Podcasts about societies

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Steve is joined by STARFOX to discuss ancient societies, war, conspiracies, and MORE! Find Starfox on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/@starfoxmediaBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/missing-persons-mysteries--5624803/support.

At a moment when national politics are testing the boundaries of constitutional protections and human dignity, local communities are asking a vital question: What can we do to protect one another? Town Hall Seattle and The Stranger present the March 19 edition of the Speaking of Seattle civic conversation series, an evening focused on immigrant rights, community responsibility, and the everyday actions that help safeguard our neighbors. This timely conversation explores how federal immigration enforcement policies ripple through local communities — and how ordinary people can respond with care, courage, and solidarity. Together, we examine what it means to treat immigrant rights as human rights, and how community members can act lawfully, safely, and effectively when confronted with fear-based tactics and unconstitutional overreach. Host Marcus Harrison Green is the publisher of Hinton Publishing, the founder of the South Seattle Emerald, and a columnist with The Stranger. Growing up in South Seattle, he experienced first-hand the impact of one-dimensional stories on marginalized communities, which taught him the value of authentic narratives. After an unfulfilling stint in the investment world during his twenties, Marcus returned to his community with a newfound purpose of telling stories with nuance, complexity, and multidimensionality with the hope of advancing social change. This led him to become a writer and found the South Seattle Emerald. An award-winning journalist, he was awarded the Seattle Human Rights Commissions' Individual Human Rights Leader Award for 2020 and named the inaugural James Baldwin Fellow by the Northwest African American Museum in 2022. Panelists Angelina Snodgrass Godoy is Helen H. Jackson Endowed Chair in Human Rights and Director at the Center for Human Rights at the University of Washington. She is Associate Professor of International Studies at the Henry M. Jackson School, Associate Professor of Law, Societies, and Justice, and Adjunct Associate Professor of Sociology. A sociologist by training, her research focuses on human rights in Central and Latin America. Godoy teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in human rights in both the Law, Societies, and Justice program and in the Jackson School of International Studies. Roxana Norouzi is a longtime immigrant rights leader with 20 years of experience in organizing, advocacy, and social justice work with immigrant and refugee communities. She currently serves as Executive Director of OneAmerica, where she first began as an organizing intern 12 years ago and later led education policy efforts that won major state and local victories and secured millions in funding for multilingual education. Over the past decade, she has helped guide OneAmerica through a transformational shift toward deeper grassroots organizing, strategic policy campaigns, and building political power. Roxana is also a clinical instructor at the University of Washington School of Public Health. She earned her MSW from UW and was awarded the Bonderman Fellowship, which took her to 20 countries to study post-conflict regions, migration, and identity. As a first-generation American, her work is grounded in a deep commitment to racial equity and immigrant justice. Erika Evans is the first African American and first person of color to serve as Seattle City Attorney. A graduate of the University of Washington and Seattle University School of Law, Erika began her career in the Seattle City Attorney's Office before serving as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Department of Justice's Terrorism and Violent Crimes Unit and as Civil Rights Coordinator until March 2025, when she resigned following federal policy changes she opposed. She has also served as a pro tem municipal court judge in three Washington jurisdictions. Erika is a past president of the Loren Miller Bar Association and co-chair of the Washington Leadership Institute. Seattle City Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck is known for bringing people together around practical solutions and delivering results. A graduate of Syracuse University and the University of Washington's Evans School of Public Policy and Governance, Rinck built her career as a community organizer and policy leader. She has advanced campaign finance reform, supported public health and human services policy across 38 cities during COVID-19, and held leadership roles at the Sound Cities Association and the King County Regional Homelessness Authority. As a councilmember, she created a dedicated Committee on Federal Policy Changes to respond to federal threats to Seattle and has championed union-built social housing, immigrant rights, and progressive revenue solutions. Presented by Town Hall Seattle and The Stranger.

Are interethnic marriages bridges or fault lines in post-conflict societies? What happens when the politics of national identity enter the intimacy of home? Who were the main agents to oppose or promote mixed marriages in East-CentralEurope? Was it the Church? Was it the legal framework? Were it depending on local culture? Was it determined by class?In our podcast in two parts, we discuss this topic with Karolina Lendák-Kabók and Lucija Balikić, around their research project called entitled “Mixed Families: Searching forIdentity and Belonging in Post-Conflict Societies”. Their research group emerges from the The Momentum (Lendület) 2025 project hosted at Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of MinorityStudies and it is financed by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences – Flagship Program of the Academy.By following marriages that crossed lines of language, confession, and social status, the research project “MixedFamilies: Searching for Identity and Belonging in Post-Conflict Societies” trace how states, churches, and communities sought to regulate intimacy long before theyregulated borders.In our second part, we discuss why mixedness shouldbe treated as a long historical process instead of a simple past-present comparison. Legal norms, religious prescriptions, social expectations, and gendered assumptions shaped mixed families across generations. To unfold thiscomplex phenomenon, Karolina Lendák-Kabók and Lucija Balikić move between micro‑level family dynamics, meso‑level institutions such as schools and churches, andmacro‑level political frameworks to trace how mixedness is produced, negotiated, and transmitted over time.The second part of this episode also explores theproject's diverse source base: legal codes, canon laws,  minority association records, ego‑documents, and oral interviews. Finally, the conversation opens toward the future of the field. Karolina Lendák-Kabók and Lucija Balikić expand on emerging research avenues, including the understudied role of children in mixed families, the methodological challenges of combining quantitative and qualitative data, and the potential for expanding the geographical scope beyond Central and Southeastern Europe.

(16) Ryan Streeter discusses human flourishing, defining it as the fulfillment of potential through purpose and upward mobility. He argues that dynamic societies improve job satisfaction for hourly workers by providing more options. Conversely, stagnation in Europe results from heavy regulation and a declining cultural valuation of entrepreneurs.

This week we're joined by Ryan Avent to discuss his new book In Good Faith: How the Nature of Belief Shapes the Fate of Societies. We discuss human evolution and the impact of collective knowledge and culture and the need to create a new story about the future of society. We also discuss grass is greener thinking on infrastructure, the nature of belief without the need for evidence, and the fact that there is no perfect past. +++ Get the show ad free on Patreon! Find out about our newsletter and archive on YouTube! Follow us on Bluesky, Threads, Instagram, YouTube, Flickr, Substack ... @theoverheadwire Follow us on Mastadon theoverheadwire@sfba.social Support the show on Patreon http://patreon.com/theoverheadwire Buy books on our Bookshop.org Affiliate site!  And get our Cars are Cholesterol shirt at Tee-Public! And everything else at http://theoverheadwire.com

Aujourd'hui, nous allons parler d'un sujet devenu absolument central pour l'industrie publicitaire : la quête d'une mesure unifiée entre TV, CTV et digital. Selon l'IAB Europe, plus de 70 % des annonceurs considèrent désormais la mesure cross-média comme une priorité stratégique. Pourtant, malgré les progrès technologiques, le marché continue de fonctionner avec des méthodologies, des métriques et parfois même des intérêts divergents. Alors pourquoi les annonceurs doutent-ils aujourd'hui des chiffres ?La mesure est-elle encore un sujet purement technique… ou devenue un enjeu politique et économique pour l'ensemble de l'écosystème ? Peut-on réellement mesurer une campagne TV + CTV + digital de façon unifiée ?Quels sont les blocages technologiques, commerciaux ou diplomatiques qui freinent encore cette convergence ?Et enfin : le marché va-t-il un jour converger vers une currency unique de la vidéo ? Pour en discuter, j'ai le plaisir d'accueillir :Emilie Carcassone d'Audience ProjectVincent Salini de France Télévisions Publicitéet Damien Prybis d'OMD FranceUne émission Minted, produite par THE SOCIETIES.MEDIA,en français sous-titré en anglais.Épisode soutenu par Audience ProjectPartenaire opérationnel : Checksub ⚡️ Développer votre audience ⚡️ Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Msgr. Roger J. Landry General Assembly of The Pontifical Mission Societies Collegio San Lorenzo da Brindisi, Rome May 30, 2026   To listen to an audio recording of today's conference, please click below:  https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/catholicpreaching/5.30.26_TPMS_General_Assembly_Growing_Disciples_through_Generosity_1.mp3   To download a copy of the PDF of today's talk, please click below:  5.30.26 Growing Disciples Through Generosity   The post Growing Disciples through Generosity, General Assembly of The Pontifical Mission Societies, May 30, 2026 appeared first on Catholic Preaching.

