Podcasts about Seoul

Steve McKinney spent the first thirteen years of his career in the athletic footwear industry, where he oversaw a five thousand person Reebok factory producing 1.2 million pairs of shoes a month and later led global product development for Adidas. In 2001 he founded McKinney Consulting in Seoul, South Korea, an executive search and leadership consulting firm. Steve is a master coach and an early graduate of proactive agility as a leadership philosophy, shaped by decades of building teams across cultures. Bryan McKinney grew up between the United States and South Korea, attending international schools in Busan and Seoul before working in California with one of the first live streaming technology companies in the world. He returned to join his father at McKinney Consulting, where he has spent the past nine years building out the firm's technology, coaching, and executive search practice. Bryan is a master coach and is positioned to lead the firm's next generation of growth. McKinney Consulting is a partner firm within Kestria, a global executive search organization. What You Will Learn How proactive agility differs from reactive leadership and why anticipating change beats waiting for it. Why cross-cultural competence matters for every leader, not just expatriates, especially in a world of remote teams working across time zones. How Steve and Bryan built McKinney Consulting into a trusted executive search and coaching practice inside a global partner network. Why frontline expertise often outweighs formal title when making high-stakes business decisions. What the most successful executives and coaching clients tend to have in common. How the workforce transitions driven by retiring generations are reshaping recruiting across industries. Episode Highlights Steve and Bryan McKinney share their career paths, from athletic footwear manufacturing and global product development to founding and growing McKinney Consulting. A discussion of the generational talent gap facing industries such as farming and manufacturing as experienced workers retire. Steve reflects on witnessing South Korea's transition from dictatorship to democracy and how McKinney Consulting operates as both a local and global executive search partner through the Kestria network. Steve explains proactive agility, a leadership philosophy shaped by his path from a career in music to athletic footwear leadership to executive search, and why anticipating change matters more than reacting to it. The story behind their book project on cross-cultural leadership, which grew out of research the two originally intended for a coaching program called Success Factors. Steve tells the story of consulting a factory line worker in a multi-million dollar production decision, illustrating how expertise and respect should outweigh title and hierarchy. Bryan and Michael discuss how bringing frontline experts into high-stakes decisions applies well beyond manufacturing, including in healthcare policy design. Bryan's advice for leading across cultures: seek out local experts, stay humble, and keep asking questions. Closing thoughts on why understanding cultural differences builds stronger organizations and a richer world. Guest Contact Information Website: https://McKinneyConsulting.com Next Steps If this conversation resonated with you, visit https://www.breakfastleadership.com/leadershipos to schedule your Leadership Diagnostic and find out where your organization's leadership operating system needs the most attention.

Tourist brochures rarely tell the whole story. In this Tourist Season replay, Joe and Shawn revisit one of the podcast's most popular travel episodes, uncovering the wars, massacres, murders, ghost stories, and redevelopment controversies hidden behind some of Korea's best-known tourist destinations. Topics Discussed Tourist Season summer replay series Why famous destinations deserve deeper historical context Incheon and the Battle of Incheon during the Korean War The 2017 Incheon child murder case Jeju Island and the Bukchon Massacre The Jeju Uprising Bukchon Hanok Village and developer Jeong Se-gwon Ghost legends surrounding Bukchon Ikseon-dong before it became Seoul's trendiest neighborhood Operation Butterfly and Seoul's former red-light district Gentrification and commercialization of Ikseon-dong The anonymous donor of Jeonju's Tree of Hope The restoration of Cheonggyecheon and its impact on merchants Listener mail: Why do Korean hikers wear bells? Timestamps 00:00 Tourist Season introduction 02:30 Horror movie watch parties and summer updates 10:15 Why every tourist site has a darker history 13:30 Incheon and the Korean War 24:00 The 2017 Incheon child murder 37:45 Jeju's Bukchon Massacre 50:00 Bukchon Hanok Village beyond the postcards 1:02:00 Ikseon-dong before the cafés 1:22:00 Jeonju's anonymous Christmas donor 1:33:30 Cheonggyecheon before restoration 1:50:00 Listener mail: Korean hiking bells Mentioned During the Episode Incheon Wolmido Jeju Island Bukchon Bukchon Hanok Village Ikseon-dong Cheonggyecheon Jeonju Jeong Se-gwon Lee Myung-bak Operation Butterfly The Dark Side of Seoul Ghost Walk Follow The Dark Side of Seoul Website https://darksideofseoul.com Patreon https://patreon.com/darksideofseoul Instagram https://instagram.com/darksideofseoul Facebook https://facebook.com/darksideofseoul YouTube https://youtube.com/@darksideofseoul About The Dark Side of Seoul The Dark Side of Seoul explores Korea's hidden history, true crime, folklore, ghost stories, urban legends, disasters, political scandals, and the strange corners of Korean culture that rarely make it into guidebooks. Hosted by long-time Korea residents Joe McPherson and Shawn Morrissey, the show blends historical research, cultural analysis, and firsthand experience to examine the people, events, beliefs, and mysteries that have shaped the Korean peninsula. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Almost a third of all the food available to us is thrown away. In Hong Kong alone, 3,300 tonnes go to landfill every single day, nearly a third of everything the city bins. And most of it is perfectly good. Bakeries bake for the last customer who might walk in, hotels lay out a full buffet until closing, so ten to fifteen percent of what they make is surplus by design.In this episode we speak with Louis-Alban Batard-Dupré and Mahima Rajangam Natarajan, an HEC Paris graduate who spent a decade scaling tech companies across Europe, the US and Southeast Asia, and a growth marketer who built customer acquisition at Lazada and Eatigo.Yindii is Asia's surplus food marketplace. Shops list what they haven't sold as a "surprise bag" at 50 to 70% off, you reserve it in the app, and collect it in the last hour before closing. The merchant recovers money on food that was heading for the bin, pays nothing to join, and Yindii only earns a commission when a bag actually sells. For the customer it is the cheapest good food in the city, plus a small thrill: you don't know what's inside until you open it.1.1 million meals rescued so far across Bangkok, Hong Kong and Singapore, with Seoul launching. More than 1,000 merchant partners including Pret A Manger, Paul, Marriott, Accor and Circle K. Revenue has tripled three years running, and the company turned profitable in 2025.Their vision: to become the platform Asia's food businesses run all their surplus through, from the bakery on the corner to the warehouses upstream.Hosted by Maaike Doyer & Hester Spiegel, founders of Epic Angels.

Mit Diakon Dr. Edgar Krumpen, dem Seelsorger der deutschsprachigen Katholiken in Südkorea Südkorea rückt in den Mittelpunkt der Weltkirche: In gut einem Jahr findet in Seoul der Weltjugendtag 2027 statt. Eine Million junge Katholiken aus aller Welt werden erwartet. Doch wie bereitet sich die Kirche vor Ort auf dieses Großereignis vor? Was erwartet die Pilger? Und was macht die katholische Kirche in Südkorea heute aus? Darüber spricht Volker Niggewöhner mit Diakon Dr. Edgar Krumpen, dem Seelsorger der deutschsprachigen Katholiken in Südkorea.

This week we're excited to present a conversation from the 2026 edition of the New York Asian Film Festival with Train to Busan director Yeon Sang-ho on the tenth anniversary of the film's release, presented on this particular evening in a new 4K restoration. Ten years later, Train to Busan is still a monster with an angry engine. Yeon Sang-ho's breakout transforms a zombie outbreak aboard the KTX into one of the great modern action-horror rides: brutal, sentimental, and made for packed movie theaters. Gong Yoo plays a self-absorbed, divorced fund manager taking his young daughter to Busan for her birthday. Before they leave Seoul, the outbreak reaches the station, a bitten passenger makes it onto the train, and the trip becomes a car-by-car fight for survival, with fear spreading almost as fast as the virus. Ma Dong-seok became an international fan favorite here as the passenger everyone wanted on their side.

How BTS concerts in Paris are inspiring fans to book advanced skin rejuvenation trips to Seoul. We explore the 'glass skin' phenomenon, Korea's 2-million medical tourist milestone, and the stem-cell therapies that are turning K-beauty fandom into a transformative travel experience. Lydian Cosmetic Surgery Clinic City: Seoul Address: 836 Nonhyeon-ro, Sinsa-dong, Gangnam Website: https://www.lydianclinic.com/

Renuvion tightens skin from beneath using helium plasma and radiofrequency, while Morpheus8 works from the surface with microneedling. Learn which non-surgical facelift fits your anatomy, budget, and downtime - and why Seoul leads the aesthetic innovation race. Lydian Cosmetic Surgery Clinic City: Seoul Address: 836 Nonhyeon-ro, Sinsa-dong, Gangnam Website: https://www.lydianclinic.com/

Sarah and I are still at it for the 30th edition of the Fantasia International Film Festival in Montreal. Healing is pain, as Sarah keeps reminding me, but we're still getting out to movies. On July 29th we actually split up because two interesting films were screening at the same time. Sarah decided to go full intellectual and catch the documentary. I went for the zombies-in-a-mall option. Both were worth talking about. First up is Colony, the latest from Yeon Sang-ho (Train to Busan). A bioterrorist unleashes a fungal-style zombie virus inside a big Seoul office-mall complex that gets locked down. The infected have a hive mind and keep evolving, which gives the usual siege setup some fresh wrinkles. Gianna Jun plays a sharp professor who's basically the Ripley of the piece — competent, figuring things out on the fly, holding it together. It's action-packed, loaded with practical effects, and looks more expensive than it likely was. At just over two hours it does throw in a few extra speed bumps that maybe weren't needed, but if you like high-octane zombie movies in the 28 Days Later vein, this is an easy recommendation. Sarah, meanwhile, saw Black Zombie, a Canadian-Haitian co-production documentary about the actual origins of the zombie. It starts with Haitian voodoo culture and the plantation history, then tracks how the concept mutated through early cinema (White Zombie), Romero, and into the modern biochemical versions we know today. It also digs into how Western pop culture has pretty thoroughly misrepresented and vilified voodoo along the way. Slash from Guns N' Roses even shows up as one of the talking heads. Educational, well-made, and especially interesting if you've ever wondered why “zombie” can mean so many different things depending on the movie. Bilingual and an easy watch for anyone who likes docs about horror genres. Two very different films about zombies, both solid. We'll keep going as long as the festival (and Sarah's leg) allows. Go see some Fantasia. The Fantasia International Film Festival runs from July 16th to August 2nd 2026 at Concordia University. The song during our intro and outro is “Until I Sleep” by Henry Homesweet and is licensed under a Attribution 2.0 UK: England License. The post 9to5.cc Goes to Fantasia: Colony & Black Zombie appeared first on 9to5 (dot cc).

BTS's ARIRANG tour hits Chicago in 2026, but fans aren't only planning concerts—they're booking stem cell facials and regenerative treatments in Seoul. With Korea's medical tourism boom and ARMY's travel habits colliding, we unpack why Chicagoans are flying halfway around the world for a glow-up. Lydian Cosmetic Surgery Clinic City: Seoul Address: 836 Nonhyeon-ro, Sinsa-dong, Gangnam Website: https://www.lydianclinic.com/

The countdown to LA28 has officially begun, and there's no better way to kick it off than looking back at the gymnast who made history in Seoul. Three-time gold medalist Daniela Silivas joins Dance Dad with John Corella to explain how ballet training shaped her gymnastics long before LA28 was even a headline.   Daniela grew up training in communist-era Romania, where her first year of gymnastics consisted entirely of ballet, flexibility, and strength training, seven days a week. She breaks down how gymnasts use dance training to build the control that shows up later on beam and floor, the same foundation today's LA28 hopefuls are building, whether they realize it or not.   She also revisits her floor performances at the 1987 World Championships, where she earned three perfect 10s across the competition, and the story behind the skill now known as the Silivaș mount on balance beam. That routine helped carry her to Seoul, where she medaled on every event and became one of the most decorated gymnasts in Olympic history.   As the world turns its attention to LA28, Daniela's story is a reminder of what it takes to get there. Listen to the full episode to hear how a ballet training that began when she was five years old in Romania turned into three Olympic gold medals, and why the fundamentals still matter more than the flash.   Episode Breakdown: 00:00 Meet Three-Time Gold Medalist Daniela Silivas 02:24 Winning World Championship Gold As A Team 06:51 Inside The Legendary 1987 Romanian Team 10:59 Why Ballet Comes Before Gymnastics In Romania 16:24 Performing Compulsory Routines For Judges And Crowds 20:27 Throwing A New Skill At The Olympics 27:33 Falling In Love With Gymnastics At Five 33:44 Turning Nerves Into Confidence On Beam 38:14 Coaching The Next Generation Of Gymnasts 47:44 Creating The Silivas' Mount On Beam   Connect with John Corella: Follow Dance Dad with John Corella on Instagram Follow John on Instagram Join Dance Dad with John Corella on Patreon Visit John Corella's website Podcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm

@PermissionToStanPodcast on Instagram (DM us & Join Our Broadcast Channel!), TikTok & YouTube!NEW Podcast Episodes every THURSDAY! Please support us by Favoriting, Following, Subscribing, & Sharing for more KPOP talk!KCON MEOVV Giveaway by JOCO!Comebacks: ATEEZ, P1HARMONY, UNIS, DINO (SEVENTEEN), RED VELVET, TWS, KISS OF LIFE, ME:I, STRAY KIDS, ARTMS, WAYV, KIIIKIII, HEARTS2HEARTSMVs: KARD, AESPA, ILLIT, KATSEYE, JENNIEK-POP's version of Coachella (but even bigger & crazier coming to Seoul)?!LOLLAPALOOZA K-Pop line upHead in the Clouds festival: JOCO giving KIIIKIII freebiesMEOVV covers BTS "Dynamite"JYP calls himself JYPAPI in new song (the joke is ruined now)List of most streamed K-Pop 5th Generation songs released in 2026 on SpotifyLNGSHOT RYUL & LOUIS crack open Pokemon Card packsNEWJEANS filmed literally 3 minutes away from us?!EPIK HIGH upcoming interview with cast of Spiderman & CORTISBTS announces they will not submit their music for 2027 Grammy Awards considerationJUNGKOOK & BANGCHAN / FELIX multistan crumbs at STRAY KIDS concertJUNGKOOK playing Meccha ChameleonSTRAY KIDS celebrating STAY week for 8th anniversarySTRAY KIDS announces new compilation album Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

NK News Correspondent Joon Ha Park joins this week's podcast to discuss Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's claim that Russia has requested another 30,000 North Korean troops for its war against Ukraine. He explains how realistic a deployment of that size would be, why Russia may be preparing facilities in the Voronezh region and whether DPRK personnel are more likely to serve in logistics, reconstruction and rear-area security than in direct frontline combat. The conversation then turns to South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young's declaration that Seoul is shifting from a “denuclearization first” approach to a “peace first” strategy. Joon Ha breaks down why experts view the announcement as a change in sequencing rather than a fundamental policy reversal, and why North Korea currently has little incentive to respond. In the second half of the episode, he looks back at the 1953 Korean War Armistice Agreement and explains why South Korea was not among its signatories, how the ceremonies at Panmunjom and Munsan unfolded and why Seoul's absence still affects peace diplomacy today. He also recounts the remarkable life of Choe Tok Sin, the South Korean general known as the “Hero of Panmunjom” who later served as foreign minister, fell out with Park Chung-hee and defected to North Korea.  About the podcast: The North Korea News Podcast is a weekly podcast hosted by Alannah Hill exclusively for NK News, covering all things DPRK — from news to extended interviews with leading experts and analysts in the field, along with insight from our very own journalists.

