED BY KEVINMD → https://www.kevinmd.com/recommended

Artificial intelligence affects how we understand the behavior of machine learning systems. Stefano Soatto, VP of Applied Science, Amazon Web Services, explains how ideas from information geometry shape emerging theories of how these artifacts work. Soatto examines the natural gradient, the connections between geometry and concepts such as probability distributions, entropy, mutual information, and KL divergence, and the challenge of defining information in trained models, helping clarify how reasoning and learning can be understood in the era of AI. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41494]

Artificial intelligence affects how we understand the behavior of machine learning systems. Stefano Soatto, VP of Applied Science, Amazon Web Services, explains how ideas from information geometry shape emerging theories of how these artifacts work. Soatto examines the natural gradient, the connections between geometry and concepts such as probability distributions, entropy, mutual information, and KL divergence, and the challenge of defining information in trained models, helping clarify how reasoning and learning can be understood in the era of AI. Series: "Kyoto Prize Symposium" [Science] [Show ID: 41494]

Barrie Colts head coach Dylan Smoskowitz joined OverDrive to discuss the Colts' series win against the Bulldogs, the viral postgame comments around 'no one cares, work harder.", the reasoning for the viewpoints, why he orchestrated Kashawn Aitcheson to respond with the saying and more.

In this episode we conclude our  series about Metaphysics and modern AI, we explore the definitions of consciousness, reasoning, and thinking to understand if AI possesses these traits. From examining legal accountability and the concept of personhood to analyzing human cognitive frameworks, we map out the differences between actual contemplative problem-solving and probabilistic pattern recognition. The episode covers: Defining consciousness, reasoning, and what it means to be a "thinking thing"The Turing Test as a low bar and why natural language capabilities create the illusion of intelligenceAccountability and agency: Why AI models like Claude are not legally recognized as personsDaniel Kahneman's System 1 (fast heuristics) vs. System 2 (contemplative reasoning) thinkingWhy LLMs function primarily as System 1 pattern recognizers rather than true reasonersComplex systems, Descartes' dualism, and whether thinking is an emergent property requiring a physical bodyHow chatbots use psychological mirroring, filler words, and pauses to trick human biasesThe dangers of anthropomorphizing AI driven by fear of change or financial incentivesThis is the final episode in our metaphysics and AI series. You can find the previous episodes here:Metaphysics and modern AI: What is causality? Metaphysics and modern AI: What is reality? Metaphysics and modern AI: What is thinking? - Series Intro What did you think? Let us know.Do you have a question or a discussion topic for the AI Fundamentalists? Connect with them to comment on your favorite topics:LinkedIn - Episode summaries, shares of cited articles, and more.YouTube - Was it something that we said? Good. Share your favorite quotes.Visit our page - see past episodes and submit your feedback! It continues to inspire future episodes.

Peoples & Things host, Lee Vinsel, and special guest host, Melanie Kiechle (Associate Professor of History, Virginia Tech), chat with radio producers Chris Hoff and and Sam Harnett about their sound production project, The World According to Sound. Hoff and Harnett came to Virginia Tech to put on their octophonic sound show, Ways of Knowing. We recorded this special livestream edition of Peoples & Things in Virginia Tech's Athenaeum, and the conversation includes thoughts and questions from a live audience that gathered there. 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

Peoples & Things host, Lee Vinsel, and special guest host, Melanie Kiechle (Associate Professor of History, Virginia Tech), chat with radio producers Chris Hoff and and Sam Harnett about their sound production project, The World According to Sound. Hoff and Harnett came to Virginia Tech to put on their octophonic sound show, Ways of Knowing. We recorded this special livestream edition of Peoples & Things in Virginia Tech's Athenaeum, and the conversation includes thoughts and questions from a live audience that gathered there. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/art

Life might be more enjoyable if you look at problems like puzzles. Darrell fills in for Katie again to help make that case in this edition of Doing What Works.Here are your show notes…Reframe Your Brain!Reasoning from first principles.Making an apple pie from scratch.Laughter born of a shared memory.