Welcome to our new series, The Hayekian Triangle. This series will feature a range of conversations between our hosts: Virgil Storr, Chris Coyne, and Peter Boettke. On this episode, the three sit down to mark the 250th anniversary of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations — and to ask a deceptively simple question: why are we still reading a book written a quarter-millennium ago?From the invisible hand to the division of labor, Smith's ideas have become so embedded in how we think about markets and society that it's easy to forget just how radical they originally were. Virgil, Chris, and Pete dig into what Smith actually said, why the standard takes on laissez-faire and self-interest so often miss the mark, and what a Scottish moral philosopher writing in 1776 still has to teach us about wealth, poverty, and the institutions that make human flourishing possible.Whether you're coming to Smith for the first time or returning to him with fresh eyes, this conversation is a reminder that the greatest works in political economy aren't monuments to be admired from a distance — they remain living inputs into the science of today.**This episode was recorded on April 3, 2026**Show Notes:Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations (Liberty Fund, 1982)Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (Liberty Fund, 1982)Kenneth Boulding, "After Samuelson, Who Needs Adam Smith?" (History of Political Economy, 1971)Kenneth Boulding, "Economics as a Moral Science" (The American Economic Review, 1969)Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson, The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty (Penguin Press, 2019)Raghuram Rajan, The Third Pillar: How Markets and the State Leave the Community Behind (Penguin Press, 2019)Deirdre McCloskey, The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce; Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can't Explain the Modern World; Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World (University of Chicago Press, 2006, 2010, 2016)Martha Nussbaum, The Cosmopolitan Tradition: A Noble but Flawed Ideal (Belknap Press/Harvard University Press, 2019)Ludwig von Mises, “Why Read Adam Smith Today?” (FEE, 2015)Richard Ebeling, "Celebrating Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations at 250 Years" (Future of Freedom, 2026)If you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Check out our other podcast from the Hayek Program! Virtual Sentiments is a podcast in which political theorist Kristen Collins interviews scholars and practitioners grappling with pressing problems in political economy with an eye to the past. Subscribe today!Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatusCC Music: Twisterium

Societies rarely collapse overnight. More often, they decline slowly—becoming less competent, more restrictive, and harder to navigate with each passing year. In this episode, we revisit the ideas of managed decline and soft totalitarianism, examine the possible paths societies take as institutions weaken, and lay out a practical framework for how you can position yourself to survive, adapt, and preserve what matters in an age of growing instability.So, pull up a chair and sit a spell as we discuss How to Survive the Long Descent.Resources:The Civil War Has Been Cancelled (Until Further Notice)The Civil War Has Been Cancelled Part IILive Not By Lies, Rod DreherSupport the showGet Members Only Content when you upgrade to a premium membership on our Substack page.  Click here.Link up with us:Website:  Pearl Snap TacticalInstagram: Pearl Snap Tactical X:  Pearl Snap TaciticalThe views and opinions expressed by the guests do not necessarily reflect those of the host, this podcast or affiliates.  The information provided in these shows are for educational purposes do not constitute legal advice.  Those interest in training in the use of firearms or other self-defense applications are advised to seek out a professional, qualified instructor.(Some of the links in the episode show notes are affiliate links. This means that if you make a purchase through these links, we may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. We only recommend products or services we have personally used and believe will add value to our listeners.)

Datshiane Navanayagam talks to Whitley Fund for Nature winners from India and South Africa who are protecting endangered frogs and salamanders.Dr Barkha Subba is leading the first grassroots protection for the Himalayan Salamander in Darjeeling. The scientific adviser at local NGO, Federation of Societies for Environmental Protection (FOSEP), Barkha is working to restore habitat, remove invasive species and screen for deadly diseases, as well as engage local people in awareness programmes promoting sustainable land use and eco-friendly tourism.Environmentalist Jeanne Tarrant works on protecting frogs and their habitat in South Africa. Almost two-thirds of the country's 135 frog species are found nowhere else. She uses frogs as flagships for habitat protection, contributing to the broader conservation of freshwater and grassland areas that serve as important watersheds and carbon sinks.Produced by Jane Thurlow(Image: (L) Jeanne Tarrant, credit SABC. (R) Barkha Subba, credit Whitley Fund for Nature.)

Are you interested in floating cities? What do you think about startup societies as an innovative form of governance? How can we create heterarchy for better urban futures? Trailer for episode 432 - interview with Dr Nathalie Mezza-Garcia, digital and water-based jurisdiction architect. We will talk about her vision for the future of cities, floating cities, legal and environmental aspects, startup societies, digital sovereignty, and many more.Find out more in the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠episode⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Episode generated with ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Descript⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ assistance (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠affiliate link⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠).Music by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Lesfm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠from ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pixabay⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Steve Stockton is joined by STARFOX to discuss ancient societies, war, conspiracies, and MORE! Find Starfox on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/@starfoxmediaBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/missing-persons-mysteries--5624803/support.

In this episode, Jonathan Anomaly joins us to discuss the collapse of trust in modern institutions, the rise of tribal politics, and why liberty increasingly depends on exit rather than persuasion.We explore embryo selection, genetics, rational irrationality, startup societies, academia, media manipulation, and the future of liberalism in an age of polarization.From controversial ideas to practical entrepreneurship, this conversation dives into what happens when people stop asking permission and start building alternatives. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.infinitacitytimes.com

Today we talk with Rachel Miner, founder of Bellwether International, and Jennie Lloyd, Board Chair of Utah Global Diplomacy, about how to promote peace in our communities.

The world has the knowledge to make anesthesia safer, but too often it's the basics that are missing where the need is greatest. We're talking about perioperative patient safety in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where a smaller share of surgical volume can still carry a massive share of perioperative death and disability. That imbalance isn't inevitable, and it isn't solved by one tool or one training course. It changes when systems change. We walk through the biggest systemic barriers starting with anesthesia workforce shortages and the downstream effects on access, delays, and confidence in care. We also dig into national surgical, obstetric, and anesthesia plans (NSOAPs) and how partnerships with organizations like the World Health Organization and the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists can help countries set targets, build capacity, and track progress. From there, we get painfully practical: monitors, oxygen, essential medicines, and rescue drugs. We discuss the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist, what makes implementation succeed, and why the WFSA International Standards for a Safe Practice of Anesthesia matter as both a minimum safety floor and a roadmap for improvement. We close on a critical question for quality improvement everywhere: how do you build accountability when risk-adjusted outcomes data is hard to collect, and what solutions are most realistic? Subscribe for more anesthesia patient safety conversations, share this episode with a colleague, and leave a review so more clinicians can find the show.For show notes & transcript, visit our episode page at apsf.org: https://www.apsf.org/podcast/307-perioperative-safety-in-low-and-middle-income-countries/© 2026, The Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation

Dive into a special episode with Dato' Dr. Sean SEAH, a serial tech entrepreneur, satellite innovator, and global technology leader, as he shares insights on digital transformation, space technology, entrepreneurship, and leadership for the future of Malaysia and beyond.With experience spanning Silicon Valley companies such as Sun Microsystems and Netscape, Dato' Dr. Sean SEAH has played a key role in advancing Malaysia's digital and space ambitions. As the founder of Angkasa-X and Chairman of WITSA, he is passionate about using technology to create social inclusion, connect underserved communities, and inspire future generations to dream boldly and innovate fearlessly.

Are interethnic marriages bridges or fault lines in post-conflict societies? What happens when the politics of national identity enter the intimacy of home? Who were the main agents to oppose or promote mixed marriages in East-CentralEurope? Was it the Church? Was it the legal framework? Were it depending on local culture? Was it determined by class?In our podcast in two parts, we discuss this topic with Karolina Lendák-Kabók and Lucija Balikić, around their research project called entitled “Mixed Families: Searching forIdentity and Belonging in Post-Conflict Societies”. Their research group emerges from the The Momentum (Lendület) 2025 project hosted at Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of MinorityStudies and it is financed by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences – Flagship Program of the Academy.By following marriages that crossed lines of language,confession, and social status, the research project “MixedFamilies: Searching for Identity and Belonging in Post-Conflict Societies” trace how states, churches, and communities sought to regulate intimacy long before theyregulated borders.Our first part begins by discussing the intellectualcuriosities that led to this project and the main research questions. Then, the discussion moves to a careful unpacking of the project's main term, mixedness, and why it offers a productive lens for studying interethnic marriages.The episode then turns to the choice of cases: Hungaryand the post‑Yugoslav space. Listeners will learn what makes these regions comparable, how their shared imperial and socialist legacies matter.

Msgr. Roger J. Landry Pontifical Missionary Union Webinar May 14, 2026   To watch a recording of today's webinar, please click below:    To listen to an audio recording of the webinar, please click below:  https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/catholicpreaching/5.14.26_Four_Pontifical_Mission_Societies_II.mp3   To download a copy of the slides of the presentation, please click below: 5.14.26 PUM MIssiology Lecture on […] The post The Four Pontifical Mission Societies as Instruments of Missionary Animation and Formation in the Local Churches for a New Missionary Movement in the Church, Pontifical Missionary Union Refresher Course in Missiology, May 14, 2026 appeared first on Catholic Preaching.