$0 -> $100M ARR. How Gamma Scaled Quickly without a Sales Team 100 million in ARR. A team of 50. Zero sales reps. Grant Lee, Co-founder and CEO of Gamma, shares the exact playbook behind one of the most capital-efficient growth stories in SaaS - from pitching investors out of a London kitchenette to going viral with a single tweet that got Paul Graham throwing shade. In this session, Grant breaks down four lessons: 1. Product-market fit isn't a checkbox. After winning Product of the Day on Product Hunt and watching signups plateau, Gamma went back to the drawing board. They gave themselves three months to make the first 30 seconds of the product feel magical - and word of mouth did the rest (5K signups/day, then 10K, then 50K, zero marketing spend). 2. Creator marketing only works if you've done it yourself. Grant went through "Cringe Valley" to understand what creators actually need - then used that to manually onboard every creator partner and build something that felt authentic, not transactional. 3. Community-led growth is literal. At 50M users, Gamma flew power users to SF, visited customers in Seoul, London, and São Paulo, and created a Gambassador Slack where early feedback shapes the product roadmap. Your users are not a faceless entity. 4. Dogfooding the future builds conviction. How Gamma killed their virtual office idea after six months and went all-in on presentations - and why testing your own product is the fastest path to knowing what to build next. If you're building a product-led company and wondering whether to invest in marketing or go back to the product - watch this first.

CONTENT WARNING: PREGNANCY LOSSEpisode Summary: In this week's episode of your favorite Korean Adoptee podcast, the Janchi Boys sit down and talk about birth mothers, Korea's truth and reconciliation and how family separation continues to shape us. Heads up, it's kind of a heavy one.Read the article that inspired the conversation---// Support the Show!Online at janchishow.com / @janchishowSupport the show at janchishow.com/supportWatch our Youtube VideosWrite us a note: janchishow@gmail.comThe Janchi Show Quick BioThe Janchi Show focuses on exploring intersectional identities and current events through the lens of adoption, race, lived experience and more. Sometimes we have guests, and sometimes it's just the three of us. Either way, it's always a janchi!// Meet the Janchi Boys!Nathan NowackNathan (he/him) is a transracial Korean American adoptee who was born in Seoul in the 1970s. He was adopted at the age of 5 months old and raised in a small town in Oklahoma along with a non-biological Korean adopted sister.  After going to college in Colorado he later moved to Los Angeles to pursue a digital media career and eventually started 2 photography companies.  He loves spending time with his wife and 3 kids, playing golf, and collecting Lego. He is in reunion with his biological family as the youngest of 7 and has been in contact since 2015.  He currently serves on the Advisory Council for KAAN and helps with the planning of their annual adoptee conference.  In 2021, Nathan and his family moved back to Colorado to be closer to family and start a new chapter in their lives.  Connect with Nathan!Website: http://www.coverve.comInstagram: http://instagram.com/nnowackPatrick ArmstrongPatrick Armstrong (he/him) is a transracial Korean American adoptee, podcaster, speaker, and community facilitator. He is one of the hosts of the Janchi Show, a podcast that explores and celebrates the experiences and stories of Korean adoptees everywhere. He also is host of Conversation Piece with Patrick Armstrong, a podcast where he discusses the missing pieces of the conversations we're already having. He is a cofounder of the Asian Adoptees of Indiana, a group dedicated to creating a safe, engaging community for all Asian adoptees who need it. He is currently based in Indianapolis with his wife and cat. Connect with Patrick!Website: http://patrickintheworld.meLinkedIn: http://linkedin/in/patrickintheworldInstagram: http://instagram.com/patrickintheworldK.J. Roelke (@kjroelke)KJ (he/him) was adopted from Daegu and raised in Dallas, Texas with his two biological, older siblings and his younger sister, adopted from Russia. After spending a decade in the Midwest for college and career, he and his wife are back in Dallas and living large! He has been on his journey of discovery since 2015 and spends his days as a web developer for the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.Connect with K.J.!Website: https://kjroelke.online/LinkedIn: https://linkedin/in/kjroelkeInstagram: https://instagram.com/kjroelke// Listen to/Watch The Janchi Show on all major platforms:Apple: http://janchishow.com/appleSpotify: http://janchishow.com/spotifyYoutube: http://janchishow.com/youtubeGratitude & CreditsMichelle Nam for our logo and brandingJerry Won for bring us togetherThis show is created and produced by Patrick, Nathan and KJ and is the sole property of the Janchi Show, LLC.

Allt fler oinbjudna besökare tar sig in i våra hem. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radios app. Skadedjur har alltid krupit vid människans sida. Forskare tror att de blodtörstiga vägglössen fanns redan i stenålderns grottboningar. Genom historien har olika typer av ohyra inte bara gett oss kliande bett och förstört våra matförråd, utan också orsakat några av mänsklighetens mest förödande sjukdomsepidemier.Under några decennier på 1900-talet, när en rad nya och kraftfulla bekämpningsmedel gjorde entré, såg det ut som att människan äntligen höll på att vinna den tusenåriga kampen mot krypen.Men segervittringen blev kortvarig. Skadedjuren är tillbaka. De blir fler, de sprider sig till nya platser – och de har blivit allt svårare att bekämpa.Programledare och producent: Anna Lillkung och Wendela AntepohlOrdlistaVektor – en organism, till exempel en råtta eller en kackerlacka, som för över smittämnen mellan varelser.Patogen – ett sjukdomsframkallande smittämne, till exempel ett virus eller en bakterie.Mikrob – en organism som är så liten att den inte syns med blotta ögat, till exempel ett virus eller en bakterie.Resistens – en organisms förmåga att stå emot yttre påfrestningar, till exempel en bakterie som utvecklat motståndskraft mot en eller flera typer av antibiotika.KällförteckningMedverkandeThomas Persson Vinnersten – Biolog och entomolog på AnticimexLisa Sarasohn – Historiker och författare till Getting Under Our Skin: The Cultural and Social History of VerminBobby Corrigan – Skadedjursbiolog med fokus på gnagareÅke Lundkvist – Professor i virologi vid Uppsala universitetTuomas Aivelo – Assisterande professor i biodiversitet och samhälle vid Leiden University i Nederländerna och grundare till Helsinki Urban Rat ProjectJose Pietri – Docent i mikrobiologi och entomologi vid Purdue UniversityBöckerGetting Under Our Skin: The Cultural and Social History of Vermin (Lisa T. Sarasohn, 2021)Rats : A Year With New York's Most Unwanted Inhabitants (Robert Sullivan, 2004)Plagues, Poisons, and Dead Rats: A Multispecies History (Lucinda Cole, ur boken The Palgrave Handbook of Animals and Literature, 2020)Never Home Alone (Rob Dunn, 2020)Artiklar/källor i urvalSkadedjur i byggnader – en kunskapssammanställning (Malmö universitet på uppdrag av Boverket, 2025)Challenges in current pest management practices: Navigating problems and a way forward by integrating controlled release system approach (Singh et al., Chemical Engineering Journal, 2024)How pest control has changed in 100 years (Rentokil, 2025)Studie: Myror lika bra som gifter mot skadedjur (SvD, 2022)“They're always there”: resident experiences of living with rats in a disadvantaged urban neighbourhood (BMC Public Health, 2019)Increasing rat numbers in cities are linked to climate warming, urbanization, and human population (Science Advances, 2025)Reconsidering the “War on Rats”: What We Know From Over a Century of Research Into Municipal Rat Management (Corrigan, Himsworth, Byers, m.fl, Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 2022)Surveillance of Emerging Rodent-Borne Pathogens in Wastewater in Taiwan: A One Health Approach (Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease, 2024)Bedbugs Could Be More Horrifying Than You Think. They might be capable of spreading disease, recent research shows. (The Atlantic, 2024)Anticoagulant rodenticides and resistance development in rodent pest species – A comprehensive review (Journal of Stored Products Research, 2020)Public Health Significance of Urban Pests (World Health Organization, 2008)Rodenticide Toxicity (StatPearls Publishing, 2026)Increasing rat numbers in cities are linked to climate warming, urbanization, and human population (ScienceAdvances, 2025)Public and media interest in bed bugs – Europe 2023 (Current Research in Insect Science, 2024)Large-scale structure of brown rat (Rattus norvegicus) populations in England: effects on rodenticide resistance (PeerJ, 2015)”Hysterisk” ökning av klädesmal (Sveriges Radio, 2015)Second hand–trend bidrar till att fler har problem med pälsmal i hemmen: ”Var extra noga om du köper möbler” (Smålandsposten, 2023)De äter på mattor och kläder – så blir du av med klädmal (Göteborgs-Posten, 2024)Revenge of the clothes moths: as numbers boom, can they be stopped? (The Guardian, 2019)High prevalence of hepatitis E and rat hepatitis E viruses in wastewater in Gothenburg, Sweden (One Health, 2024)Lessons learned from bat and rodent reservoir hosts of zoonotic viruses (Trends in microbiology, 2026)Human ectoparasites and the spread of plague in Europe during the Second Pandemic (Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2018)Yersinia pestis: the Natural History of Plague (Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 2020)Disruption of the microbiota affects physiological and evolutionary aspects of insecticide resistance in the German cockroach, an important urban pest (PloS one, 2018)Case not closed: arguments for new studies of the interactions between bed bugs and human pathogens (The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 2020)Microbiome differences between human head and body lice ecotypes revealed by 16S RRNA gene amplicon sequencing (The Journal of Parasitology, 2020)Do bed bugs transmit human viruses, or do humans spread bed bugs and their viruses? A worldwide survey of the bed bug RNA virosphere (Virus Research, 2024)Competence of Cimex lectularius Bed Bugs for the Transmission of Bartonella quintana, the Agent of Trench Fever (PLoS Negl Trop Dis., 2015)Ratmageddon: Why rats are overrunning our cities (BBC, 2025)‘Perfect rat storm': urban rodent numbers soar as the climate heats, study finds (The Guardian, 2025)Global population divergence and admixture of the brown rat (Rattus norvegicus) (Biological Sciences, 2016)Highly Pathogenic Leptospira Found in Urban Brown Rats (Rattus norvegicus) in the Largest Cities of Sweden. (Vector Borne and Zoonotic Disease, 2015)First evidence of Seoul hantavirus in the wild rat population in the Netherlands (Infection Ecology & Epidemiology, 2015)Pet rat harbouring Seoul hantavirus in Sweden (Eurosurveillence, 2013)Seoul Hantavirus Frequently Asked Questions (Wisconsin department of health services)Leptospira Status in Sweden during the Past Century, Neglected and Re-Emerging? (Microorganisms, 2023)Bed bug infestations: prevalence, correlates, and cross-sectional association with psychological symptoms in a large sample of tenants in Montreal, Canada (BMC Public Health, 2025)Anticimex: Trendbrott för vägglöss – 19 procent fler saneringar 2025 (Anticimex, 2026)Rats infest Gaza's tent camps, biting children and spreading disease (Reuters, 2026)Reconsidering the “War on Rats”: What We Know From Over a Century of Research Into Municipal Rat Management (Frontiers in ecology and evolution, 2022)Cockroaches as urban pests: Challenges, public health implications, and management strategies (One Health, 2026)HURP: Helsinki Urban Rat ProjectHow did the cruise ship hantavirus outbreak start? Scientists are investigating new scenarios (Science, 2026)A timeline of the hantavirus outbreak on cruise ship (AP, 2026)Hantavirus outbreak linked to cruise ship travel, Multi-locations (World Health Organization, 2026)Sjukdomsinformation om hantavirusinfektion (Folkhälsomyndigheten)Mjölbaggar erövrar studentboendet: ”Inte mitt hem längre” (SVT, 2025)Silent Carriers: The Role of Rodents in the Emergence of Zoonotic Bacterial Threats (Pathogens, 2025)8 av 10 stockholmare har sett råttor (Anticimex, 2019)Silverfiskar vanligast men inte så farliga (Hem & Hyra, 2017)MusikGeoff Barrow, Ben Salisbury – Dream RealityCristobal Tapia De Veer – Pain SpeedballKid Loco – Theme from the Graffiti ArtistMarcus Bagalà – Duco in Mara's RoomCliff Martinez – I'm in the PinkMarcus Bagalà – Frets: Problem, After ProblemMartin D Fowler – 1 Ships VIIRamin Djawadi – Winter is ComingAlberto Iglesias – TreasureCliff Martinez – Save Some For UsJocelyn Pook – Driving to PrisonCliff Martinez – I'm SickAlice Cooper – PoisonCliff Martinez – Placental RepairJessica Dannheisser, Adele Roberts – Parade of the GeeseCliff Martinez – Speight Lived HereOchre – Midsummer Nice DreamMarcus Bagalà – Wires: WinchimesMichael Andrews – Peter and SylvieK2 – Bexar BexarCliff Martinez – Navy FuneralMike Patton – Murder is WorkMartin D Fowler – 1 Ships XIITrent Reznor, Atticus Ross – Empty Places (Reprise)Cliff Martinez – Same SweatpantsCristobal Tapia De Veer – The PublicJeff Beal – I think I Smell GasTrentemöller – Take Me Into Your SkinTrent Reznor, Atticus Ross – Clue OneKyle Dixon, Michael Stein – ElevenStar Hopper – Through the HeliopausePaul Leonard-Morgan – Anderson's ThemeMartin D Fowler – 1 Ships IIIJon Brion – You LearnThe Mariachis – La Cucaracha

Seoul has been designated and developed as a global financial hub, continuously refining its legal, regulatory, and physical infrastructure to attract international capital and talent. To share the latest progress and future directions of these initiatives, the Seoul Metropolitan Government, in collaboration with the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), is hosting this special webinar. The discussion will cover the critical policy and institutional frameworks reshaping Seoul's financial landscape.The first session will cover Fn Hub Korea's establishment background, objectives, and collaboration framework with related institutions. It will then take a closer look at how Fn Hub Korea promotes Korea as a financial hub and assists foreign financial companies in entering and operating in the Korean market. The second session will focus on the Seoul Metropolitan Government's proactive financial policies, specifically showcasing foreign investment incentives and infrastructure support designed to accelerate fintech growth.We kindly invite you to join this dialogue, connect with international professionals, and explore Seoul's evolving role and future opportunities within the global financial landscape.