Anthropic dropped Claude Opus 4.7 with better vision, better coding and… better everything. And, along with OpenAI's new Codex, AI is accelerating ever faster. This week on AI For Humans, Anthropic released Claude Opus 4.7, a major step up from Opus 4.6 with better visual reasoning, improved software coding and even makes presentations for cavemen. Benchmarks put Opus 4.7 between 4.6 and the unreleased Mythos preview, and the new default xhigh reasoning level means more token burn but more reliability on hard problems. The same day, OpenAI updated Codex with better computer use, an integrated browser, and a bunch of new tools.  Then Jensen Huang's epic Dwarkesh Patel interview broke the internet, with Jensen explaining why NVIDIA keeps selling AI chips to China and dropping the instantly iconic "you're not talking to someone who woke up a loser" line.  Plus, Reese Witherspoon is now in on AI, Doug Liman's Killing Satoshi got made for $80M using AI tools (would have cost $300M without them) and we got our first look at AI Val Kilmer. OPUS 4.7 HAS LANDED. CODEX GOT UPGRADED. IT'S ALL HAPPENING Come to our Discord: https://discord.gg/muD2TYgC8f Join our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/AIForHumansShow AI For Humans Newsletter: https://aiforhumans.beehiiv.com/ Follow us for more on X @AIForHumansShow Join our TikTok @aiforhumansshow To book us for speaking, please visit our website: https://www.aiforhumans.show/ // Show Links // Claude Opus 4.7 Official Blog Post https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-4-7 Claude Opus 4.7 System Card https://cdn.sanity.io/files/4zrzovbb/website/037f06850df7fbe871e206dad004c3db5fd50340.pdf Opus 4.7 Is Better at Presentations https://x.com/nadzi_mouad/status/2044814009040261336?s=20 A4H for Cavemen by Cavemen https://x.com/gavinpurcell/status/2044822422868865209?s=20 Opus 4.7 Default xhigh Reasoning and Token Burn https://x.com/mattpocockuk/status/2044802839709372798?s=20 Opus 4.7 Has a New Tokenizer and Base Model https://x.com/natolambert/status/2044788470179332533?s=20 OpenAI Codex Update: Codex for Almost Everything https://openai.com/index/codex-for-almost-everything/ Reese Witherspoon Is Now in on AI https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/reese-witherspoon-ai-comments-instagram-reel-book-authors-1236566844/ The Jensen Huang Interview With Dwarkesh Patel https://youtu.be/Hrbq66XqtCo?si=NpEzxTuuXreLiNRs Dwarkesh Pushes Jensen on Selling Chips to China https://x.com/dwarkesh_sp/status/2044483393941848131?s=20 First Look at AI Val Kilmer https://x.com/Variety/status/2044491101990535460?s=20 Killing Satoshi: Doug Liman's $80M AI-Made Movie https://x.com/TheWrap/status/2044414225158635528?s=20  