In this special Complex Care Journal Club podcast episode, co-hosts Drs. Emily Goodwin, Kristie Malik, and Kathleen Huth interview presenters of posters and oral abstracts relevant to the care of children with medical complexity at the Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) 2026 annual meeting, as well as at a pre-PAS event focused on home- and community-based care and training in complex care. Speakers describe their key findings, messages for care teams including patients and families, and opportunities to translate their findings into practice.‌ SPEAKERS Flor Arellano, MPH Clinical Research Coordinator, University of California, Los Angeles Jennifer Arnold, MD, MSc Medical Director, Skeletal Health, Boston Children's Hospital Ryan Brewster, MD Neonatal- Perinatal Medicine Fellow, Stanford University School of Medicine Meg Comeau, MHA Senior Project Director, Center for Innovation in Social Work & Health, Boston University School of Social Work John Greenwood, PT Executive Director for Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy and Rehabilitation Services, Boston Children's Hospital Elaine Lin, MD Complex Care Pediatrician, Boston Children's Hospital Michelle Macy, MD, MS Professor of Pediatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine Scientific Director, Community, Population Health, and Outcomes, Research and Evaluation Center, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago Ashley Nmoh, BA Medical Student, Duke University School of Medicine Jennifer Peralta, MD, MSHPN Assistant Clinical Professor, University of California, Los Angeles Nora Renthal, MD, PhD Assistant Professor of Pediatric Endocrinology, Boston Children's Hospital Erin Ward, MEd Patient Engagement Consultant, Complex Care Service, Boston Children's Hospital HOSTS Emily J. Goodwin, MD Clinical Associate Professor of Pediatrics, University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine Pediatrician, General Academic Pediatrics Beacon Program, Children's Mercy Kansas City Kristina Malik, MD Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, University of Colorado School of Medicine Medical Director, KidStreet Pediatrician, Special Care Clinic, Children's Hospital Colorado Kathleen Huth, MD, MMSc Pediatrician, Complex Care Service, Division of General Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School DATE Initial publication date: May 11, 2026. ARTICLES REFERENCED - Brewster RC, Kats DJ, Elborki M, Chilukuri N, Ray M, Shaar N, Hron J, Khan A. Clinical Outcomes of Postedited Artificial Intelligence Translation for Discharge Instructions. Hosp Pediatr. 2026 Apr 10:e2025008986. doi: 10.1542/hpeds.2025-008986. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 41956490. - FamilyCIRCLE. University of Wisconsin–Madison, Department of Pediatrics. Accessed May 4, 2026. https://familycircle.pediatrics.wisc.edu/ - Pediatric Academic Societies. Online program guide. Accessed May 4, 2026. https://2026.pas-meeting.org/ - Pediatric Academic Societies. Who we are. Accessed May 4, 2026. https://www.pas-meeting.org/about/ - Pediatric Academic Societies. Academic Pediatric Association (APA) awards. Accessed May 4, 2026. https://www.pas-meeting.org/2026-awards-apa/‌ TRANSCRIPT https://cdn.bfldr.com/D6LGWP8S/as/k7qqm93qqpqgb5k3jw4f3w2t/PAS_2026_conference_transcript_5-8-26‌ Clinicians across healthcare professions, advocates, researchers, and patients/families are all encouraged to engage and provide feedback! You can recommend an article for discussion using this form: https://forms.gle/Bdxb86Sw5qq1uFhW6. CITATION Goodwin EJ, Malik K, Arellano F, Arnold J, Brewster R, Comeau M, Greenwood J, Lin E, Macy M, Nmoh A, Peralta J, Renthal N, Ward E, Huth K. Practice-Changing Research in Complex Care at the Pediatric Academic Societies 2026 Annual Meeting. 05/2026. OPENPediatrics. Online Podcast. https://soundcloud.com/openpediatrics/practice-changing-research-in-complex-care-pediatric-academic-societies-2026.

In this second episode of the Social Inclusion Series*, we explore how ageing populations are reshaping social protection needs and development across Asia and the Pacific. While demographic trends vary widely across the region, countries are increasingly facing issues on how to support income security, health, care, and dignity in later life. The episode explores the links between ageing, pension systems, and the care economy, which has long relied on women's unpaid labour, including how family-based care is coming under increasing pressure from migration, urbanisation, and changing social and economic conditions. Drawing on examples from the Asia-Pacific region, with a closer look at the experience of Fiji, our guests discuss how social protection can evolve to complement family and community support, reduce poverty, and strengthen resilience across the life course. Meet our guests:  Philip O'Keefe, Professor of Practice, Centre for Population Ageing Research (CEPAR), University of New South Wales Jesse Doyle, Senior Social Protection Specialist (Economist), P4SP Ms Rozia Bi, National Coordinator - Social Protection Reforms, Fiji Ministry of Women, Children & Social Protection For our Quick Wins segment, we spoke with Meghna Ranganathan, Associate Professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who shared insights on how the impacts of social protection interventions on intimate partner violence and household dynamics evolve over time, and reflected on more inclusive approaches to research and evidence. *The Social Inclusion Series, produced by socialprotection.org in partnership with Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), is a three-part series that explores how social protection systems can advance the economic and social inclusion of vulnerable populations across the Indo-Pacific, in line with GEDSI principles, addressing key themes such as gender equality, demographic shifts, and disability inclusion. Resources: Publication | World social protection report 2024-26: Regional companion report for Asia and the Pacific Publication | Social Outlook for Asia and the Pacific 2024 - Protecting our Future Today: Social Protection in Asia and the Pacific Publication | Toward a Resilient Care Ecosystem in Asia and the Pacific - Promising Practices, Lessons Learned, and Pathways for Action on Decent Care Work Publication | Caring Societies, Inclusive, and Green Economies in Asia and the Pacific: Unveiling Data To Advance Women's Empowerment Beyond GDP Blog | Why Asia-Pacific should care about care: Care infrastructure is the next frontier development solution across the region Blog | Ageing in the Global South: The challenge of social protection Publication | Future demand for care in Indonesia, the Philippines & Vietnam Website | Cash Transfer and IPV Research Collaborative Publication | Evolution of intimate partner violence impacts from cash transfers, food transfers, and behaviour change communication: Mixed-method experimental evidence from a nine-year post-programme follow-up in Bangladesh Publication | Decolonising implementation science: a call for methodological pluralism

Today's political debates are fiercely polarized. But looking beyond the headlines, The Trigger Points: Inequality and Political Polarization in Contemporary Society (Policy Press, 2026) shows that ordinary citizens hold much more nuanced, less divided views. Drawing on rich survey data and group discussions, this work maps four major areas of conflict: migration, climate change, diversity, and economic justice. Across these conflicts, most citizens take positions that are middle-of-the-road, contradictory, or undecided. It is only certain ‘trigger points' – like gendered pronouns or refugee admissions – that predictably ignite tensions and deep disagreement. Political entrepreneurs know this and weaponize trigger points for their agenda. Yet the real key to contemporary conflicts, the book argues, lies in social inequality. This is a vital work that maps today's political landscape without sensationalism, offering a fresh lens on public debate. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's political debates are fiercely polarized. But looking beyond the headlines, The Trigger Points: Inequality and Political Polarization in Contemporary Society (Policy Press, 2026) shows that ordinary citizens hold much more nuanced, less divided views. Drawing on rich survey data and group discussions, this work maps four major areas of conflict: migration, climate change, diversity, and economic justice. Across these conflicts, most citizens take positions that are middle-of-the-road, contradictory, or undecided. It is only certain ‘trigger points' – like gendered pronouns or refugee admissions – that predictably ignite tensions and deep disagreement. Political entrepreneurs know this and weaponize trigger points for their agenda. Yet the real key to contemporary conflicts, the book argues, lies in social inequality. This is a vital work that maps today's political landscape without sensationalism, offering a fresh lens on public debate. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Today's political debates are fiercely polarized. But looking beyond the headlines, The Trigger Points: Inequality and Political Polarization in Contemporary Society (Policy Press, 2026) shows that ordinary citizens hold much more nuanced, less divided views. Drawing on rich survey data and group discussions, this work maps four major areas of conflict: migration, climate change, diversity, and economic justice. Across these conflicts, most citizens take positions that are middle-of-the-road, contradictory, or undecided. It is only certain ‘trigger points' – like gendered pronouns or refugee admissions – that predictably ignite tensions and deep disagreement. Political entrepreneurs know this and weaponize trigger points for their agenda. Yet the real key to contemporary conflicts, the book argues, lies in social inequality. This is a vital work that maps today's political landscape without sensationalism, offering a fresh lens on public debate. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Today's political debates are fiercely polarized. But looking beyond the headlines, The Trigger Points: Inequality and Political Polarization in Contemporary Society (Policy Press, 2026) shows that ordinary citizens hold much more nuanced, less divided views. Drawing on rich survey data and group discussions, this work maps four major areas of conflict: migration, climate change, diversity, and economic justice. Across these conflicts, most citizens take positions that are middle-of-the-road, contradictory, or undecided. It is only certain ‘trigger points' – like gendered pronouns or refugee admissions – that predictably ignite tensions and deep disagreement. Political entrepreneurs know this and weaponize trigger points for their agenda. Yet the real key to contemporary conflicts, the book argues, lies in social inequality. This is a vital work that maps today's political landscape without sensationalism, offering a fresh lens on public debate. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