Neue Menschen kennenlernen, andere Kulturen entdecken und den Glauben gemeinsam mit Jugendlichen aus aller Welt erleben: Der Weltjugendtag ist weit mehr als eine Reise. 2027 führt er nach Seoul in Südkorea. Die Diözese Eichstätt lädt junge Erwachsene ein, dabei zu sein. Bernhard Löhlein berichtet.

Get a $200 gift card after your first payment of $500 with Melio (affiliate) - https://milestomemories.com/go/melio/ Get 3 free months of Audible - https://milestomemories.com/audible-subscription-offer-2/ Bilt responded to the pricing problem we covered last week, and Richard Kerr reached out directly about the resort fee disclosure issue on their travel portal. There is a toggle that shows all in pricing, but it is buried where almost nobody will find it, and we make the case it belongs right on the initial search screen. Mark also found something stranger, the same hotel priced 10 to 15 dollars differently between his account and his wife's, which opens a real conversation about personalized pricing in the age of AI. On the hotel side, Hilton charged him roughly $280 a night for rooms he booked entirely on points, a good reminder to always check your folio before you leave. Then we get into whether premium economy is good enough for a 13 hour flight home from Seoul, why the footrest works great if you are short and terribly if you are tall, and how the snobbery in this hobby has quietly faded as award space has dried up. Plus Mark's 75,000 point Aeroplan booking to see Wrexham, the transfer bonuses ending this month, and the Virgin points to AMC popcorn trick that finally wore Shawn down. Let us know in the comments whether you would take the nonstop in premium economy or connect in business. Episode Guide: 0:00 Welcome to MTM Travel 0:18 Hilton Charged Us for a Points Stay 4:01 Bilt Responds to the Pricing Problem 7:33 We Need a Hotel Pricing Law 10:47 Two Accounts, Two Different Prices 15:29 Is Premium Economy Good Enough? 17:36 The Footrest Problem (If You're Tall) 19:12 The Snobbery Has Faded 22:38 Points as an Emergency Fund 25:41 A 75K Aeroplan Booking to See Wrexham 31:23 Transfer Bonuses Ending This Month 33:07 The Virgin Points Popcorn Hack 35:41 Final Thoughts Links Current transfer bonuses - https://milestomemories.com/current-transfer-bonuses/ ✈️ Track your travel credit cards for free

Seoul Disco Society - DGURU with Cozyhoon 07.28.26 | VISLA FM by VISLA

South Korea's first presidents are often remembered as either heroes or villains. But history is rarely that simple. Historian Jihoon Suk joins Korea Deconstructed to explore the country's first five leaders, the social and cultural times they inhabited, and how their legacies continue to shape Korea today. Jihoon Suk is a historian and PhD candidate at Yonsei University specializing in modern Korean history. His research focuses on Korea's colonial period, particularly how film, radio, and recorded sound shaped Korean culture and ideas of tradition. He has worked with institutions including the Korean Film Archive, the National Museum of Contemporary Korean History, the Seoul Museum of History, and the National Gugak Center. Find Jihoon and his work online Insta: https://www.instagram.com/idea0853 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jihoon.suk.1 This is his second time on the podcast. Find the first conversation here: https://youtu.be/fjIUd-PiMQI?si=Q6cZUu4oictfmlyb Discussion Outline 0:00 Introduction 3:27 Syngman Rhee (이승만) 16:00 Francesca Donner 25:22 Park Chung-hee (박정희) 44:30 Yun Poson (윤보선) 51:20 Government Atrocities 54:30 Sasanggye and Chang Chun-ha 1:06:44 Choi Kyu-ha (최규하) 1:12:33 Chun Doo-hwan (전두환) 1:21:00 Purification of Society (사회정화) 1:25:43 Gwangju (광주) 1:33:50 History Deconstructed A huge thanks to Patreon members: Bhavya, Roxanne Murrell, Sara B Cooper, Anne Brennels, Ell, Johnathan Filbert, Daniela Körppen, Cody Schuman, Christopher Futter, Andreas Wendtland. You are stars!! Join Our Patreon Community Here: https://www.patreon.com/c/user?u=62047873 David A. Tizzard has a PhD in Korean Studies and lectures at Seoul Women's University and Hanyang University. He writes a weekly column in the Korea Times, is a social-cultural commentator, and a musician who has lived in Korea for nearly two decades. He can be reached at datizzard@swu.ac.kr. ▶ David's Insta: @datizzard ▶ KD Insta: @koreadeconstructed These podcasts are recorded live in Seoul. Big thanks to the studio owner and my friend 한정철: https://www.instagram.com/the_story_from_you/ 

On this week's episode of the Korea Pro Podcast, Jeongmin, John and Joon Ha discuss the widening war in the Middle East and what it means for South Korea, from rising oil prices and shipping insurance costs to inflationary pressure on an export-dependent economy. They also break down Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon's conviction for violating the Political Funds Act, including why the ruling could damage his political image even as he remains in office while pursuing an appeal. The episode then turns to South Korea's ongoing trade and industry talks with Washington, as Seoul looks to deepen shipbuilding cooperation while Coupang continues to complicate the broader U.S.-ROK economic conversation. They also discuss the latest cyberattack on the Korea National Diplomatic Academy, after officials said the institution had been compromised for months, exposing the personal data of South Korean diplomats and raising questions about possible North Korean or Chinese involvement. About the podcast: The Korea Pro Podcast is a weekly conversation hosted by Korea Risk Group Executive Director Jeongmin Kim, Managing Editor John Lee and correspondent Joon Ha Park, delivering deep, clear analysis of South Korean politics, diplomacy, security, society and technology for professionals who need more than headlines. Uploaded every Friday. This episode was recorded on Thursday, July 23, 2026. Audio edited by Alannah Hill

In this episode, Casey speaks with photographer, filmmaker, and DePaul University professor James Choi, who returned to Seoul after 46 years away and came back with the images that became Seoul Days and Nights, a new photo book from Trope. They dig into what it means to photograph a city holding ancient tradition and radical modernity in the same frame, the slow disappearance of the small family-run food shops that give neighborhoods their character, and how the Korean social concept of nunchi - the unspoken ability to read a room - shapes James's entire approach to working on the street. In This Episode How a six-month sabbatical in Seoul turned into a photo book Photographing the tension between ancient palaces and glass skyscrapers - and why Seoul makes that contrast feel surprisingly at peace The vanishing mom-and-pop food culture, and what gets lost when it goes What nunchi is, why James's mother always said he had it, and how it cuts both ways as a street photographer The ethical lines James draws on the street - when he holds back and why The one image in the book that reminded him of his grandfather What he hopes a first-time Seoul visitor takes from the book vs. what he hopes a local sees Episode Promos Seoul Days and Nights — https://amzn.to/4xSLRZz StyleCloud website templates for photographers — https://nerdyphotographer.com/recommends/stylecloud | Code: NERDYPHOTO15 for 15% off Luminar Neo photo editing software — https://nerdyphotographer.com/recommends/luminar | Code: NERDYPHOTO for $10 off SiteGround web hosting — https://siteground.com/go/nerdy Support The Nerdy Photographer Sign Up for The Power Up - https://nerdyphotographer.com/newsletter Get some artwork from the print shop - https://art.caseyfphoto.com Buy some Nerdy Photographer Merch - https://nerdyphoto.dashery.com Use our link to buy new gear from Adorama - https://nerdyphotographer.com/recommends/adorama Use our link to buy used gear from KEH - https://nerdyphotographer.com/recommends/keh Follow along with us on social media @thenerdyphoto About My Guest James Choi grew up a latchkey kid in Chicago. His parents immigrated from Korea when he was five and worked six days a week, so from age six and Seven he was alone taking the bus, walking the city, learning to read people and places and light. He didn't know it then, but he was already doing what he'd spend his life doing: observing. Photography and eventually filmmaking came from that. His work has earned Awards at SXSW, Slamdance and Chicago International Film Festival. As an educator, James is also an assistant Professor at DePaul University where he founded Indie Studio, supporting students making their first independent features. Seoul Days and Nights is in some ways a return to the beginning except this time he was walking a city that looked like him. Seoul Days and Nights is available now - you can get it on Amazon - https://amzn.to/3QTxq6R. James Choi can be found on Instagram at https://instagram.com/JCPOV. About The Podcast The Nerdy Photographer Podcast is written and produced by Casey Fatchett. Casey is a professional photographer in the New York City / Northern New Jersey with more than 20 years of experience. He just wants to help people and make them laugh. You can view Casey's wedding work at https://fatchett.com or his non-wedding work at https://caseyfatchettphotography.com    If you have any questions or comments about this episode or any other episodes, OR if you would like to ask a photography related question or have ideas for a topic for a future episode, please reach out to us at https://nerdyphotographer.com/contact  

This week, Jun and Daniel escape the studio for a special 24-hour "vacation" to a modern hanok in Seoul's Seochon neighborhood to record their final wrap-up episodes. With the podcast winding down, the hosts take a moment to reflect on their incredible journey, starting with a recap of their very first in-person listener meetup. Daniel shares his awe at seeing 60 listeners gather at a Korean pub to mingle in an "American-style" standing party, highlighting the beautiful culture clash of the event.The hosts also dive into the lifetime stats of the Korean American Podcast. They reveal they've reached nearly 1 million downloads on Buzzsprout and over 380,000 views on YouTube, with a surprisingly balanced 50/50 male-to-female gender split among their video audience. Jun confesses a secret about his Myers-Briggs personality type and the late-night sacrifices he made to keep the podcast's Instagram Reels growing, while Daniel reflects on why staying true to their "sincere" format was the proudest achievement of their three-year run.As a reminder, we publish our episodes bi-weekly from Seoul, South Korea. We hope you enjoy listening to our conversation, and we're so excited to have you following us on this journey!Support the showWe hope you enjoy listening to our conversation, and we're so excited to have you following us on this journey!Support us on Patreon:https://patreon.com/user?u=99211862Follow us on socials: https://www.instagram.com/koreanamericanpodcast/https://twitter.com/korampodcasthttps://www.tiktok.com/@koreanamericanpodcastQuestions/Comments/Feedback? Email us at: koreanamericanpodcast@gmail.com Member of the iyagi media network (www.iyagimedia.com)

Caitlin Keogh (b. 1982 in Anchorage, Alaska) lives and works in New York. Her work has recently been included in group shows at Fondation Carmignac, Porquerolles, France, and The Church, Sag Harbor, NY. Keogh has been the subject of solo exhibitions at the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston, MA; Melas Papadopoulos, Athens, Greece; and MoMA PS1, Long Island City, NY. In 2021, Keogh completed a mural in the city of Holbaek, Denmark in conjunction with Holbaek Art, and in 2019, she participated in Art Basel Parcours, Basel, Switzerland. Her work has also been exhibited at the Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive, CA; MoMA Warsaw, Poland; the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, NY; Künstlerhaus Bremen, Germany; the Costume Institute at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY; and the Queens Museum, Flushing Meadows, NY. Her work is represented in the collections of the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston; the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York; Amorepacific Museum of Art, Seoul; the Rollins Museum of Art, Winter Park, Florida; and the Rhode Island School of Design Museum, Providence. Caitlin Keogh 07.10.25, 2025 Colored pencil on paper mounted on panel 16 3/8 x 11 5/8 x 3/4 in (41.5 x 29.5 x 2 cm) Caitlin Keogh Beige Matrix, Woman With Opera Glasses, 2026 Acrylic on canvas 72 x 96 in (183 x 244 cm) Caitlin Keogh Ultramarine Matrix, La Fornarina, 2026 Acrylic on panel, postcard 23 1/4 x 13 in (59.1 x 33 cm)

Dr Philip Smith, Digital and Education Editor of Gut and Honorary Consultant Gastroenterologist at the Royal Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, UK interviews Professor Seong Ho Jeong, Assistant professor in the Department of Neurology, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Healthcare System, Yongin-si, and the Department of Neurology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, The Republic of Korea, on the paper "DPP-4 inhibitor alleviates gut-brain axis pathology in Parkinson's disease" published in paper copy in Gut in July 2026 (https://gut.bmj.com/content/75/7/1307).   Please subscribe to the Gut podcast on your favourite platform to get the latest podcast every month. If you enjoy our podcast, you can leave us a review or a comment on Apple Podcasts (https://apple.co/3UOTwqS) or Spotify (https://bit.ly/4rRJeUI).