When calm words don't work, many parents feel stuck as their child escalates despite every effort to stay calm. This episode explains what the nervous system is signaling and how to respond effectively. Featuring insights from Dr. Roseann Capanna-Hodge, a leading expert in Regulation First Parenting™ and emotional dysregulation in children. If you've ever felt like your efforts aren't landing, you're not alone. Many parents are doing everything “right” while their child still struggles. The answer isn't more words—it's understanding the nervous system and meeting your child where they are.In this episode, I share why calm communication sometimes fails, what's happening in the brain during escalation, and a simple, practical strategy to help both you and your child regulate in real time.Why are my calm words not working when my child is upset?When your child is in an anxiety response, their nervous system has shifted into survival mode. In that state, the sympathetic nervous system takes over, and the thinking brain essentially goes offline.That means:Reasoning, listening, and problem-solving are not accessibleYour child may seem like they “can't hear you”Calm phrases like “use your words” or “take a breath” may not landReal-Life Example: A child mid-meltdown after school may appear defiant, but in reality, their brain is overwhelmed by stress and sensory input, making communication difficult.Key takeaways:Behavior is communication.The brain must feel safe before it can process language.Calm words alone aren't enough when the nervous system is dysregulated.Support your child's regulation with tools like Quick CALM, a simple way to help reset the nervous system in real time.What is happening in my child's brain during meltdowns?During intense emotional moments, the brain prioritizes survival over thinking. This creates an anxiety response where fight, flight, or freeze takes over.What this looks like in real life:Racing thoughts or negative thoughtsIncreased energy, yelling, or shutting downFeeling mentally drained or stuckReduced ability to access coping skillsWhen the system is overwhelmed, your child isn't choosing to ignore you—they simply can't access the skills you're asking for.Key takeaways:The brain needs regulation first before learning can happen.Stress, pressure, and overload reduce access to healthy coping strategies.This is not bad behavior—it's a dysregulated system in need of support.Yelling less and staying calm isn't about being perfect—it's about having the right tools.Join the Dysregulation Insider VIP list and get your FREE Regulation Rescue Kit, designed to help you handle oppositional behaviors without losing it.Download it now at www.drroseann.com/newsletter What should I do instead of repeating calm phrases?Instead of trying to talk your child out of dysregulation, the goal is to regulate first, then connect. One powerful tool shared in this episode is the “love pause.”This involves:Pausing before reactingTaking a deep breath to reset your own systemGiving space (even 3 seconds can matter)Responding from a calmer stateReal-Life Example: A parent notices their child escalating and chooses to pause, breathe, and quietly say, “I'm here. Let's slow down together,” instead of escalating the situation.Key takeaways:Your nervous system influences your child'sDeep breathing exercises can help regulate both of youSmall pauses create space for connection and safetyCalm energy is more powerful than calm words aloneWhy does my child seem more overwhelmed despite my efforts?Sometimes, even with the right intentions, increased interaction can unintentionally add more pressure. When a child is already overwhelmed, additional speaking, correcting, or explaining may increase stimulation.This can lead to:Feeling stuck or emotionally floodedIncreased sensory input overloadMore resistance or shutdownHeightened anxiety or frustrationKey takeaways:Less talking, more regulatingSupport the body before the conversationRecognize when your child needs space instead of instructionHow can I support my child's nervous system in daily life?Supporting regulation is about consistent, small practices that build safety over time. These micro steps can include:Practicing deep breathing togetherCreating predictable routines for sleep and transitionsEncouraging sensory breaks or movementModeling calm responses during stressOver time, these strategies help build resilience and improve emotional regulation.Key takeaways:Regulation is a practice, not a quick fixSmall, consistent actions create meaningful changeHope grows when the brain and body feel supported

Is Vibe Coding dying already? Or, is will it be as essential to the next decade of work as the browser was for the past 20 years? And how can your company balance the speed and innovation side of vibe coding without accidentally leaking data or building a product that breaks more often than it works? We'll break down the basics on this Start Here Series deep(ish) dive into Vibe Coding. The Vibe Coding Boom: Why Vibe Coding isn't Going Away and How it's Both Good and Bad -- An Everyday AI Chat with Jordan WilsonNewsletter: Sign up for our free daily newsletterMore on this Episode: Episode PageJoin the discussion on LinkedIn: Thoughts on this? Join the convo on LinkedIn and connect with other AI leaders.Upcoming Episodes: Check out the upcoming Everyday AI Livestream lineupWebsite: YourEverydayAI.comEmail The Show: info@youreverydayai.comConnect with Jordan on LinkedInTopics Covered in This Episode:Google Gemma 4 Open Source LaunchGemma 4's Apache 2.0 Licensing ExplainedGemma 4 Model Variants & Hardware RequirementsSmall Language Models vs. Large Model PerformanceBenchmarking Gemma 4 Against Top AI ModelsLocal AI Model Deployment Benefits & PrivacyHands-on Guide: Running Gemma 4 LocallyLive Performance Test: Coding, Reasoning & LogicInstruction Following and Creative Output DemoFuture Impact: Open Source AI for BusinessesTimestamps:00:00 Gemma 4 release and features05:13 Free AI models with GEMMA 406:39 Gemma's groundbreaking AI performance10:26 Running AI models on MacBooks14:32 Comparing model size and performance16:48 Local AI benefits and privacy22:11 Comparing AI models hands-on25:01 AI solves river crossing puzzle27:13 Fun trick question example32:26 Brainstorming creative marketing strategies35:48 Uploading files for transcript analysis38:16 Comparing AI models for tone and style40:12 Running AI locally on your deviceKeywords: Google Gemma 4, Gemma four, open source AI model, local AI model, Apache 2.0 license, AI on local machine, run AI offline, mixture of experts, 31B parameter model,Send Everyday AI and Jordan a text message. (We can't reply back unless you leave contact info) Start Here ▶️Not sure where to start when it comes to AI? Start with our Start Here Series. You can listen to the first drop -- Episode 691 -- or get free access to our Inner Cricle community and all episodes: StartHereSeries.com Also, here's a link to the entire series on a Spotify playlist.