Today's political debates are fiercely polarized. But looking beyond the headlines, The Trigger Points: Inequality and Political Polarization in Contemporary Society (Policy Press, 2026) shows that ordinary citizens hold much more nuanced, less divided views. Drawing on rich survey data and group discussions, this work maps four major areas of conflict: migration, climate change, diversity, and economic justice. Across these conflicts, most citizens take positions that are middle-of-the-road, contradictory, or undecided. It is only certain ‘trigger points' – like gendered pronouns or refugee admissions – that predictably ignite tensions and deep disagreement. Political entrepreneurs know this and weaponize trigger points for their agenda. Yet the real key to contemporary conflicts, the book argues, lies in social inequality. This is a vital work that maps today's political landscape without sensationalism, offering a fresh lens on public debate. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

On this week's Mean Age Daydream, Brian looks at how all of the services (welfare, SNAP, free healthcare) are creating an entire society that doesn't want to take part in civil culture. Also: Animal Farm tanks hard, and California's ridiculous climate policies lead to a catastrophe when a massive fire breaks out in an abandoned oil tunnel. ⁠⁠https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lou-perez-live-in-los-angeles-tickets-1986570202954⁠ ⁠ Buy my new card game: WOKE WORD WARS - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FLF8Y16S⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

On this week's Mean Age Daydream, Brian looks at how all of the services (welfare, SNAP, free healthcare) are creating an entire society that doesn't want to take part in civil culture. Also: Animal Farm tanks hard, and California's ridiculous climate policies lead to a catastrophe when a massive fire breaks out in an abandoned oil tunnel. ⁠⁠⁠https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lou-perez-live-in-los-angeles-tickets-1986570202954⁠⁠ ⁠ Buy my new card game: WOKE WORD WARS - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FLF8Y16S⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