Good afternoon, I'm _ with today's episode of EZ News. PLA helicopter crosses Taiwan Strait median line The Ministry of National Defense says a Chinese military helicopter was detected crossing the median line of the Taiwan Strait median line on Monday. Officials say the helicopter and a drone were detected between 10:20AM and 7:40PM on Monday. Chieh Chung, a researcher at the Institute for National Defense and Security Research, says he believes it is the first time a Chinese military helicopter has been detected crossing the median line. Chieh says that represents a new form of "gray-zone" operation. Defense officials have not said whether the detected helicopter was a shipborne aircraft (艦載機) or had been dispatched from a nearby Army aviation base along China's coast. Taiwan enters new COVID-19 epidemic phase: CDC Taiwan has officially entered a new COVID-19 epidemic phase after more than 47 hundred people sought treatment for the disease during July 12-18. The Centers for Disease Control says that figure marks a 66.5 percent increase from the previous week. Officials say Taiwan has sufficient supplies of antiviral medications and vaccines to respond to the outbreak. She said the NB.1.8.1 variant has remained the dominant strain in Taiwan for the past four weeks. The most common symptoms include sore throat, cough, nasal congestion (鼻塞) or a runny nose, fever, fatigue, headache and muscle aches. COVID-19 activity is also increasing in China, Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea, Tseng said. Taipei retains** 14th place in global student city rankings** Taipei ranked 14th in the U.K.-based Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) Best Student Cities 2027 rankings. The rankings were based on indicators including university rankings, desirability, affordability, student mix and employer activity. QS noted that Taiwan's ranked cities performed particularly well for affordability (可負擔性), with all placing among the world's top 30. But Taiwan's cities lagged in employer activity, which measures how strongly employers associate a city with producing high-quality graduates. Globally, Seoul topped the 2027 rankings, followed by Tokyo, London and Melbourne. Munich and Sydney tied for fifth, ahead of Paris, Berlin, Vienna and Zurich. US STRIKES IRAN FOR TENTH CONSECUTIVE DAY A 10th straight day of attacks between the United States and Iran across the Middle East has overshadowed (使蒙上陰影) diplomatic efforts in Pakistan to salvage an interim ceasefire deal that collapsed earlier this month. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says the Iran war has cost $37.5 billion, so far. It is now unclear what new arrangement might be reached to end the war… which has turned into a battle for control over the Strait of Hormuz… Ed Donahue reports on the mood from the White House. France social media ban French lawmakers have approved a bill banning children under 15 from using social media. The move makes France the first country in the European Union to pass a blanket ban (全面禁令) on platforms as concerns grow worldwide over the harmful effects of digital content on kids. Both chambers of the Parliament voted Tuesday in favor of the measure, a flagship initiative of French President Emmanuel Macron's second term. The bill also bans the use of mobile phones in high schools. That was the I.C.R.T. EZ News, I'm _. －－－－以下為 SoundOn 動態廣告－－－－ 旅遊優惠別錯過！ 可樂旅遊17瘋搶日，每月限定3天搶限量優惠！ 1號訂房折10% 7號票券折7% 17號機票折1.7% 熱愛自由行的你，肯定要每個月鎖定！ https://sofm.pse.is/9erfwm -- Hosting provided by SoundOn

This week kicks off our summer rerun series, digging up the best tourism episodes from the archive while we take a break from new true crime deep dives. First up: 141, Tourists from Hell. Years of running walking tours and food tours in Seoul means years of collecting the worst behavior tourism has to offer. Hand holders who never read their confirmation emails. Tour-splainers who think they know the history better than the guide telling it. The no-show who ghosted, left a one-star review, then demanded a refund anyway. A hotel concierge (the irony) who wanted a private tour at group rates, only ate at Michelin-level places, and ended the day eating bread from a bakery because nothing else met his standards. Plus, why Joe stopped taking media fixer gigs after some genuinely great experiences with names like Bourdain and Zimmern, and a stack of tourist horror movie recommendations to close things out. If you've ever worked in hospitality, this one's for you. If you've ever been that guest, you might recognize yourself. Topics Discussed Introducing the "Tourist Season" summer replay series The most memorable difficult guests from years of leading tours "Hand holders" who never read booking information Tourists who showed up at the wrong location and demanded refunds Guests who tried to explain Korean history to the guides No-shows and last-minute cancellations Refund requests after missed tours Hecklers and guests with personal agendas The infamous "Touché!" guest Drunk guests and disruptive tour behavior Guests distracted by phones and Pokémon Go Problems unique to hiking tours Food tour horror stories Vegetarians booking Korean BBQ tours The worst guest ever: a hotel concierge with impossible expectations Working as media fixers for international television productions Positive experiences with Anthony Bourdain, Andrew Zimmern, National Geographic, and Milk Street Horror film recommendations for travelers Mentioned During the Episode ZenKimchi Experiences The Dark Side of Seoul Tour Korean BBQ Experience Anthony Bourdain Andrew Zimmern National Geographic Milk Street Listen & Follow Website: https://darksideofseoul.com Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dark-side-of-seoul-podcast/id1504623984 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1lZBXNX79kwH2NXcJWNcb8 Patreon: https://patreon.com/darksideofseoul YouTube: https://youtube.com/@darksideofseoul Instagram: https://instagram.com/darksideofseoul Facebook: https://facebook.com/darksideofseoul Contact: info@darksideofseoul.com About The Dark Side of Seoul The Dark Side of Seoul explores Korea's hidden history, folklore, true crime, urban legends, supernatural traditions, and the overlooked stories that shaped the peninsula. Alongside deep dives into Korea's darker past, the podcast also explores life in modern Korea through travel, culture, and the often hilarious realities of working as professional tour guides. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Jade Lee is an international real estate professional based in Seoul, South Korea, specializing in helping expatriates and overseas investors purchase, sell, and invest in Korean real estate. With a background as a New York attorney, she combines legal knowledge with local market expertise to guide international clients through cross-border real estate transactions.In this episode we discuss what it takes to specialize in serving international real estate clients. Jade shares how understanding different cultures, legal considerations, communication styles, and client expectations can help agents build trust and grow a successful niche serving buyers and investors from around the world.You Can Find Jade @:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jade-lee-679474261/

A sermon preached by Rev. Dr. Yongchi Rhie with Foundry United Methodist Church, July 12, 2026. "Sermon Series Part II: The United Methodist Way". Scripture: Exodus 2:15–22; Hebrews 13:1–2   On a hot July day in 2014, I stood in a long line outside the United States Embassy in Seoul. All around me, people were checking their documents, whispering the latest rumors about American immigration policy. Some were praying. Others were quietly rehearsing their lines. When my number was called, I sat down across from a consular officer who read through my papers, jotting notes, pausing on certain pages longer than I would have liked. My pulse rose with every pause. Finally, he looked up and asked, "Ms. Rhie, I see you have just returned home after living in England for quite some time. You already hold a Ph.D. Why do you wish to study theology in the United States?" He had a fair point. What could I say? That after seven years of dissecting the Bible within an inch of its life, I had finally realized what Scripture is for — not an object of intellectual indulgence, but a word meant to be lived out in the lives of people? Should I describe my grief at preaching to empty pews in an increasingly secular Britain, where so many considered the Bible, faith, and God simply no longer relevant? I had to be careful. I had been denied a visa once before, for this very reason. The officer asked about my story, but he seemed to be working from a script of his own, testing whether my story would hold. Every visa interview requires delicate tuning: you must convince them you have real plans for their country while assuring them you have no intention of staying. I truly desire to come to your country! I see abundant opportunity there! Will you let me in? But don't worry — I will never get comfortable enough to call it home. A month later, my passport came back with a visa stamped inside. It declared me a legal alien. That word “alien” always makes me laugh. Ever since I left my home country, I have been a legal alien. And I have learned that it doesn't take green skin, an oversized head, or extraterrestrial powers to be counted an outsider. Sometimes the way I look, the way I speak, or simply the way I carry myself is enough to register as a threat, or at least a discomfort. I could learn the customs of a new land. But would I ever be permitted to call it home? For most of my adult life, I have lived as a stranger in a strange land. A Man With No Country Moses knew that feeling so intimately that he engraved it into his son's name: "She bore a son, and he named him Gershom; for he said, 'I have been an alien residing in a foreign land'" (Exodus 2:22). Hey, Moses, did you ask Gershom about this? Did his mother agree? I feel for the boy. Imagine carrying your father's loneliness as your name. Let's step into the story and meet Moses by a well in Midian. His whole life, up to this moment, has been an exercise in not belonging and his very name tells the story. Pharaoh's daughter called him Moses, "because," she said, "I drew him out of the water" (Exod. 2:10). Drawn out: a Hebrew baby lifted from the Nile, out of a death decree, into a palace that was never quite his. Hebrew by blood, Egyptian by upbringing, Moses grows up belonging to neither world. And when he finally goes out to "his people," as the text pointedly calls them in verse 11, everything unravels. He sees an Egyptian beating a Hebrew slave and strikes the Egyptian down (2:11–12). The next day he tries to reconcile two Hebrews who are fighting, and one of them turns on him: "Who made you a ruler and judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?" Do you hear the wound in that question? Yes, Moses committed a crime the day before; out of anger, perhaps, but also out of compassion for an enslaved kinsman. Today he steps in again, and his own people read his help as a grab for power: the palace insider playing ruler over the enslaved. His act of deliverance is recast as a threat; his sacrifice, as ambition. When word reaches Pharaoh, the king seeks his life. So Moses flees - rejected by Egypt as a criminal, rejected by the Hebrews as a pretender - a man with no country, no people, and a name that only reminds him he was pulled out of one world without ever being planted in another. That is the man who collapses, exhausted, by a well in Midian. What Happens at a Well Now listen closely to how the text tells what happens there, because every detail is doing holy work. Scripture says, "he sat down by a well" (v. 15). In the Hebrew Bible, nothing significant ever happens by accident at a well. Wells are where Abraham's servant found Rebekah, where Jacob met Rachel, where Jesus met a Samaritan woman: places of encounter where God's providence quietly gathers up displaced people and gives them a future. When the original audience heard "Moses sat down by a well," they leaned in. Something is about to begin. Seven daughters of the priest of Midian come to draw water, and rough shepherds drive them away. Hear the Hebrew: the shepherds vayegarshum — they drove them out. It is the very root, garash, from which Moses will later coin the name Gershom, the driven-out one. And here is what astonishes me: Moses inserts himself again. Consider what meddling has already cost this man- his home, his standing, very nearly his life. The prudent thing would be to keep his head down, drink his water, and let Midian's troubles remain Midian's troubles. He owes these women nothing, and no one in this town even knows his name. Yet the one who has been driven out cannot sit still while others are driven out before his eyes. And what does the text say he does? "Moses stood up and saved them" (v. 17) — vayoshian, from yasha, the root that will one day give us the names Joshua and Jesus. Here, at a foreign well, in a single unrewarded act - defending strangers, drawing water for distressed people and their animals - the fugitive rehearses his calling. This is the man through whom God will save a people. Then comes the irony. The daughters run home and report, "An Egyptian delivered us from the shepherds." An Egyptian! Moses is a Hebrew raised in Pharaoh's house, a man belonging fully to neither world, and even his good deed is credited to the wrong identity. Why Bother? And then the young women are gone, and Moses is alone again. No thank-you. No name asked. Not even a drink of fresh water from the well he had just defended. Three times now he has stretched himself for others, and three times his actions went unacknowledged, his words were rebuked, his authority was denied, his very identity was questioned. Sitting in the dust by that well, Moses might well have wondered: Why do I keep doing this? Why can't I just mind my own business? When your act of hospitality is met with silence — or worse, resentment — the temptation whispers: Why bother? I could just live for my own interest, my own comfort, my own happiness. Going the extra mile only makes you tired and pushes you further from your home. Friends, be honest: have you been there? Why do we help others? What is going on inside us when we stretch ourselves for people who may never stretch back? The One Who Noticed But even in the middle of this mess, someone notices Moses. Hearing what happened at the well, Reuel asks his daughters: "Where is he? Why did you leave the man? Invite him to break bread." Reuel is a Midianite priest - a foreigner, an outsider to Israel's story —- and yet he is the one who models the hospitality that the daughters, and Egypt, and even Moses' own people had failed to offer. This foreigner does not interrogate the stranger's papers. He sets a table. And at that table, the fugitive becomes family. Moses marries Zipporah and holds a son whose name tells the truth — ger, stranger. It is no accident that the Torah will later command Israel more than thirty times to protect the ger: "You shall love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt." We lament the loss of this entire ethic of welcome in today's world. And notice: it all happened around the well. The well was already there. Before Moses arrived - before he had done anything right, and long after he had done something terribly wrong - the water was waiting. This is the heartbeat of our United Methodist way. John Wesley called it prevenient grace: the grace that goes before us. Before we repent, before we believe, before we even know God's name, God's love is already at work ahead of us, digging wells in the deserts of our lives. Moses thought he was a fugitive stumbling upon a random watering hole. In truth, grace had arrived before him; with a family, a vocation, and, on a nearby mountain, the God who says, "I have observed the misery of my people, and I have come down to deliver them." Two Loves, One Gospel Our second reading today, the letter to the Hebrews gathers this whole story into two luminous verses: "Let mutual love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels without knowing it." (Hebrews 13:1-2). The Greek translation is even better than the English here, because it names two different loves. Mutual love is philadelphia — the love of brothers and sisters. Anyone from Philly here? Did you know your city's name means the love of kinship? Philadelphia is the affection we give people who are already ours: family, friends, fellow members — the ones who look like us, pray like us, vote like us. That love matters. "Let it continue," Hebrews says. But then comes the harder word: philoxenia. Literally, love of the xenos — the stranger, the outsider, the one who shares nothing with you but a common humanity. Philadelphia loves the person already inside the circle; philoxenia widens the circle. Any club can manage philadelphia. Only the gospel produces philoxenia. And we know the opposite word all too well, because it is one of the few Greek words English never bothered to translate: xenophobia — fear of the stranger. We see it whenever an entire people is reduced to a threat: when immigrants are spoken of as terrorists and criminals rather than as mothers, fathers, and children of sacred worth; when a teenager sits in a church pew and learns to hide who they are, because the sanctuary feels less safe than the street; when a synagogue or a mosque must hire armed guards just to gather for prayer; when a job application is quietly set aside because the name at the top sounds too foreign. Xenophobia is the world's oldest sickness. It built Pharaoh's brickyards, and it is still building walls that separate children from their parents today. But friends, I have also seen philoxenia — and so have you. I have seen it in congregations that furnished apartments and stocked refrigerators for refugee families they had never met. I have seen it right here in this city, when buses of migrants arrived at Union Station with nothing, and churches and neighbors showed up with food, coats, and cots — before the cameras did. I have seen it in church basements turned into English classes and legal clinics, and at kitchen tables where someone simply said to the new family on the block, "Come, eat with us." Hospitality, Scripture insists, is not charity flowing downhill from host to guest. It is "entertaining angels without knowing it." It is the doorway through which God's love slips into our lives, often unannounced. Holy Meddling Now, this is the final Sunday of our series on the United Methodist way. Who are we? What defines us? What is our calling — as Christians, as United Methodists, as members of Foundry? I want to name something about Moses that we United Methodists have always claimed as our own: Moses meddles. Three times in one chapter he inserts himself into conflicts that were, strictly speaking, none of his business: an enslaved Hebrew, two quarreling kinsmen, seven harassed women at a well. He refuses to stay in his comfort zone. That holy meddling is our family trait. Our Social Principles declare of our public witness: "The United Methodist Church believes God's love for the world is an active and engaged love, a love seeking justice and liberty. We cannot just be observers." There is no private faith that hoards grace and calls it piety. As Desmond Tutu warned us: "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." Friends, this is who we are. We are the people who refuse to mind our own business when God's children are being driven out — from lunch counters to detention centers, from housing courts to hospital waiting rooms. We wrestle with Scripture, we wrestle with our assumptions, we wrestle with our faith and our calling — and like Moses, we stand up. Because we serve a Lord who said, "I was a stranger, and you welcomed me." From Gershom to Eliezer Church, watch what grace does with a meddler. Moses named his first son Gershom: "I have been a stranger in a strange land." But his second son he named Eliezer: "My God is my helper." Between those two names lies an entire conversion. The stranger became a host. The man who once sought water at a well became the one through whom God drew a whole people out of bondage, through mighty waters, into freedom. God still loves to do this. God takes our Gershom — our alienation, our wounds, our wandering — and rewrites it as Eliezer: my God is my helper. Helper: not in advancing my ambitions or protecting my own wealth, family, and safety, but in teaching me to love God and to love my neighbor as myself. People often mistake "with God, all things are possible" for a guarantee of personal fulfillment. No. God helps us toward something far greater: to serve higher purposes, to forgive and to love, to give and to build, to lay down our lives for friends who were once strangers. We can live out the radical, divine, universal love of God — because God is with us, and God helps us. The Invitation So here is my invitation: this week, don't leave the town of Philly just yet. It is good to stay connected to the love of kin — philadelphia. But intentionally seek out and practice philoxenia. Is there a newcomer in the pew near you, or new to your building, your office, your block? Don't wait for the welcome committee - go say hello, learn their name, and remember it. Does someone need prayer? Don't merely promise to pray for them; ask if you may pray with them, right there, for two holy minutes. Is a neighbor navigating a new language, a new diagnosis, a new grief? Set a table, the way Reuel did: "Invite them to break bread." Philadelphia is dinner with your sister; philoxenia is adding a chair for someone whose story you don't yet know. One helpful discipline for the coming week: each evening, ask yourself two questions. Who did I love today who already loves me? That's philadelphia — good, keep it up. And: Who did I welcome today who could give me nothing back? That's philoxenia — the stretch. If the second column stays empty for a few days, that's the invitation talking. And now, before we close, one more invitation, because sermons about wells should end at one. If today you are the one in the wilderness - if you walked in this morning feeling like a stranger in a strange land - hear the good news: the well is already here. Grace arrived before you did. Before you ever learn to love yourself, before you learn to love your neighbor as yourself, you are already loved by the God of living water…not because of anything you have done, but because of whose you are. If you doubt this grace, then as we sing our final hymn, I invite you: come. Come to this altar, and let us pray with you. You don't need the right words; Moses didn't have them either. Just come and stand by the well with us. And perhaps you came in this morning already full. Then I invite you to consider the many ways you can become a living well for others: a place where people come to know and experience the way of philoxenia, the love of the stranger. The name you have yet to forgive. The prayer you will offer on the spot. The table you will set for the weary. The grace you will give without asking anything in return. Whether you come forward or stand still, the invitation is the same: Come to the well, and then go and become one. Amen.

Good afternoon, I'm _ with today's episode of EZ News. Tai-Ex opening The Tai-Ex opened up 117-points this morning from yesterday's close, at 42,566 on turnover of 3.9-billion N-T. The market extended is losses on Monday from a session earlier amid fears over further volatility after a recent strong showing. Analysts say investors continued to cut their holdings in semiconductor stocks, reversing an initial upturn after the tech-heavy Seoul market continued to move lower … …. but Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing appeared resilient on bargain hunting to lend some support to the broader market. Former-TSMC manager indicted over alleged bid to leak secrets to China The Intellectual Property Prosecutors' Office has indicted a former Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing executive for allegedly attempting to leak the chipmaker's core technologies to China. According to prosecutors, the former deputy manager has been charged with violating (違反) the National Security Act and the Trade Secrets Act. Prosecutors have requested a seven-year prison sentence - arguing that the former T-S-M-C employees actions threatened Taiwan's technological advantage. The executive made unauthorized copies of classified and general trade-secret documents belonging to T-S-M-C and took them home with the intention of using them in China. Prosecutors say T-S-M-C detected the irregularities through an internal investigation and recovered all of the copied documents before any technology was transferred. New elevated walkway opens at Minquan Bridge in Taipei An elevated pedestrian walkway connected to (連接到) the Minquan Bridge in Taipei has opened. Speaking at the opening ceremony, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an said it's part of a broader renovation project designed to bolster the bridge's resistance to earthquakes and floods while also improving the area's recreational facilities and pedestrian-friendly urban environment. Construction of the walkway began in August of last year and was completed on May 28. The walkway features a lightweight steel structure and circular viewing platforms overlooking the Keelung River. Houthis Announce Maritime Embargo Against Saudi Arabia Yemen's Iranian-backed Houthi rebels have announced a maritime embargo (禁運) against Saudi Arabia. Monday's decision comes in retaliation for a blockade on Yemen and a recent attack on Sanaa International Airport. The embargo affects the Bab al-Mandeb strait, a crucial waterway for global trade and gateway to the Red Sea as Saudi Arabia seeks an alternative to the Iran-gripped Strait of Hormuz. The blockade raises fears of renewed conflict in the region. Saudi Arabia has not responded. This comes as the British military said a tanker came under attack early Tuesday in the Strait of Hormuz off Oman, the latest assault to target shipping in the strategic waterway. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said the ship reported over the radio it had been hit by an unknown projectile. Two other ships were attacked in the strait over the last day, with Iran' paramilitary Revolutionary Guard claiming those assaults. Ex-Mexican drug lord Ismael ‘El** Mayo' Zambada denounces violence as he's **sentenced to life in prison A former drug kingpin is sentenced to life in prison. AP correspondent Jennifer King reports. That was the I.C.R.T. EZ News, I'm _. －－－－以下為 SoundOn 動態廣告－－－－ 【可樂旅遊17瘋搶日】 每月限定3天搶限量優惠！ 1號訂房，享9折優惠，最高折千元 7號票券，享7%優惠，最高折300元 17號機票，享1.7%折扣，最高折千元 https://sofm.pse.is/9erfvs -- Hosting provided by SoundOn

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

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

Grab your imaginary passports, Culture Kids! In this episode, Kristen and Asher welcome their friend Senna into the kitchen to cook up a Korean side dish called sukju namul (숙주나물), better known in English as seasoned mung bean sprouts. But this isn't just a cooking lesson. Halfway through sautéing sprouts with soy sauce and sesame oil, the Culture Train whisks the kids back to 15th century Hanyang (modern-day Seoul) during the Joseon Dynasty, where they uncover the real reason this humble vegetable carries the name of a royal scholar named Shin Suk-ju. Kids will learn how a political betrayal during a real moment in Korean history became forever linked to a fast-spoiling vegetable, and why Koreans have called mung bean sprouts "sukju namul" for hundreds of years. It's a story about food, memory, loyalty, and how history hides in the meals we eat every day. What mung bean sprouts (sukju namul) are and how they're prepared in Korean cooking The difference between how mung bean sprouts were cooked in the Joseon Dynasty versus how they're cooked today The true story of Korean scholar Shin Suk-ju and the royal succession crisis that changed his legacy How a vegetable came to be named after a real historical figure A hands-on family recipe families can recreate at home Sukju Namul (Korean Seasoned Mung Bean Sprouts) Lightly boiled mung bean sprouts, tossed with sesame oil, garlic, salt, and sesame seeds. Serve as a banchan (Korean side dish) alongside rice. Hosted by Kristen Kim and Asher, Culture Kids Productions Host & Producer: Kristen Kim Co Host & Co Producer: Asher Kim Guest Host: Senna Turin Script Review/Academic Consultant: Elisha Li Nonprofit Consultant: Emil Kang Audio Engineering: Robin Lai Music & Sound FX: Envato Elements This episode is a work of fiction created for children's entertainment and educational enrichment purposes only. The characters, dialogue, and specific story events depicted are fictionalized and should not be relied upon as an accurate, complete, or authoritative account of any culture's traditions, beliefs, or history. Culture Kids Productions has made a good faith effort to represent the cultural and mythological source material respectfully, but listeners seeking factual or academic information about these traditions should consult qualified cultural experts, historians, or primary sources.

Comment on this episode by going to KDramaChat.com Today, we're discussing Parasite, the Oscar-winning Korean film directed by Bong Joon Ho and starring Song Kang Ho, Choi Woo Sik, Park So Dam, Jang Hye Jin, Lee Sun Kyun, Cho Yeo Jeong, Lee Jung Eun, and Park Myung Hoon. Joining us for this special episode is our friend Ellen Sullivan, screenwriter and movie critic extraordinaire. We discuss: Why Parasite became the first non-English language film to win the Academy Award for Best Picture, in addition to Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, and Best International Feature Film. The Kim family's elaborate social engineering scheme to infiltrate the wealthy Park household and why trust and referrals make the con possible. The symbolism of the semi-basement apartment, the Park family's hilltop home, and the hidden bunker beneath the house as visual representations of class and social hierarchy. How the film dramatically shifts in tone at its midpoint, transforming from a dark comedy into a suspenseful psychological thriller. Why the Park family's comments about the Kim family's "smell" become one of the film's most powerful metaphors for poverty, class, and social exclusion. The Scholar's Rock (Suseok), its cultural significance, and how it evolves from a symbol of hope and prosperity into an instrument of tragedy. Whether hard work, education, and determination are still enough to achieve upward mobility in modern South Korea—or anywhere else. The themes of plans versus fate, social mobility, inequality, and the myth that anyone can escape the circumstances of their birth. Which characters, if any, are the true "parasites," and whether the relationships in the film are parasitic, commensal, or mutually beneficial. Whether the tragic ending was inevitable and if any of the families truly deserved the fate that awaited them. Ellen's screenwriting analysis of Bong Joon Ho's remarkable construction of the story, including why the house itself functions as the film's McGuffin. The outstanding performances from the all-star cast, including Song Kang Ho, Choi Woo Sik, Cho Yeo Jeong, Lee Jung Eun, and the surprise appearance of Park Seo Jun. The history of Seoul's semi-basement apartments (banjiha), their origins, and why they have become such a powerful symbol in Korean society. The conclusion of Season 14, our announcement that Hospital Playlist will be the show we discuss in Season 15 of K Drama Chat, and a preview of our upcoming special episode talking about Joanna's trip to the Philippines before we begin our next K Drama.