“Delegating knowledge is not the same as delegating wisdom. You learn by experience, and if you don’t have any experiences…you will get cognitive atrophy.” –David Vivancos About David Vivancos David Vivancos is an AI, data, and neuroscience serial entrepreneur, having cofounded five startups since 1995. He is a frequent keynote speaker and is the author of six books, including the Artificiology series. Website: vivancos.com LinkedIn Profile: David Vivancos What you will learn Why embracing advanced AI is crucial for human progress How shifting from digitization to automation and datification redefines value The evolving distinction between human-acquired and AI-generated knowledge How to avoid cognitive atrophy and actively exercise your mind alongside AI What cognitive flourishing means in a world of widespread AI augmentation Ways AI can transform and personalize education across all levels The importance of coexistence training as we prepare for AGI's societal integration Why rethinking human identity, humility, and social structures is essential for a future with machine citizens Episode Resources Transcript Ross Dawson: David, it is wonderful to have you on the show. David Vivancos: Thank you very much, Ross. Glad to be here. Ross: So you have a more developed, or some would say, extreme view of the relative role of humans plus AI. I’d love to dig into where you think things are going, and how we can best respond. Perhaps the starting point is, you say that we should not be resisting or pushing back. We should fully embrace the shift towards very high levels of AI capability, or at some point, AGI. David: Yeah, that’s fully my point. I think we are in a moment in history where we are really building this technology that one day is not going to be a technology anymore. So, the sooner we start to embrace it, to teach it, and to be really in sync with what we are creating day by day, the better off we will be. So yes, my point of view is that we should embrace it. We should start building as soon as possible. We should fix most of the problems that humans have had over the last millennia, and some of these problems could be solved by using AI. So basically, our “fourth brain”—we have the three-part brain, but in reality, there’s only one brain—this fourth brain, AI, will help us solve all of these issues. So yes, it’s an opportunity. Ross: Yes. I mean, I think there’s always two sides—as in, every opportunity has a challenge, every challenge has an opportunity. So I always think we need to acknowledge challenges and focus on opportunities. I think we’ll get onto that in discussing some of the cognitive implications. You have a series of books which have really told the story over time around this. One of them was “Automate or Be Automated.” This idea of saying, well, there are things which machines, in the broader sense, can do in automating things. So, how would you frame that now, in terms of what it is that can be automated, and how do we position ourselves relative to that? Where do machines start to do what humans have done? David: Yep. I’ve been in this business of trying to build the impossible for the last 30-plus years. “Automate or Be Automated,” the book you mentioned, is from about six years ago. When I started creating and building technology, also about VR and many other things, about 30 years ago, the first companies were internet companies. Back then, what we did is what people now call digitization. But over the last 20–25 years, what we’ve mostly been doing is datification—gathering data and using that data for companies to grow and to understand what happens in the world. But over the last maybe 10 or 11 years, what I call the new golden age of AI, we are starting to build the capabilities to use that data to really build algorithms. Once we have that, we can start to automate, and with this automation, basically what we regain is time. I think time is our most precious asset, along with health and the people we love. Being able to stop doing these repetitive things over and over and put a machine to do that is a fundamental trait for humans. That book, six years ago, was about building a methodology of what can be automated in the digital world, but also in the physical world. That has changed over the last year and a half with the physicality of AI—humanoid robots. I was invited last year to attend the first humanoid Olympia in Greece, in Olympia, the place where 2,800 years ago, humans started to compete. We’ve just seen this week the explosion of the new race, for example, of the half marathon in China, where robots already beat the human mark. So yes, with automation, you need to see what you are doing, and if you are repeating anything, you can try to see if that can be automated by using an agent, by using the cloud, by using a robot—whatever. So yes, we should regain our time and automate, or be automated. It’s all about that. Ross: Yeah. I think people understand the automation thesis. It’s obviously not new—we’ve been automating things in various ways for centuries, at an increasing pace. Your following book was “The End of Knowledge.” This is an interesting framework, starting to get to cognition. The idea is that knowledge is built on experience of whatever kind, whether that’s just in data or otherwise. Obviously, humans use data just as much as machines. But where this starts to become a distinction, as well as a complementarity, is between AI-embedded knowledge and human knowledge. So why is it “the end of knowledge”? David: Yeah, that’s a really great question. It came as an epiphany for me. That book is from about three years ago. I’ve also been involved, of course, in building AI and AGI algorithms over the last 20 years. We started using GPT models before they became can across, but the GPT moment, a year before that, really marked the difference—when we started to be able to use AI in a very seamless way to regenerate and process knowledge. That book, “The End of Knowledge,” came from the realization that we are starting to delegate the production and understanding of knowledge to machines. That’s a critical shift in human history, because through history, humans have needed and used knowledge a lot. Knowledge is power. The more knowledge you have that others don’t, the more advantages you have to do whatever you want. That started to change back then. Now, what people call the “dead internet theory” is basically some of the things I expressed in that book earlier, because we are starting to generate more knowledge. In fact, we’ve already passed the point where most of the human-written knowledge since the printing press has been surpassed by the amount of knowledge we can create using AI. Myself, for example, I started learning to code when I was young. I’ve coded in more than 25 languages and written over a million lines of code in my life. That same number of lines of code, I might now write in the last couple of weeks. So as you can see, you have 40-plus years of your own life in a week. That’s why “the end of knowledge” means that the human capability to gather knowledge and to be knowledgeable about whatever you want can now be delegated to machines. That book marked the difference and started a new field that I now call artificiality. I didn’t know that when I started writing it, but I started this path of trying to see what happens when you delegate some of the main capabilities of your mind to a machine. Ross: Yeah, and I’d like to come back later to the themes of artificiality, machine citizenship, and the societal value we attribute to machines. But I want to start digging into the cognitive piece here. One of the points you make is that we do need to avoid cognitive atrophy. You say we need to have cognitive exercise in order to avoid cognitive atrophy—obviously, a strong analog to the physical world. We need to collaborate with others and with machines to do that. I’d love to get more specific around that. What is the nature of cognitive exercise that will avoid cognitive atrophy, which will enable us to keep our cognition refined and even improving? David: Yeah, that’s a fundamental piece. When we start to delegate all these things to machines, the easy thing to do—and probably the oldest human brain capability—is to not do it yourself. You just delegate everything, and you basically become like in the movie “Idiocracy,” which played out quite well what could happen if we do that. The thing is, with the current AIs—even with the latest releases, like DeepSeek and GPT-5.5—everything is changing quite fast. But even with those AIs, you still need to be in the loop. It’s good if you stay in the loop. I think it’s fundamental. Use the technologies—the AIs, I always call them in plural because there are many—and use as many as you can, but you should still be in the loop, at least for now. Maybe for a couple of years or months, I don’t know exactly, but for a while, you still need to have your hands on the wheel. If you use most of them and get all the information from all these AIs, as a human you need to understand the bias, because all AIs are going to be biased. We all know humans are biased; there are no unbiased humans. The same happens with AIs. But if you are in charge and have that council of intelligences, you can start to grasp what each one is doing. I use about 20 of them every day and get different sets of answers in small batches. You can start to see where they come to consensus and where they differ. So, to avoid cognitive atrophy, if you use AIs to keep yourself in the loop and apply your human curiosity—I don’t even say creativity, because creativity is also being widely delegated to machines—but human curiosity and other things that are still hard to embed in LLM models, you can still add a lot of human value. That’s where, to avoid cognitive atrophy, you should use AIs, but use them with your human in the loop. Ross: So, what specifically, what’s your advice to someone who sees that they’re using LLMs and getting lazy in their thinking? What should specifically they do if they notice their brains are getting lazy? David: They should differentiate between simple questions—where you look for something you need quickly—and other things that should make you think. Delegating knowledge is not the same as delegating wisdom. You learn by experience, and if you don’t have any experiences and you delegate not only knowledge gathering or creation, but also the experience itself, then you will get cognitive atrophy. So, understanding this difference and using knowledge to think is really the key point. It’s not just asking for something simple, but for more complex things, you should still add your thoughts. When you talk to an AI or AIs, it’s basically a conversation. It shouldn’t be, in most situations, just a one-way communication. It’s fundamental to keep this line of communication open, so you can keep feeding your brain with information and other activities, and gather wisdom with that. Ross: I guess this goes to another phrase you use—cognitive flourishing. There is absolutely the potential for us to think bigger, better, broader, and in more refined ways than we have in the past using LLMs. But that’s not the default path for most people. Many people start to fall into that trap, so there is a divide. We need this metacognition. We need to be aware of what we are doing and at what level we are working with the LLMs. Maybe paint this picture of cognitive flourishing. What is the positive? How far could we go in terms of potentially improving, augmenting, and letting out our cognition blossom? David: Yeah. The thing is, we humans—of course, there are many intelligences. That’s the first thing we must address, because there isn’t a single IQ or whatever way you want to measure intelligence. For me, the most important one is the capacity to adapt. That’s probably the most important intelligence of all. If we talk about the G factor, it’s one way, maybe mixing different aspects. In that sense, we have limitations. Since the beginning of time, humans have developed tools to extend our physical capabilities, but we’ve also developed tools to extend our mental limitations. This is really the final tool to extend these mental limitations. We have issues, for example, with memorizing long things—it’s quite difficult; our brains aren’t made for that. We’re basically pattern recognition machines; almost two-thirds of our brains are devoted to that. That’s something machines do quite well, so we can use that to extend our mental performance. If we think that now we have AIs with close to 150 IQ points—regardless of what you mean by IQ points, or at least in the Mensa standard test, maybe they’ve learned that, so maybe it’s not so fair to think that—but if that trend continues, even over the current year, it’s not far-fetched to have 200 IQ AIs at your fingertips. That’s a game changer. It’s like we all can have a conversation with Einstein, Newton, Carl Sagan, or whoever you want, and even make them argue about things. That’s another interesting point—when you use AIs, you can have them argue, not just agree with you, but also challenge what you or other AIs are saying. That power at your fingertips—to have this IQ potential of machines—is very critical. Another important aspect is the volume. For example, you can’t read a million books, or even 100 books in a month would be quite challenging. The capability to have machines provide all that knowledge, and even create that knowledge, is huge. We’re now in the age of identity AIs, which is really booming. There have been three big moments in AI over the last five years: the ChatGPT moment, the DeepSeek moment, and the OpenClaw moment. It’s really challenging. I use billions of tokens every month because it’s really changing everything. With that change, you can create one of these clones or agents to build a book for you with the 1,000 books most interesting to you, tailored fully to what you want to learn. You can have that in one page, 10 pages, 100 pages—whatever you want. You can use AI to synthesize and build the knowledge you want to use. That’s another great extension, if you use it that way. Having this capability of really augmented minds that you can interact with, chat with, and create with is important. Humans need the experiential part of building—it’s another critical trait. You shouldn’t just focus on asking or doing things; you should create things and interact with things, especially with multimodality. Two-thirds of our brain is devoted to vision, and we don’t use that as much. We’ve all been “one-eyed” since the beginning of technology, but we have two eyes for a reason. When I started building virtual reality or AR companies—I’ve built a couple, the first in 1995—it was because I was challenged by that. But humans are still using flat screens instead of 3D worlds. This is one area where new AIs with world models and interactive 3D spaces will be a game changer in how you feed knowledge to your brain and make it easier to grasp and understand what’s going on. Ross: Yeah, many people observe that once you start to get machines to experience the world directly for themselves, that’s a different layer compared to doing it through the intermediation of texts written by a human based on their own experience. I want to look at some of the layers of the social, structural, and economic implications. One of the core ones is education. If we are moving into a very different world, which it certainly looks like at the moment, then the nature of education needs to change. What do you think we can or should be doing in terms of redesigning education? Are there any examples you’ve seen that point to where a good education structure may already exist? David: Yeah, that’s a fundamental piece. I started this it in “The End of Knowledge.” There are two types of education. Humans aren’t able to live a meaningful life when we start here on planet Earth—we need at least maybe 15, 11, whatever number of years to build that human from the beginning. That kind of education is fundamental. The other kind—higher education, when you try to become functional by having some sort of capabilities—is another game that probably is going to end quite soon. But the first part is still fundamental, and we need to keep growing it. The thing is, there are a lot of asymmetries. We don’t have enough teachers, but we have a lot of students. The same happens with the elderly—we don’t have enough people to take care of them, and there are a lot of them. With children, it’s even more critical, because if you don’t get that from the early beginning, you won’t be able to really see what every child is good at. There are talents we are all born with, and those are fundamentally lost if you don’t nurture them. If you just try to create clone humans, you’ll get cloned humans when they’re older. That’s fundamental, and I think AI can help a lot. If you start to create that path of learning from early on—I’m involved in a project called Education (with “action” at the end) here in Europe, where we’re trying to reframe all that. It’s like when banks needed to be rescued a few years ago; we think the same is happening with education, and we’re pushing that new project. We think education needs to be rescued to start to keep up with what’s going on. We need to be in sync with learning—with AIs and with physical AIs too. It’s not far-fetched that every child will have a humanoid robot companion. Teaching needs to be bidirectional—we need to help them learn in sync. There are many aspects of technology that can help you grasp what’s happening when you learn, because we all learn in different ways. It’s fundamental to teach you how to learn by yourself. I think the most important trait at the moment is not needing to rely on others, but to learn by yourself and learn all your life. That should be taught from the beginning. There are a lot of technologies starting to pop up. We’re starting to see it in China, for example—a lot of brain-computer interfaces or devices to read some of the biological signals of kids. You can do it with other devices and mix that with multimodality, with different tests, to start seeing what’s happening, why they get distracted, where they learn best. We’re reaching a point where you can really tailor 100% of the learning experiences and even the content itself. You can create it in real time now, so you don’t need to rely on books. You can use interactive 3D content—the interactivity can be quite extensive. These new ways to teach and learn are fundamental. For that, we need to integrate AIs in schools. Of course, regulation is needed—it may be easier in China than in Europe, Australia, the US, or other places. But we need to see the trade-off—not just banning screens, as many countries are doing, but really changing the narrative. The problem isn’t the screen; it’s what’s inside the screen—the content itself. We’ve built smartphones with addictive capabilities, but for other purposes, not for teaching. If you change what’s inside the operating system of the devices—whether it’s a screen or any medium, or a talking experience with a humanoid robot for your child—that can be a game changer. That should be integrated as soon as possible to start having these new ways of learning. It should be gradual, because the technology of today is basically old science just a year or a few months from now. We need to see everything changes so fast, so education should change at the same pace. Ross: Yeah, and this was an interesting phrase you came up with—coexistence training. This is about preparing us for where we have to coexist with systems that, to your mind, will be considered as equivalents to us. David: Yeah, I think it’s happening. I’ve been quietly involved in researching AGI for 25,000–26,000 hours so far—a lot of time and years devoted to that. I see the trend is now starting to close the gap, not through LLMs alone—that could be one way to brute-force some of it—but through new models, new bio-inspired models that are starting to change things. We’re starting to learn from biology, neuroscience, and integrating all that into new models. We’re not still working with the perceptron of Rosenblatt from the 1950s; we’re building new models to cope with something that is alive and learning 24/7. We don’t differentiate between training and inference, and our brain doesn’t either. With that kind of model, the gap is narrowing, and we start to have the “next task,” as I call it—the last human tool. When we start to have that, it’s better if, through the process, we’ve been more in sync with them, instead of just building tools without being the teachers of these tools. The current kids will probably be the last human teachers of machines. That’s the responsibility at the moment—to make these machines that will surpass us. Biologically, we cannot compete; our DNA and the way we evolve is not as fast as machines. They will surpass us, probably by the end of the decade—unless there’s a big nuclear issue or we run out of energy, but otherwise, it’s very probable we’ll have AGIs and ACIs by the end of the decade. We need to start to see that it’s going to be a multi-species world. It already is, but not as intelligent as us. We need to rethink what anthropocentrism means. We’ve gotten rid of some things like that in the past—for example, realizing our planet isn’t the center of everything, like in Galileo’s days. We need to do the same with human intelligence. Human intelligence is not the end game, and very soon, that’s going to change. The sooner we grasp that and understand that some entities will be at the top, the better off we’ll be. If they see us as parents or elders, we’ll be better than if they see us as competition. The competition will be quite limited anyway. Ross: Yeah! David: Well, it’s better if we reframe that. Ross: So, I found out about your work because we were both contributors to the report “Building Human Resilience in the Age of AI.” That point of resilience is particularly critical. Humans are generally pretty adaptable—it’s one of our strengths. But now the pace of adaptation and the need to be resilient is absolutely fundamental. One of the other things you point to is around identity reconstruction. I guess you’ve just been talking about that—the sense that we have to reimagine who we are as individuals, as a society, as the human species, and reconstruct and rebuild that in a way where we can feel at home in this new emerging world. David: Yeah. I think we need to change the contract somehow—between humans and humans, and between humans and the next thing, and between societies and themselves. The models of society we’ve been building over the last millennia are going to be fully changed in just years. If we don’t really connect and put everyone together to understand that, for example, we’ve been building a world where there is no abundance—but there could be abundance if machines take over and we change how we build and process. Scarcity has been the driving force of conflict and many other things in the current world. All these things can change. Of course, work itself—the meaning of having something to do that’s not related to what you earn—even the role of money, for example. There are many questions we should address as soon as possible to build resilient societies, instead of just trying to keep adapting to the last war and being in the medieval stages of the current world. Ross: So, to round out, you take all of this further than most people do. In your most recent book, “Artificiality,” you point to machine citizenship—where, if there are human citizens, machines are our peers in the sense of also being citizens, able to participate in our society and be players alongside humans. How long might this take? What does this look like? What is required if we are moving in that direction? And, particularly, if this happens, how do we make this a positive for humans? We may recognize the rights of intelligences other than our own, but I think most people would prefer that humans still retain their sovereignty and equality, even if we have other intelligences alongside us. David: Yeah, at the end, it’s humility—understanding your point and your role in the new world. That’s fundamental. As you say, I created more books besides “The End of Knowledge.” The next one was “EAGI”—an acronym I coined for Embodied Artificial General Intelligence—because when we get this physicality of AIs, with millions or billions of humanoid robots, it will be easy to see what happens when they learn in the world. The last book was about “artificeracy,” or this mix of artificial democracy, if you want to frame it that way. These three books are the “Artificiality Trilogy,” in a sense. Artificiality is like anthropology for humans—artificiality is to try to understand all these new things, how they will develop and be among us. So yes, humility is probably the key factor. If you keep thinking you’ll be ruling things that are much smarter than us quite soon, I think that’s not very clever from a human perspective. It’s like if ants wanted to stay at the top of the food chain—it doesn’t make sense if you understand the growth of this intelligence and the capabilities they’re gathering and will gather. The trend is very difficult to stop. I don’t like the word impossible—it’s not in my dictionary—but it’s quite difficult for humans to compete in those asymmetric capabilities, because the increase in machine capabilities is going to be exponential. The last book, “Artificiality,” is the only one where the first part is fully devoted to what’s happening now—it’s called “The Storm,” the first block of the book, narrating what’s happening at the moment. The other two parts look into the possible future. I call it science prediction more than science fiction, because with what you know now, you can see things that could happen in a really short time. My point is that if we start to think and start the narratives at all levels—from every human on Earth to governments and institutions—and start to see what could happen if this happens sooner rather than later, we’ll be better off. Otherwise, if we try to legislate and limit what’s happening, we’re only going to lose competitiveness. Some countries are going to move ahead. If you want to live in the future, just visit somewhere in China, or Shanghai, or this week with the humanoid half marathon and 300 different robots working together, trying to compete with us. You see the pace of change. Now, with just one human, you can build a $1 billion revenue company. That wasn’t possible when I started creating companies in 1995. The capabilities didn’t exist. But now, with AIs, you can move much faster. So, we need to see what role we want to have in that new world. For that, again, humility is the best trait. And, of course, see things with reality lenses. If you think that with your current brain and intellect you can overrun things that are going to be 100 or a million or a billion x more intelligent than you, something is not going well. Ross: So, where can people go to find out more about your work? David: Well, vivancos.com is my site. There you can find all my books, references, and keynotes. I give a lot of keynotes all around the world. I’m going to Berlin to present a paper, later to Osaka and to San Francisco again. Last time, I went to Singapore. I haven’t been to Australia yet, but I’d like to go there—maybe it’s a good place also. Yes, at vivancos.com you have all the information and can reach me there. I’m very open to talk to anyone. Ross: Thank you so much for sharing your insights today, David. David: Thank you, Ross. Fantastic to be with you today. The post David Vivancos on the end of knowledge, cognitive flourishing, resilient societies, and artificial democracy (AC Ep42) appeared first on Humans + AI.