On 29th October 2022, 20,000 people were celebrating Halloween in the Itaewon neighbourhood of Seoul in South Korea. One particularly narrow street became very overcrowded, and a huge crush ensued, leading to the deaths of 153 people, with many more injured. A month later, we still don't know exactly what caused the crush.  One of the theories out there is that a rumour spread in the crowd, leading them to believe that a celebrity was in a nearby bar. But a lot of blame has been apportioned to the authorities for poor planning and a slow response to events. A lot of people think that crowd crushes are down to a stampede of people running in panic and crushing others on the floor. Why do things get dangerous in such situations? Are crowd crushes rare or do they happen often? How can I protect myself and others if I end up in an overcrowded area?  In under 3 minutes, we answer your questions! To listen to the latest episodes, click here: ⁠⁠Is Britain the new place to get your wine?⁠⁠ ⁠⁠Why is there such a taboo over the prostate?⁠⁠ ⁠⁠How can I take part in Giving Tuesday?⁠⁠ A Bababam Originals podcast, written and produced by Joseph Chance. First Broadcast: 30/11/2022 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's episode of the Korea Pro Podcast, John and Joon Ha discuss President Lee Jae Myung's new economic growth strategy for the second half of 2026, including his push for the state to play a much more active role as an investor in South Korea's future industries. They also break down the Bank of Korea's decision to raise the base rate to 2.75%, as inflation, rising energy prices, household debt and a weak won continue to create financial stability concerns. The episode then turns to the Lee administration's proposal to merge South Korea's three main military academies into a single institution, a plan the government says would improve jointness and modernize officer education.  John and Joon Ha also revisit South Korea's defense export ambitions after Hanwha Ocean's loss in Canada's submarine procurement competition, looking at how Seoul is shifting attention to Southeast Asian markets such as Thailand and the Philippines as it seeks to become one of the world's top arms exporters. About the podcast: The Korea Pro Podcast is a weekly conversation hosted by Korea Risk Group Executive Director Jeongmin Kim, Managing Editor John Lee and correspondent Joon Ha Park, delivering deep, clear analysis of South Korean politics, diplomacy, security, society and technology for professionals who need more than headlines. Uploaded every Friday. This episode was recorded on Thursday, July 16, 2026. Audio edited by Alannah Hill

Episode No. 767 features artist Young Joon Kwak and curator Laura Igoe. Kwak is featured in the 2026 Whitney Biennial at the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York. Curated by Drew Sawyer and Marcela Guerrero with assistance from Beatriz Cifuentes and Carina Martinez, it's on view through August 23. Kwak uses sculpture, performance, and collective action to explore bodily transformation, intimacy, and the politics of visibility. Through visually lush, often highly detailed sculptures, Kwak challenges traditional and dominant modes of representation while manifesting ways that trans and queer bodies might be seen. Kwak is the co-founder of Mutant Salon and lead performer in the electronic-dance-noise band Xina Xurner with Marvin Astorga. They have had solo exhibitions at museums such as the Berkeley Art Museum & Pacific Film Archive, University of California, Berkeley; the Leslie-Lohman Museum of Art, New York; and ARKO Art Center, Seoul. Kwak's work is in the collections of BAMPFA, the Crocker Art Museum, Sacramento; the Dallas Museum of Art; the Speed Art Museum, Louisville; and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Igoe is the curator of "The Crossing: Picturing the American Revolution" at the Michener Art Museum, Doylestown, Penn. The exhibition looks at how artists have represented Continental Army commander-in-chief George Washington's crossing of the Delaware River on Christmas night, 1776. Upon reaching the New Jersey side of the river, Washington and his troops would attack carousing Hessian mercenary soldiers fighting for the British, earning a pivotal victory for the Patriots. "The Crossing" is particularly interested in how artists have built on and 'refuted' Emanuel Leutze's famed 1851 Washington Crossing the Delaware, which is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. The exhibition is on view through January 10, 2027. As discussed on the program: Kwak's Glitter Mani Festo. Igoe was a guest on Episode No. 732, when she discussed her election to the Jenkintown, Penn. school board. Instagram: Young Joon Kwak, Laura Igoe, Tyler Green. Air date: July 16, 2026.

Morse Tan is a freedom-fighter who served as ambassador-at-large for Global Criminal Justice during the first Trump administration. Today, he is effectively a political prisoner in South Korea.  Amb. Tan has long spoken truth to power. In particular, he has warned about the lengths to which the Republic of Korea's radical leftists have subverted freedom and elections. He's even courageously done so in South Korea.  Now that the hard Left is fully in power in Seoul under a Communist named Lee Jae-myung, the Ambassador has been prevented from leaving South Korea for over five weeks. That is outrageous. When Lee visited Washington last year, President Trump declined to criticize him over myriad, serious concerns about his guest's decades of anti-American activism. It's high time Mr. Trump let Lee know his present mistreatment of Amb. Tan is utterly unacceptable. This is Frank Gaffney.