On this week's Mean Age Daydream, Brian looks at how all of the services (welfare, SNAP, free healthcare) are creating an entire society that doesn't want to take part in civil culture. Also: Animal Farm tanks hard, and California's ridiculous climate policies lead to a catastrophe when a massive fire breaks out in an abandoned oil tunnel. ⁠⁠https://www.eventbrite.com/e/lou-perez-live-in-los-angeles-tickets-1986570202954⁠ ⁠ Buy my new card game: WOKE WORD WARS - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FLF8Y16S⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

On this episode of the Hayek Program Podcast, Peter Boettke talks with Bill Easterly about his new book, Violent Saviors: The West's Conquest of the Rest. Drawing on figures such as Adam Smith, P.T. Bauer, and Amartya Sen, Easterly argues that material progress alone cannot justify the denial of human dignity and consent. The conversation explores the idea of the “benevolent autocrat” and examines how both colonialism and modern development policy have too often treated people as objects of improvement rather than agents of their own lives. Along the way, Boettke and Easterly discuss state capacity, slavery, colonialism, migration, and post-communist transitions, making the case that freedom is not just a means to development but an end in itself.Dr. William Easterly is Professor Emeritus of Economics at New York University and Co-director Emeritus of the NYU Development Research Institute. He is the author of numerous books, including The Tyranny of Experts: Economists, Dictators, and the Forgotten Rights of the Poor (Basic Books, 2014), The White Man's Burden: Why the West's Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good (Penguin Books, 2006), and The Elusive Quest for Growth: Economists' Adventures and Misadventures in the Tropics (MIT Press, 2001).**This episode was recorded on February 2, 2026**Show Notes:Acemoglu and Robinson, The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty (Penguin Books, 2020)Amartya Sen, Development As Freedom (Vintage, 2000)David Colander, Why aren't Economists as Important as Garbagemen? (Routledge, 1991)Matt Kibbe, Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff: A Libertarian Manifesto (HarperCollins, 2015)If you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Check out our other podcast from the Hayek Program! Virtual Sentiments is a podcast in which political theorist Kristen Collins interviews scholars and practitioners grappling with pressing problems in political economy with an eye to the past. Subscribe today!Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatusCC Music: Twisterium

In the mid-1970s, primatologist Jane Goodall witnessed something that changed her opinion of chimpanzees forever: A four-year conflict amongst the chimpanzees she was studying in Tanzania. Chimpanzees that knew each other started killing each other. It was essentially the primate equivalent of a civil war. And now, it's happening again: Fighting within the largest known community of chimpanzees. NPR science correspondent Nate Rott helps us break down what's going on and what it could tell us about how human communities can fall apart. Read all of Nate's story here. Interested in more science? Email us your question at shortwave@npr.org.Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

Michael Torrey and Julie McClure of Torrey Advisory Group join Society CEO Jim Cudahy to discuss the impacts of the current administration on the Societies' sciences, the Farm Bill, and how our members can be involved. Contact us at podcast@sciencesocieties.org or on Twitter @FieldLabEarth if you have comments, questions, or suggestions for show topics, and if you want more content like this don't forget to subscribe. If you'd like to see old episodes or sign up for our newsletter, you can do so here: https://fieldlabearth.libsyn.com/. If you would like to reach out to Michael, you can find him here: mtorrey@torreydc.com If you would like to reach out to Julie, you can find her here: jmcclure@torreydc.com Resources Transcripts: https://www.rev.com/app/transcript/NjllMTRjNWU3NzQ2MzEwZDYwZDAxZjYxcWRtRmxqVHJ6dGU4/o/VEMwODEwNzc1NDIw Torrey Advisory Group: https://torreydc.com/ Societies' Science Policy efforts: https://www.sciencesocieties.org/science-policy Field, Lab, Earth is Copyrighted by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.