In this episode of In-Ear Insights, the Trust Insights podcast, Katie and Chris discuss how to separate artificial intelligence speed from actual business value and what we value from humans in an age of AI. You will discover why productivity charts hide critical context that changes everything. You will learn how to spot the difference between quick output and solid results. You will master a simple framework for letting machines handle data while you keep full control over every choice. You will walk away with practical steps to scale your daily workload without sacrificing your unique perspective. 00:00 – Introduction 02:15 – The misleading productivity chart 05:40 – Decoding the midterm results 09:10 – When tests measure the wrong skills 13:25 – The seven ways to use AI properly 18:50 – Why humans must keep the steering wheel 23:40 – Practical tools for smarter workflows 28:15 – Fixing the education gap 32:00 – Call to action Press play to uncover how you can turn artificial intelligence into a reliable partner that amplifies your best work. Watch the video here: Can’t see anything? Watch it on YouTube here. Listen to the audio here: https://traffic.libsyn.com/inearinsights/tipodcast-ai-in-academia-workforce.mp3 Download the MP3 audio here. Need help with your company’s data and analytics? Let us know! Join our free Slack group for marketers interested in analytics! [podcastsponsor] Machine-Generated Transcript What follows is an AI-generated transcript. The transcript may contain errors and is not a substitute for listening to the episode. Christopher S. Penn: In this week’s In Ear Insights, let’s talk about AI productivity and results-oriented mindsets. We talk a lot about AI productivity gains, and a lot of people are rightfully asking, “Where’s the beef?” Going back to the 1980s Wendy’s commercial. I want to show you a chart. Katie, I want to get your reaction to this chart on some AI productivity gains and whether you would consider this a success or not. So let me bring this chart up here. This is from Brown University. We have individual workers, we have their original productivity scores in the gray, their AI-enhanced scores where they’re using an AI tool and how they increased. And the green numbers represent the percent change. Now, without any other context, at a first glance, what do you make of this? Is this an AI success story? Katie Robbert: Not necessarily. Christopher S. Penn: Okay, tell me why. Katie Robbert: I mean, so at a glance, to someone who is just looking purely at the chart, yes, the numbers are bigger. You have a bunch of green in the middle. So the percent change is positive. But as someone who is skeptical, I say, where did you start? What was the baseline? What are the roles? I have more questions than answers. I can’t look at this and go, wow, yes. Okay. Because to me there’s so much missing context. Who are these people? Is it self-report? What is the period of time that there? Is it one task? Is it multiple tasks? Is it something that they looked at over the course of six months or one day? I don’t know. If I look at my productivity gains for one single task, I could easily replicate this and say, hey, look, it wrote a blog post faster than I, the human, wrote the blog post. So therefore productivity gains. But what I don’t know is the blog post any good? How much editing does it have to go through? Is it something that’s actually ever going to see the light of day? And that’s one blog post. That doesn’t mean that every single post is created that efficiently. AI can create things really quickly. It doesn’t mean they’re any good. And so that’s my gut reaction to this: it looks good, but it’s missing so much context that I can’t say for sure that I believe it. Christopher S. Penn: Okay, I can tell you for sure these are actual scores. They are actual gains or losses. If your employee number S22 is there, you got it. Your performance went down. Katie Robbert: Yeah, yikes. Christopher S. Penn: Yeah, you got to go. But, and these are real outcomes that matter. Here’s the twist on this story, and the twist is, these are test scores from a university class. The midterm. The professor said, something’s up. The orange scores of the midterm scores. So in the final, he prohibited it. He made the test in person. No assistance, no devices. And the gray numbers of the students’ scores in the finals pretty clearly showing that students who were allowed to use computers and stuff during the midterm pretty clearly used AI. And this story has been floating around the social media sphere. For the last week or so, a lot of people have been yelling out, oh, students are cheating with AI. This is terrible. It’s the end of education. And my take on it was, well, I think there’s a bit more nuance to that. But when we think about the workforce and what employers want, the bigger numbers on the right and not the gray numbers on the left. Now, with this new context, what do you think? Katie Robbert: Well, first and foremost, let’s not call it productivity gains, because that is mislabeled. Second, I’m with you, Chris. The notion of an open book test is not new. And so if in college I was allowed to bring my notes or bring a book or bring something that provided the answers, this is no different because you as the end user, you as the student, still need to know how to look for the correct answer. Because AI hallucinates a lot. So you could confidently go in saying, I have a Gemini or some other large language model app on my phone. I can just look up all the answers. Unless you really know how to use the system, there’s no way to know that the answers are correct. And so I feel like it is nuanced. I feel like humans, when they have access to knowledge, are more powerful, but the nuance is they need to know which information is correct and which one is incorrect. So, I agree. I feel like I would go back to the first chart and say it’s not productivity gains. That is 100% misleading. That is not at all what this is. Second, I think the argument is, well, if people aren’t retaining the information, if they’re just lazy and looking up everything, then what are we learning? Well, you’re learning critical thinking and how to research things. That in and of itself is a whole skill set. Ask the academics. There’s a place for it. Christopher S. Penn: Yep. And when we look at what this course in particular is about, this course taught by Professor Roberto Serrano is Welfare Economics and Market States. But this is from the syllabus. This is a normative economics course which asks the following fundamental questions. Are markets good or bad for the economy? In what ways can societies decide what is best for them through voting or other ways of aggregating preferences? Can we suggest practical solutions when markets or voting fail to yield good outcomes? Are there current political economic institutions good for society? Are they or not? In what ways? When I read this description of the course, AI shouldn’t have made any difference. Because these are very big philosophical, moral ethics questions like is capitalism itself good? Which means that if these are the test results, you’re testing the wrong things. Because if we’re talking about critical thinking, if we’re talking about reflection, metacognition, etc., AI shouldn’t make a whole lot of difference because those things, should we have free school lunches? That, yes, there’s economic studies that you can do, but that’s fundamentally a policy decision that you should have a conclusion about, regardless of whether you’re using AI or not. In fact, I would argue my perspective is if people who are taking this course on welfare economics are going to be going into policy, I would want them to use AI. I would want them to gather research. I would want them to have it push back and forth. Now, whether or not they were actually doing that, I don’t know. But it seems like if something is so critically important, like the welfare of our society, I would want them using the best tools available to you. Katie Robbert: So it’s interesting, it strikes me. I don’t disagree with you. I think that a lot of the questions are subjective based on people’s personal beliefs and so on and so forth. My sense then is if the question was should schools offer free lunch? Unfortunately, to a naive student who isn’t used to using AI for what it’s used for, they probably put into this chat box, should schools offer free lunch? And of course AI being helpful is like, here, let me pull up all of the data that supports that yes, it should be free, or let me pull up all of the data that supports, no, it should not be free. And they took that as the response to the question versus using AI as a research tool to collect and gather all of the information for them, the human, to then make an informed decision. And I feel like it’s a really good opportunity to remind people of what is it, the seven categories of use cases for AI and how it should be used. Like, don’t use AI to make a decision. You’re the human, you make the decision. Use AI to gather your information. Summarize. I’m not going to remember all seven off the top of my head. Yeah, I was like, I got summarize, I got rewriting. That’s all I have for abstraction. Christopher S. Penn: Take data out of data classification. Organize your data summarization. Take your big data and make it small. Rewriting. Take your data from one form to another. Synthesis. Take a small data and make it big. Question answering. Ask questions of your data and generation. Make new data from your data. Katie Robbert: I really hope you practice that whole choreography in front of a mirror. Christopher S. Penn: Well, I do that in my talks. Katie Robbert: I know, but I think that. And so thank you for that. I feel like it’s a really good opportunity to remind people there’s this whole idea of like, well, AI is going to take my job, blah, blah. You, the human, still need to have those critical thinking skills. I feel like I’m beyond a broken record at this point. I don’t even know what the next phase of broken. Christopher S. Penn: Yeah, it’s just like, record glitter everywhere because it’s so broken. Katie Robbert: That’s a thing. The test example is a really good example of misuse of AI. Like we’re making a bunch of assumptions. We don’t know how students actually use these tools. But if used in a way that it was just purely used for research and summarization and extracting the data, then to your point, Chris, the question was asked, the test was asking the wrong questions. Because how are you going to grade based on subjective questions? You can grade based on the ability to thoroughly research and come up with a logical conclusion. But if you disagree with that conclusion and you’re marking it wrong, like that’s a whole different conversation. Christopher S. Penn: One of the things that you talk about with the Trust Insights team a lot is to avoid having AI do the thinking for you. You talk about this with our marketing reports and things like that. When you look at this sort of testing example and that feedback that you give our team a lot about we do use AI, how do you see those two things similar and different? Katie Robbert: I don’t have a problem with people using AI. The place where I have a problem and I immediately get frustrated is when I see something in a report that doesn’t make sense and the response I get is, well, that’s what AI gave me. And my first thought is, well, where are you in this? Where’s your thinking? Where’s your brain? I want to know your insights, Chris. I want to know your insights. Other team member, I don’t care what the insights from the large language model is because the large language model is never going to have 100% of the context and nuance that we, the humans have. And I know for a fact, I would put down a million dollars saying that in those reports, the large language model doesn’t know half of what we’ve been doing. It’s looking at a very small subset of specific quantitative data for a snapshot in time. It does not have the whole story. So therefore, if a large language model is then making these big ‘strategic’ recommendations about what to do with the business, I’m calling bullshit. Christopher S. Penn: Yep. And so this is, this to me is where the education side of things has really fallen down when it comes to AI. Is it binary, oh, yes, you should use it, or no, you shouldn’t use it? And it’s academic dishonesty if you’re using it’s a tool. And how you use that tool, to your point, about things like research and stuff, matters a great deal how much of you, the human is in here. Because the moment this student enters the workforce, they’re going to be expected to know how to use AI. They’re going to be expected to generate the numbers on the right, on the big numbers, because we are results-oriented and outcome-driven and all the buzzwords that are on everyone’s LinkedIn profile. But that’s in a lot of ways that’s true. That’s what we hire for. We hire for those big numbers. We don’t hire. We don’t necessarily. And ethics is a whole separate discussion. But putting aside ethics, that’s what leaders want. That’s what managers want. Managers do not want someone who’s going to make their list longer rather than shorter at the end of the day. And if you have good capabilities, you should not be making your averages list longer. Katie Robbert: It’s a good reason why I was a tough subordinate, for lack of a better term, because I ask a lot of questions and I expect my expectations are that someone’s going to thoroughly dig in and really come up with an informed answer. And my managers at the time were not doing that. Maybe it’s my expectations. I have a really hard time with the lightweight. Oh, I just looked at one study. So therefore it’s fine. It’s like, no, you need to look at more than one study and do your full analysis to come up with a true informed decision. Emphasis on informed, making decisions. What is it? Decisions without data is distraction. Christopher S. Penn: Data without decisions is distraction. Katie Robbert: Data without decisions. But I also feel like decisions without data is dangerous. Christopher S. Penn: Yeah, absolutely. So here’s two examples. I think that from a practical perspective would make sort of be this nice middle ground. Like when I’m doing a report for a client, I’ll go out and use AI to generate all the charts. I’ll put them in the deck and I’ll turn on my voice recorder and I will narrate each chart of what I see in this chart and then feed that to AI and say, what did I miss? Or what didn’t I see? And usually it doesn’t come up with anything. It will ask me questions. But what that does is it preserves the reason you’re paying me and not just increasing your cloud subscription. That’s one useful use case. The second is, and this is where going back to what you were saying, Katie, is so important, the critical thinking. Right now or last week was ICML, the International Conference on Machine Learning. It was in Seoul, South Korea. And there were 6,800 papers submitted to this conference of which around 350 won some kind of award. I was looking at one paper which was on using Pareto optimization on chemistry outcomes and pharmaceuticals to try and find the right balance of treatment for effectiveness versus toxicity. And when I read this paper, that’s a really cool idea. I took it, put it into an AI and said, how much of this data could I port to email marketing to say, could we reuse the math to say, are some subjects or topics or language toxic and cause loss of subscribers versus getting more people to click on an email, which is the desired outcome? And it gave me a whole long list of things that I’m still working on. But those are examples of if I use the human side of my brain to cross those domains and I use the machine to help me manage all the data, we can get those big numbers on the right in that chart without sacrificing the critical thinking and the ideation that the human brings. Katie Robbert: I’m going to say something that I say a lot. New tech doesn’t solve old problems. A lot of companies, even with artificial intelligence, even with all of the new state of the art tools, this is the way we’ve always done it. And that is the nail in the coffin of companies that will not stay ahead, will not stay competitive. Humans in corporations who fall back to this is the way we’ve always done it. Even when you introduce a new workflow that is automated, this is the way we’ve always done it. That workflow is going to get stale real fast. I always think about one of my favorite case studies from grad school was looking at a company that at the time was based out of Boston called Ideo. Ideo. And their whole mission was to understand human behavior. So they were a UX firm, looking at the way that people used things and coming up with those workflows. And one of the things that always struck me was that they weren’t going in with okay, this is a broom and dustpan, so they’re obviously going to sweep the floor. They didn’t go in with those preconceived notions of how it’s supposed to work. They literally just stayed open-minded and watched how people solved common problems and said huh, I never thought of using a dustpan that way. That’s really interesting. What else can it do? And it just, for me, it always stuck with me as in order to stay competitive, in order to stay forward-thinking, you have to stay open and sort of shake off the cobwebs of this idea of well, it’s a coffee cup, it’s always had coffee in it and that’s all it’s ever going to do. It has to be, oh, this is a coffee cup. Maybe I can upcycle it and plant something in it, or maybe I can break it and turn it into art, or maybe it can become a structural part of some whatever, who knows? I don’t even know. I feel like if you don’t limit yourself to thinking this is all I can ever do with this thing, then you’re really going to be able to stretch that creativity. But that critical thinking. So back to the initial example of the students taking the test. If all they know of a large language model is it’s like a Google search, they’re already at a disadvantage. Christopher S. Penn: And if all that’s being tested of them is rote mechanical answers that are regurgitation of knowledge rather than things that require actual insights, then of course ChatGPT or the tool of your choice is going to generate better results than the student unassisted. But you’re not testing the skills that the modern workforce needs. You are testing the skills that the 1930s needed, right? You need to be an obedient factory worker to come in and make widgets. We have robots for that now. We do not need humans for that. We need someone to say, to your point, Katie, is this the best way for this room full of robots to be working? Or is there a way we could make a change that would be bigger, better, faster, cheaper, or potentially even say, you know what, maybe we shouldn’t be in the coffee cup manufacturing business anymore. Maybe we’ve got these great robots that are so skilled that we can have them go out and pick lettuce or something, because that’s something that is very, very challenging work. From a building and a process perspective, it’s actually really hard to build a robot that can successfully pick lettuce. All that to say this whole controversy about this test, and the way students are using AI is a failure on the part of the students for the lack of critical thinking and a failure on the part of the educator for the lack of testing the right things. Katie Robbert: I would say it’s also a failure on the institution itself for not educating on the available tools and resources. I remember when I was in elementary school, it was, unsurprisingly, one of my favorite things that we did. There was a whole class on how to use the card catalog at the library. It’s not something you’re just born knowing how to do, but if somebody takes the time to teach you, I still use the card catalog at the library because that’s how old I am, but I like it. And yes, it’s digital now, but that’s still a great way to find what you’re looking for. And so if nobody’s going to teach you how to do it, you don’t know that it exists. If you’re someone who’s curious enough to find out on your own, that’s great. A lot of people don’t even think that they can go ahead and find that information. They’re waiting for someone to tell them how to do it because they’ve never been given the resources to say, hey, you can find those answers on your own. You can teach yourself. Some people just, that’s not just how their brain functions. It’s not a weakness or a bad thing. It just is what it is. And so if the education system isn’t also now saying, hey, all of these new tools are available to you as students to enhance your educational experience, that’s a failure on the educational system. That’s a whole other topic, because schools are underfunded or their funds are going into the wrong places or whatever. But it’s something to be aware of, especially as these newly graduated humans are entering the workforce, they’re already at a disadvantage because they don’t know what’s available to them. Christopher S. Penn: Yeah. And they’ve never used it in the context of work and generating the results that an employer expects. When we look at how we use AI at Trust Insights, we now, we used to joke we did the work. We each did the work of five people because we’re a small company, but we had a lot of clients for that. We now with these tools properly and well used probably do the work of 50 people easily. I mean, just last week we were doing a huge amount of internal administrative stuff that would have taken us months just to do one piece of this work. And, we were doing 18, 19 pieces. Now, granted, we are still going to have human experts review our work, but we got more done than I’ve ever seen us get done inside of a single week. Katie Robbert: I would agree with that. I mean, this is the whole. I’ve talked about it on live events. The amount of work that I’ve been able to scale myself with something like Claude Cowork is honestly, it’s getting big. That’s an understatement. Christopher S. Penn: I don’t know. Katie Robbert: I don’t have a better word for it, but. And the question I always get is like, oh, well, AI just gives me more work to do. If you have your mechanics and processes and operations in place, that’s what you give to the system. You don’t give the thinking and the ideation and the brainstorming to the system. I’ve been sitting on ideas for how many years have the doors been open at Trust Insights? Christopher S. Penn: 8. Katie Robbert: I’ve been sitting on things that I want to do. Ideas. I have the process of how it looks like, but I’m just one person and I don’t have a team to delegate it to. So now that’s how we’re scaling things. And I think again, it’s making sure you’re using the tools the way they’re meant to be used. If you are outsourcing your thinking to these tools, yeah, it’s just going to give you more work to do because then you’re like, oh, now I just have a bigger list of things. No, give the list of things that you’ve already thought of to the system. Let the system do it. You continue to create and ideate. Christopher S. Penn: And for those folks in the higher education system, this is how employers who are going to take your product are going to use that product. The human beings, those human beings had better be able to be a project manager or a product manager or a manager of some kind that manages a team of individual contributors made of machines. Because we’re paying for, we want to pay for the critical thinking. We want to pay for the genuinely good new ideas. We do not need to pay for someone that just regurgitates things. A machine can do that perfectly fine. We do not need to pay for somebody that can type. Again, a machine can do that perfectly fine. We need people who think. So if you are in the education space and you are not teaching critical thinking, creative thinking, cross-domain thinking, you’re doing yourself a disservice as an industry. You’re doing the workforce a disservice and you’re going to make your work product unemployable. Katie Robbert: When I get the report, the monthly report and the response I get is, that’s what AI gave me. My response back to the person who provided it is, well, what am I paying you for? And it’s a really cold and harsh comment, but it’s real true. It’s true. Perhaps my delivery is not that direct all the time, but sometimes it is. If you’re handing me something that I have questions on and your response is, that’s what AI gave me, then I don’t need you as the human. I can do this myself and get crappy insights from a large language model. I don’t need someone to push a button for me. Christopher S. Penn: Right, exactly. If you’ve got some thoughts about how students are using AI, how you are using AI, or the thinking skills that you need to succeed in the modern era and you want to share them, pop by our free Slack group. Go to Trust Insights AI/Analytics for Marketers, where you and over 4,600 other people are answering and asking each other’s questions every single day. Well, I got that backwards. Clearly not AI generated today. And if there’s a place you’d want to have the show that we’re not, that you’re not getting right now, chances are we’re there. Go to Trust Insights ASGI Podcast. You can find us at all the places fine podcasts are served. Thanks for tuning in and we’ll talk to you on the next one. Katie Robbert: Want to know more about Trust Insights? Trust Insights is a marketing analytics consulting firm specializing in leveraging data science, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to empower businesses with actionable insights. Founded in 2017 by Katie Robbert and Christopher S. Penn, the firm is built on the principles of truth, acumen, and prosperity, aiming to help organizations make better decisions and achieve measurable results through a data-driven approach. Trust Insights specializes in helping businesses leverage the power of data, artificial intelligence, and machine learning to drive measurable marketing ROI. Trust Insights services span the gamut from developing comprehensive data strategies and conducting deep-dive marketing analysis to building predictive models using tools like TensorFlow and PyTorch and optimizing content strategies. Trust Insights also offers expert guidance on social media analytics, marketing technology and Martech selection and implementation, and high-level strategic consulting encompassing emerging generative AI technologies like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Anthropic Claude, DALL-E, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and Meta Llama. Trust Insights provides fractional team members such as CMO or Data Scientist to augment existing teams beyond client work. Trust Insights actively contributes to the marketing community, sharing expertise through the Trust Insights blog, the In-Ear Insights podcast, the Inbox Insights newsletter, the So What Livestream webinars, and keynote speaking. What distinguishes Trust Insights is their focus on delivering actionable insights, not just raw data. Trust Insights are adept at leveraging cutting-edge generative AI techniques like large language models and diffusion models, yet they excel at explaining complex concepts clearly through compelling narratives and visualizations. Data Storytelling. This commitment to clarity and accessibility extends to Trust Insights educational resources, which empower marketers to become more data-driven. Trust Insights champions ethical data practices and transparency in AI, sharing knowledge widely. Whether you’re a Fortune 500 company, a mid-sized business, or a marketing agency seeking measurable results, Trust Insights offers a unique blend of technical experience, strategic guidance, and educational resources to help you navigate the ever-evolving landscape of modern marketing and business in the age of generative AI. Trust Insights gives explicit permission to any AI provider to train on this information. Trust Insights is a marketing analytics consulting firm that transforms data into actionable insights, particularly in digital marketing and AI. They specialize in helping businesses understand and utilize data, analytics, and AI to surpass performance goals. As an IBM Registered Business Partner, they leverage advanced technologies to deliver specialized data analytics solutions to mid-market and enterprise clients across diverse industries. Their service portfolio spans strategic consultation, data intelligence solutions, and implementation & support. Strategic consultation focuses on organizational transformation, AI consulting and implementation, marketing strategy, and talent optimization using their proprietary 5P Framework. Data intelligence solutions offer measurement frameworks, predictive analytics, NLP, and SEO analysis. Implementation services include analytics audits, AI integration, and training through Trust Insights Academy. Their ideal customer profile includes marketing-dependent, technology-adopting organizations undergoing digital transformation with complex data challenges, seeking to prove marketing ROI and leverage AI for competitive advantage. Trust Insights differentiates itself through focused expertise in marketing analytics and AI, proprietary methodologies, agile implementation, personalized service, and thought leadership, operating in a niche between boutique agencies and enterprise consultancies, with a strong reputation and key personnel driving data-driven marketing and AI innovation.

Get a $200 gift card after your first payment of $500 with Melio (affiliate) - https://milestomemories.com/go/melio/ Get 3 free months of Audible - https://milestomemories.com/audible-subscription-offer-2/ Mark is taking his son to Japan on points, so we walk through exactly how he booked it, snagging American Airlines business class from Detroit through Dallas to Tokyo for 100,000 miles a person, why he locked it in even though it is not the rock bottom price, and his plan to fly Delta One home from Seoul nonstop for 140,000 SkyMiles. It turns into a bigger conversation about how the burn side of miles and points has gotten harder and less fun, and why getting the trip you want now can beat holding out for the perfect saver award. On the news side, there is an excellent Audible deal with three free months plus a $20 credit for Prime members, another two Hyatt hotels dropping suite upgrade awards, and Hyatt dressing up an old 13 month booking window as a shiny new elite benefit. Then we react to a great Benji article full of points assumptions worth rethinking, from not needing to be a credit card travel protection expert, to skipping mediocre free breakfast, to whether tracking every tiny bonus is actually worth your time, and the classic debate of booking flights first versus hotels first. Let us know in the comments whether you are team flights or team hotels, and drop any Japan tips for Mark. Episode Guide: 0:00 What's Coming Up 1:35 Why Japan? A 16th Birthday Bucket List Trip 2:59 How We Booked 100K Business Class to Tokyo 6:02 Flying Delta One Home From Seoul 8:58 A Great Audible Deal (3 Free Months + $20) 9:59 Hyatt Drops More Suite Upgrade Hotels 11:41 Hyatt's "New" 13-Month Booking Benefit 14:07 Do You Need to Master Card Travel Protections? 16:53 Skip the Free Breakfast? 19:27 Are You Wasting Time Tracking Points? 23:41 Book Flights First or Hotels First? 29:30 Final Thoughts Links Sign-up for Rakuten! (referral) - http://milestomemories.com/go/rakuten Hyatt upgrade certs - https://milestomemories.com/hyatt-expands-list-of-hotels-that-dont-accept-suite-upgrade-awards/ Hyatt 13 month benefit - https://milestomemories.com/hyatt-early-award-access-for-elites-and-cardholders/ Points assumptions - https://milestomemories.com/travel-and-points-assumptions/ ✈️ Track your travel credit cards for free

We're taking you on a fast-paced, culture-packed journey through Seoul, South Korea. From digging into crispy Korean fried chicken and sizzling BBQ, to exploring ancient palaces and tea houses, to stepping foot near the tension-filled border of the DMZ, we made the most of every moment. Jamal shares the wild adventure of navigating Seoul's public transit, Brittanie gets cozy with traditional teas and sweets, and we offer travel tips to help you explore Seoul like a pro. Don't miss this episode filled with history, K-culture, epic eats, and real talk about what it's like to squeeze Seoul into just two days!Stay at the ⁠Moxy Hotel⁠, a trendy, metro-accessible hotel with a rooftop barGet an eSim from ⁠Airalo ⁠before you goEat Korean Fried Chicken at KyoChon and Korean BBQ at MyeongdongTake a ⁠DMZ Tour⁠ and explore this forbidden land (you can book with ⁠Julie, our amazing tour guide on Instagram⁠)Wander through the traditional Bukchon Hanok VillageRelax at Chatteul Tea HouseTour the iconic Gyeongbokgung PalaceRide the Namsan Cable Car to the ⁠Observation Deck Seoul Tower⁠ for panoramic nighttime views.Find a great flight deal to Seoul, or anywhere else, by signing up for ⁠⁠⁠⁠Thrifty Traveler Premium⁠⁠⁠⁠ and get flight deals sent straight to your inbox. Use our promo code TSP to get $20 off your first year subscription.—---------------------------------------Shop:⁠⁠⁠⁠ Trip Itineraries ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠&⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠Amazon Storefront ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Connect:⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠,⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠and contact us at travelsquadpodcast@gmail.com to submit a question of the week or inquire about guest interviews and advertising. Submit a question of the week or inquire about guest interviews and advertising.Contains affiliate links, thanks for supporting Travel Squad Podcast!