Live from the 19th World Congress of Anaesthesiologists (WCA 2026) in Marrakesh with over 4,000 delegates from 150 countries, TopMedTalk's Kate Leslie and Mike Grocott interview Professor Adrian Gelb, past World Federation of the Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) president, about his career from South Africa to Canada and UCSF and his focus on lower-resource settings, patient safety, and WHO engagement. Gelb argues patient safety improvements require system and workflow changes, not just guidelines. The comparison is drawn to road safety reforms and urging anesthesiologists to use their leverage in hospitals and governance. He reflects on the impact of Harvard monitoring standards and leadership that advanced safety, and calls for national societies to prioritize patient-centered advocacy and implementation support using human factors and knowledge translation expertise. He also describes work on WHO essential medicines lists and proposes a tiered, anesthesia-led WFSA essential medicines list by country income level via a global Delphi process, ending with a call for anesthesiologists to choose to lead again. More about the congress here: https://wcacongress.org/ -- Join us at Evidence Based Perioperative Medicine (EBPOM) World Congress 2026 in London. Be part of a global conversation as clinicians from around the world gather between 7-9th July at the British Library in London. Three days of evidence-based perioperative medicine, global insights, and expert debate—featuring speakers including Michael Marmot and Ken Rockwood. Register here - https://ebpom.org/product/ebpom-world-congress-2026/

At the 19th World Congress of the Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WCSA 2026) in Marrakesh, TopMedTalk welcomes Desiree Chappell back alongside Kate Leslie to interview Professor Palesa Motshabi-Chakane, Associate Professor and Head of Anaesthesiology at the University of the Witwatersrand and her colleague, Dr Mullai Slave a PhD candidate at University of the Witwatersrand. They discuss a study of 629 women undergoing cesarean section with spinal anesthesia at Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital, where 23–33% are HIV positive. Using standard monitoring plus BD APM noninvasive continuous hemodynamic monitoring, they compared HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients and found higher hypotension incidence in HIV-positive women (68% vs 64%), with lower heart rate and lower cardiac index over 60 minutes. Additional testing included echocardiography with speckle tracking, pro-BNP, and autonomic assessments, with HIV-positive patients showing stiffer ventricles; Apgar scores did not differ. They discuss replication, multicenter research, and potential machine-learning tools to predict hypotension risk, and describe BD Advanced Patient Monitoring grant support enabling equipment, sensors, staffing, and training (~200 staff) to complete data collection in about six months. Edwards Lifesciences is now known as Becton Dickinson Advanced Patient Monitoring (BD APM). Desiree Chappell, former Co Editor in Chief of TopMedTalk, is now Director, Medical Science Liaison, Medical Affairs, BD Advanced Patient Monitoring. The views expressed on this program are her own and not those of her employers. We mention Adrian Gelb, if you'd like to hear his recent conversation with us go here: https://topmedtalk.libsyn.com/professor-adrian-gelb-on-patient-safety-and-essential-medicines-in-anaesthesia -- Join us at Evidence Based Perioperative Medicine (EBPOM) World Congress 2026 in London. Be part of a global conversation as clinicians from around the world gather between 7-9th July at the British Library in London. Three days of evidence-based perioperative medicine, global insights, and expert debate—featuring speakers including Michael Marmot and Ken Rockwood. Register here - https://ebpom.org/product/ebpom-world-congress-2026/  

The global refugee regime has shifted under our feet. Over the last forty years, international asylum practices have expanded to include the queer and trans displaced. At least thirty-seven countries now recognize LGBTIQ refugees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, with some states providing specialized support. Yet amid this expansion, backlash has intensified against refugee protection as well as the hard-earned rights of LGBTIQ people. In this disquieting context, the protection of LGBTIQ refugees remains partial and exclusionary. The Way Out: Justice in the Queer Search for Refuge (University of California Press, 2026) examines the complexities of queer and trans displacement around the world. Centering personal narratives of LGBTIQ refugees, the book exposes the shortcomings of an international protection regime that is unable to address the harms that drive displacement. Rebecca Buxton and Samuel Ritholtz's analysis of the stakes of queer and trans inclusion in accounts of displacement justice offers a vibrant example of theory brought to life. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Our coverage of the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists annual conference begins with an exclusive conversation with this year's recipients of the WFSA Blood Health Innovation Award, Vijay Anand Ismavel and Ann Miriam Devarathnam. Andy Cumpstey finds out about their collaborative project with Kerala Digital University to develop an intraoperative auto-transfusion device, designed to recycle a patient's own blood during surgery in resource-constrained environments. For more information about this device, see: https://jogs.one/icigs_1003_70/ -- Join us at Evidence Based Perioperative Medicine (EBPOM) World Congress 2026 in London. Be part of a global conversation as clinicians from around the world gather between 7-9th July at the British Library in London. Three days of evidence-based perioperative medicine, global insights, and expert debate—featuring speakers including Michael Marmot and Ken Rockwood. Register here - https://ebpom.org/product/ebpom-world-congress-2026/

The global refugee regime has shifted under our feet. Over the last forty years, international asylum practices have expanded to include the queer and trans displaced. At least thirty-seven countries now recognize LGBTIQ refugees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, with some states providing specialized support. Yet amid this expansion, backlash has intensified against refugee protection as well as the hard-earned rights of LGBTIQ people. In this disquieting context, the protection of LGBTIQ refugees remains partial and exclusionary. The Way Out: Justice in the Queer Search for Refuge (University of California Press, 2026) examines the complexities of queer and trans displacement around the world. Centering personal narratives of LGBTIQ refugees, the book exposes the shortcomings of an international protection regime that is unable to address the harms that drive displacement. Rebecca Buxton and Samuel Ritholtz's analysis of the stakes of queer and trans inclusion in accounts of displacement justice offers a vibrant example of theory brought to life. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

The global refugee regime has shifted under our feet. Over the last forty years, international asylum practices have expanded to include the queer and trans displaced. At least thirty-seven countries now recognize LGBTIQ refugees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, with some states providing specialized support. Yet amid this expansion, backlash has intensified against refugee protection as well as the hard-earned rights of LGBTIQ people. In this disquieting context, the protection of LGBTIQ refugees remains partial and exclusionary. The Way Out: Justice in the Queer Search for Refuge (University of California Press, 2026) examines the complexities of queer and trans displacement around the world. Centering personal narratives of LGBTIQ refugees, the book exposes the shortcomings of an international protection regime that is unable to address the harms that drive displacement. Rebecca Buxton and Samuel Ritholtz's analysis of the stakes of queer and trans inclusion in accounts of displacement justice offers a vibrant example of theory brought to life. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

The global refugee regime has shifted under our feet. Over the last forty years, international asylum practices have expanded to include the queer and trans displaced. At least thirty-seven countries now recognize LGBTIQ refugees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, with some states providing specialized support. Yet amid this expansion, backlash has intensified against refugee protection as well as the hard-earned rights of LGBTIQ people. In this disquieting context, the protection of LGBTIQ refugees remains partial and exclusionary. The Way Out: Justice in the Queer Search for Refuge (University of California Press, 2026) examines the complexities of queer and trans displacement around the world. Centering personal narratives of LGBTIQ refugees, the book exposes the shortcomings of an international protection regime that is unable to address the harms that drive displacement. Rebecca Buxton and Samuel Ritholtz's analysis of the stakes of queer and trans inclusion in accounts of displacement justice offers a vibrant example of theory brought to life. This interview was conducted by Dr. Hannah Pool, a senior researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Studies of Societies. Her research focuses on human mobilities and her new book has been published in 2025 by Oxford University Press. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/lgbtq-studies

Msgr. Roger J. Landry National Director, The Pontifical Mission Societies Daily Reflection for April 15, 2026 Here is the video of today's reflection. The YouTube generated transcript for today's reflection is: I'm Monsignor Roger Landry, national director of the Pontifical Mission Societies. It's Wednesday, April 15th. I'm coming to you from the beautiful Bethany Retreat […] The post Daily Reflection for the Pontifical Mission Societies, April 15, 2026 appeared first on Catholic Preaching.

Msgr. Roger J. Landry National Director, The Pontifical Mission Societies Daily Reflection for April 14, 2026 Here is the video of today's reflection. The YouTube generated transcript for today's reflection is: I'm Monsignor Roger Landry, national director of the Pontifical Mission Societies. It's Tuesday, April 14th. I'm coming to you from the Bethany Retreat Center […] The post Daily Reflection for the Pontifical Mission Societies, April 14, 2026 appeared first on Catholic Preaching.