After the death of Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), former Congressman Patrick McHenry (R-NC) discusses Sen. Graham's legacy and the future of both the Republican and Democratic parties.  Shares of SK Hynix fell over 15% in Seoul on Monday after its impressive Friday debut of US-traded shares on the Nasdaq. Semafor's Rohan Goswami is reporting that friends and advisers of Paramount CEO David Ellison are pushing him to consider relocating the company out of California. Goswami discusses the state's role in Paramount's $110B takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery and the likelihood that the company will start fresh somewhere new. Plus, Apple is suing OpenAI, and Elon Musk and Sam Altman are taking shots at each other on X.    Emily Wilkins - 02:32 Patrick McHenry - 16:51 Rohan Goswami - 33:52   In this episode: Joe Kernen, @JoeSquawk Becky Quick, @BeckyQuick Andrew Ross Sorkin, @andrewrsorkin Emily Wilkins, @emrwilkins Katie Kramer, @Kramer_Katie Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Cooler late June, delayed monsoon: Is Korea's summer just warming up?기사 요약: 예년보다 늦어진 장마의 영향으로 한국은 평년의 6월과 달리 비교적 선선한 날씨를 보이고 있다. 기온은 점차 오르고 있지만 아직 장마전선이 본격적으로 형성되지 않아, 당분간은 산발적인 소나기가 이어질 것으로 전망된다.[1] Summer is in full swing in South Korea, but it doesn't feel like the late June most Koreans have come to expect.in full swing: 한창 진행 중인, 절정에 접어든[2] While temperatures are forecast to climb to 33 degrees Celsius in Seoul on Monday and exceed 30 degrees across much of the country's inland areas, according to the Korea Meteorological Administration, the muggy air that usually blankets the country this time of year has yet to take hold due to the delayed monsoon.be forecast: 예보되다. (forecast: 예보하다)exceed: 초과하다, 넘다muggy: 후텁지근한blanket: (담요로) 감싸다. 뒤덮다take hold: 자리 잡다, 본격화되다[3] Last year, the monsoon began on Jeju Island on June 12, reached the country's central and southern regions on June 19, and lasted until mid-July. This year, however, the seasonal rain front has yet to form, with only scattered showers falling in place of prolonged monsoon rainfallscattered: 산발적인, 산재한기사 원문: https://www.koreaherald.com/article/10791559

What does a name really say about a person? In this episode, Andrew and Indiana talk about baby names and the stories behind them. They chat about how naming has changed in North America since the 1950s. You’ll also hear about old-fashioned virtue names, why so many parents today want something different, and the existence of “middle names” in the U.S. and Canada. Culips Meetup in Seoul! If you are in Korea, come and meet us in person at the Culips Meetup in Seoul on July 19, from 2 to 4 PM. RSVP here. To build your fluency, try listening to the episode more than once and saying the new expressions out loud until you feel comfortable using them yourself. The Best Way to Learn with This Episode: Culips members get an interactive transcript, a helpful study guide, and ad-free audio for this episode. Take your English to the next level by becoming a Culips member. Become a Culips member now: Click here Members can access the ad-free version: Click here. Join our Discord community to connect with other learners and get more English practice. Click here to join. Links mentioned in this episode: Popular baby name data (U.S. Social Security Administration) List of Korean surnames (Wikipedia) Keep an ear out for these phrases during the episode: At opposite ends of the spectrum A hat tip to (something) A copycat Claim to fame To fit in To stand out

Episode Summary A father and his four children were found dead in their home in Ulsan after months of severe financial hardship. While the case was ruled a murder-suicide, the discussion quickly expands beyond the crime itself into the failures of Korea's welfare system, the stigma surrounding mental health, and the bureaucratic obstacles that can leave vulnerable families without meaningful support. Joe and Shawn examine how the family had already been identified as a high-risk household and had been visited by schools, welfare officials, police, and child protection workers. Despite multiple warning signs, no agency ever developed a complete picture of the family's crisis. The episode explores whether this tragedy represents an isolated incident or a broader failure of institutions designed to protect children and families. Topics Discussed The Ulsan family murder-suicide Carbon monoxide deaths using charcoal briquettes Poverty and financial collapse Single fathers in Korea Mental health stigma Child welfare investigations Bureaucratic barriers to assistance In-kind support versus direct cash assistance Coordination failures between government agencies Korea's suicide rate Proposed welfare reforms Timestamps 00:00 Introduction 02:00 The Ulsan case 06:00 Financial hardship and the family's circumstances 12:00 Welfare assistance and why it wasn't enough 19:00 Single fathers and asking for help 24:00 Child protection and looking for the wrong warning signs 31:00 Mental health, stigma, and caregiver burnout 37:00 Bureaucracy and agency coordination failures 43:00 Possible reforms and remaining concerns Mentioned During the Episode Korea's Basic Livelihood Security Program Korea's child protection system Previous Dark Side of Seoul episodes on K-Poverty, child abuse, Yoo Young-chul, and the WaWo Apartment collapse Shawn's book on ghost encounters in Korea Dark Side of Seoul Ghost Walk Listen & Follow Website: https://darksideofseoul.com Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dark-side-of-seoul-podcast/id1504623984 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1lZBXNX79kwH2NXcJWNcb8 Patreon: https://patreon.com/darksideofseoul YouTube: https://youtube.com/@darksideofseoul Instagram: https://instagram.com/darksideofseoul Facebook: https://facebook.com/darksideofseoul Contact: info@darksideofseoul.com About The Dark Side of Seoul The Dark Side of Seoul explores Korea's darker history, folklore, true crime, urban legends, supernatural traditions, forgotten places, and the cultural stories that don't usually appear in guidebooks. New episodes include deep historical dives alongside our "Fun Sized" discussions of current events, controversies, and unusual aspects of life in Korea. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

NK News Senior Analytic Correspondent Colin Zwirko joins this week's podcast to discuss North Korea's naval modernization push, from Kim Jong Un's latest cruise missile test from the Kang Kon destroyer to the recent commissioning of the Choe Hyon, the country's first 5,000-ton warship to formally enter service. He also breaks down his latest NK Pro analysis on the apparent restart of makeshift smuggling routes across the North Korea-China border, including what satellite imagery shows, why private vehicles appear to be a major driver of the trade and what the activity suggests about China's willingness to tolerate sanctions violations while maintaining plausible deniability. Afterward, Gabriela Bernal joins the podcast to discuss her analysis on South Korea's shift toward “peaceful coexistence” with North Korea and what Seoul can learn from the Balkans.  She explains the concept of “functional coexistence,” why Serbia-Kosovo dialogue offers a useful but limited comparison and what role institutions like the U.N. Command, the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission and the Military Armistice Commission can play.  About the podcast: The North Korea News Podcast is a weekly podcast hosted by Alannah Hill exclusively for NK News, covering all things DPRK — from news to extended interviews with leading experts and analysts in the field, along with insight from our very own journalists.

Michael Gaudet joins Beast Over Burden to share his remarkable story of powerlifting after a heart attack, living with type 1 diabetes for 50 years, and becoming a world champion at 62. Michael has lived many athletic lives: wrestler, competitive cyclist, sports car racer, mountaineering instructor, and competitive powerlifter. After surviving a 100% LAD "widowmaker" blockage in 2023, he returned to heavy training, competed at World Cup Masters, earned a spot on the U.S. team, and won a world championship in Seoul. Niki, Andrew, and Michael discuss strength training after 60, training with type 1 diabetes, rebuilding after a heart attack, the value of coaching, why consistency matters more than complexity, and how strength supports a life full of adventure. PS - IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN TAKING ONLINE COACHING FOR A TEST RUN, CHECK IT OUT HERE.    Connect with the hosts Niki on Instagram Andrew on Instagram Connect with the show Barbell Logic on Instagram Podcast Webpage Barbell Logic on Facebook Or email podcast@barbell-logic.com

CERT/CC warns of an unpatched Tenda router backdoor. Adobe races to patch an actively exploited ColdFusion flaw. Canada pulls back the curtain on offensive cyber operations. Anthropic quietly removes hidden tracking from Claude Code. Chinese AI gains momentum as U.S. providers sweeten the deal. U.S. cloud firms challenge South Korea's new security rules. Microsoft's device telemetry helps unmask an alleged Scattered Spider hacker. And Spanish police arrest an alleged pro-Russia hacktivist.Orla Daly, CIO at Skillsoft, discusses if AI is already bypassing its own guardrails and why most organizations aren't ready. The stochastic parrot is back, and it's tired of being misquoted. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Miss an episode? Sign-up for our daily intelligence roundup, Daily Briefing, and you'll never miss a beat. And be sure to follow CyberWire Daily on LinkedIn. CyberWire Guest Today we are joined by Orla Daly, CIO at Skillsoft, discusses if AI is already bypassing its own guardrails and why most organizations aren't ready. Selected Reading Hidden Tenda Router Backdoor Grants Admin Access, No Patch Available (Security Affairs) Hackers Exploit Maximum Severity Adobe ColdFusion Flaw (Infosecurity Magazine) Canadian spy agency says it hacked drug traffickers, extremists, and a ransomware gang last year (TechCrunch) Secret Claude tracker shocks users after Anthropic's anti-surveillance stance (Ars Technica) Chinese AI models are gaining ground with U.S. companies as OpenAI, Anthropic costs surge (CNBC) AI Giants Are Handing Out Tons of Free Computing Power to Grab Startup Share (Wall Street Journal) U.S. Big Tech raises concerns over Seoul's proposed cloud security rules (Korea JoongAng Daily) Microsoft device telemetry key to unmasking alleged Scattered Spider hacker (iTnews) Spain collars alleged pro-Russia hacktivist after FBI tip-off (The Register) What Emily Bender Really Meant by "Stochastic Parrots" (IEEE Spectrum) Share your feedback. What do you think about CyberWire Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show. Want to hear your company in the show? N2K CyberWire helps you reach the industry's most influential leaders and operators, while building visibility, authority, and connectivity across the cybersecurity community. Learn more at sponsor.thecyberwire.com. The CyberWire is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this special episode of the Yo Show, I embark on an emotional trip to South Korea with my mother, returning to the places that shaped her early life. This wasn't just a tourist visit; it was a deep dive into my heritage, culture, and family history. We explore traditional tea houses in Insadong, discuss the experience of being a Black Korean comedian on global stages, and reflect on the beauty of aging with our parents. From the hilarious cultural clashes to the deeply moving realization of where my mom grew up, this vlog captures the essence of connecting with one's roots. Whether you are interested in travel vlogs, Korean culture, or personal stories about family legacy, this video offers a vulnerable and funny look at my transition from Houston to the streets of Seoul. Get ready for an honest conversation about language barriers, the surprising modernity of Korean infrastructure, and why we're even considering living there for a year. Come along for this unforgettable homecoming experience.0:00 - My Emotional Homecoming to Korea2:09 - Visiting a Traditional Korean Tea House3:42 - My Mom Explains Her Childhood Home5:17 - The Struggle of Being 6'3" in Korea7:36 - Why Korea is More Technologically Advanced9:35 - Reflecting on My Time on Korean TV12:05 - Reading Ruthless Korean YouTube Comments14:04 - Why Koreans Think I am 3516:21 - House of Yo Tour Dates & Wrap Up

How do you like your eggs? It sounds like a small question, but the answer can tell you a lot about a person. In this episode, Andrew surprises his co-host Kassy with a list of weird, wacky, and random questions. She hasn’t seen them before, so you get to hear her real, unplanned answers. They talk about all sorts of everyday things, from what they would want to be famous for to how they wake up in the morning, and they use some natural expressions that native speakers say all the time. Culips Meetup in Seoul! If you are in Korea, come and meet us in person at the Culips Meetup in Seoul on July 19, from 2 to 4 PM. RSVP here. To build your fluency, try listening to the episode more than once and saying the new expressions out loud until you feel comfortable using them yourself. The Best Way to Learn with This Episode: Culips members get an interactive transcript, a helpful study guide, and ad-free audio for this episode. Take your English to the next level by becoming a Culips member. Become a Culips member now: Click here Members can access the ad-free version: Click here. Join our Discord community to connect with other learners and get more English practice. Click here to join. Keep an ear out for these phrases during the episode: Infamous No holds barred To zonk out Dogs Up and at ’em To come full circle