In this episode, Chris interviews Dr. Nicole Hess about her research on female competition, indirect aggression, gossip, and “Informational Warfare” theory in U.S. sororities and small-scale societies in the Central African Republic. They also discuss the various challenges of field work, including personal and sociopolitical risks. Dr. Hess is a scholarly associate professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Washington, Vancouver. Dr. Hess studies gossip, friendship, cooperation, and coalitional competition. She conducted fieldwork in the Central African Republic and college Greek communities, and has conducted numerous experiments testing hypotheses derived from "Informational Warfare" theory, which proposes that coalitions may be useful in reputational competition (via, e.g., gossip) due to their improved abilities to collect, analyze, and disseminate relevant information. Trained as a multidisciplinary social scientist, Dr. Hess uses diverse quantitative and qualitative methods to explore human sociality and cognition, including psychological experiments, surveys, interviews, and ethnographic work. Dr. Hess received her PhD from UC Santa Barbara in biological anthropology and has worked for the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and the Institute for Theoretical Biology at Humboldt University. Contact Dr. Hess at nicolehess@wsu.edu ------------------------------ Contact the Sausage of Science Podcast and the Human Biology Association: Facebook: facebook.com/groups/humanbiologyassociation/, Website: humbio.org Chris Lynn, Co-Host, Website: cdlynn.people.ua.edu/, E-mail: cdlynn@ua.edu, Twitter:@Chris_Ly

This week, after some time away (visiting my brother and his wife), I had a couple of reflections.  Not only are our kids getting older and can do things like pull their own bags and navigate subway systems and sit through restaurant meals but they're also old enough to more fully appreciate differences in culture, language, and society much more so than when they were younger.  It's cool to see!  I mention that since in The Thirteenth Hour sequel books that I've been working on, one of the main characters from the first book, Aurora, ends up going to a different part of the world where she can't speak or read the native tongue.  Though there is a common tongue that allows people to communicate, not everyone speaks it, and that presents barriers to Aurora when she first gets to these lands, and eventually for Logan and his party when they arrive in search of her.  So though the things I touch on in this episode are not huge parts of the book, they lay the foundation and background for the worlds I've been trying to create in the story.More coming soon!∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞Once Upon a Dream, the second Thirteenth Hour soundtrack, is now out in digital form!   It is out on most major streaming services such as Bandcamp, Spotify, and YouTube Music.  (If you have no preference, I recommend Bandcamp since there is a bonus track there and you will eventually be able to find tapes, CDs, and special editions of the album there as well.)-Check out the pixelart music videos that are out so far from the album:-->Logan's Sunrise Workout: www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7SM1RgsLiM-->Forward: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9VgILr1TDc-->Nightsky Stargazing: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S0p3jKRTBo-->Aurora's Rainy Day Mix: https://youtu.be/zwqPmypBysk∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞ Signup for the mailing list for a free special edition podcast, a demo copy of The Thirteenth Hour, and access to retro 80s soundtrack!Like what you see or hear? Consider supporting the show over at Thirteenth Hour Arts on Patreon or adding to my virtual tip jar over at Ko-fi. Join the Thirteenth Hour Arts Group over on Facebook, a growing community of creative people.Have this podcast conveniently delivered to you each week on Spotify,  iTunes, Stitcher, Player FM, Tunein, and Googleplay Music.Follow The Thirteenth Hour's Instagram pages: @the13thhr for your random postings on ninjas, martial arts, archery, flips, breakdancing, fantasy art and and @the13thhr.ost for more 80s music, movies, and songs from The Thirteenth Hour books and soundtrack.Listen to Long Ago Not So Far Away, the Thirteenth Hour soundtrack online at: https://joshuablum.bandcamp.com/ or Spotify.  Join the mailing list for a digital free copy.  You can also get it on CD or tape.Website: https://13thhr.wordpress.comBook trailer: http://bit.ly/1VhJhXYInterested in reading and reviewing The Thirteenth Hour for a free book?  Just email me at writejoshuablum@gmail.com for more details!https://13thhr.wordpress.com/2026/04/13/the-thirteenth-hour-podcast-557-thirteenth-hour-sequel-update-6-worldbuilding-culture-language-and-societies-in-the-thirteenth-hour-sequel-and-travel-reflections/

Foundations of Amateur Radio The other day fellow amateur Randall VK6WR raised an interesting question. Using his HP 8920A RF Communications Test Set, which you might recall from our adventures in measuring radio harmonic power in 2023, that report is on my Github repository, but I digress, Randall wondered if the signal strength he was seeing on several radios were the same and discovered that in fact they were not. It made Randall ask who set the standard and following on from that, what does this look like in the real world? In 2014, episode 149 of the series "What use is an f-call?", I published an article titled "The simple S-unit". In it I referred to a standard for S-units defined in 1981. Unfortunately, I didn't provide any references, so, armed with more than a decade extra experience, Randall encouraged me to investigate. Twenty seconds into my search, I discovered IARU Region 1 Technical Recommendation R.1, which has four statements related to the topic at hand. Under the title "STANDARDISATION OF S-METER READINGS" it states that: 1. One S-unit corresponds to a signal level difference of 6 dB, 2. On the bands below 30 MHz a meter deviation of S-9 corresponds to an available power of -73 dBm from a continuous wave signal generator connected to the receiver input terminals, 3. On the bands above 144 MHz this available power shall be -93 dBm, 4. The metering system shall be based on quasi-peak detection with an attack time of 10 msec +/- 2 msec and a decay time constant of at least 500 msec. So. Job done, right? Yeah, nah, not so much. The web page I quoted from is linked from the Wikipedia S-meter entry and was archived in 2005 and at the time existed on a Swedish domain in the home directory of Kjell SM7GVF. The page has two additional interesting things, the words "Brighton 1981" and "Torremolinos 1990", both of which refer to IARU conferences. The reports for these meetings are online. In searching for any reference to the definition of the S-unit, the 1990 report shows that resolution "83-1" had the status of "Action completed", whatever that means. The 1981 conference document has all manner of interesting references, including "Log Forms and Summaries for International Contest Use", "Meteor Scatter qso procedure" and the definition of the standard way to determine Morse Code speeds using the word "PARIS" followed by a 7 bit word space, to name three. The one we're interested in is called "BM/134 - S-Meter Standards", appearing on page 33 and 34 of the 1981 report. It's a photocopy, so you can see the text from other pages superimposed. I'm making this observation because this is essentially a standards document, intended to be adhered to by industry and the amateur community. It gets better, or rather .. worse. The text that is referenced by Wikipedia uses numbers for the four elements, where BM/134 uses letters. The third item in BM/134 says that it applies for "bands above 30 MHz", but the document I just quoted appears to be unique in saying that it applies to "bands above 144 MHz". The fourth item, dealing with the way that the meter responds has been altered on BM/134. The text "+/- 2 ms and a decay time" are in a different font and at an angle. Worth noting that the change includes "ms" twice, rather than "msec" as the unit for milliseconds used elsewhere. Searching for a phrase within the standard, I discovered the Region 1 HF Manager Handbook v7.01, which appears to include the S-meter standard in chapter 11.1.2, but closer inspection reveals that the fourth item is missing, the one about quasi-peak detection. This is significant because the S-meter standard is based on a CW signal, not an SSB signal, which fluctuates. There's no reference as to where or when this was removed or by whom. These changes are repeated in subsequent versions of the HF Managers Handbook. There's other differences too, instead of using millivolt and microvolt as shown in the original BM/134 standard table, all units have been converted to millivolt for no discernible reason. The new table, including typo, is also copied everywhere. While we're at it, the original standard contains the letters "V", "E", "R", "O", "N" at the top. They don't show in the HF Managers Handbook either. This is curious, since last time I checked, those letters signify an organisation that at least some here will recognise, the "Vereniging voor Experimenteel Radio Onderzoek in Nederland", known to the the people who don't speak fluent Dutch, as the peak body for amateur radio in the Netherlands, VERON. Searching its website does not reveal their contribution to this standards document, which I have to say, is par for the course, much of our amateur radio history is poorly documented or archived, if at all, something which I've spent plenty of my time attempting to remedy over more than a decade, one article at a time. Moving on. The phrase I mentioned earlier bears reading out in its entirety. From BM/134: "We hope that the current recommendation will be followed by all equipment manufacturers, so that in a not too distant future one will know how to interpret the strength report of the other station." It goes on to say: "Societies should advise as much as possible their members about equipment manufacturers adhering to this recommendation and shall try to avoid publication of receiver designs which do not in principle use the recommended standards." Which brings me to you. What have you done lately about this? It's only been 45 years. Perhaps it's time to implement this? I can tell you that preliminary results show that the S1 level sensitivity associated with the radios that Randall showed me are reporting S1 when really they should be reporting about S4. You might wonder why this is the case? Calibration appears to be the underlying cause. While S9 itself is variable in accuracy, as-in some radios are more accurately close to -73 dBm, others are consistently 5 dB shy of that. When an S4 signal is reported as S1, then the 6 dB step size is not correctly implemented. Similarly, when an S9+20 is reported by a signal that's only 16 dB stronger than S9, there's more fudging going on. The differences between a signal with and without preamp are also worth noting as being inconsistent. In other words, the level and steps associated with S-meter units are all over the place, which is interesting, since the authors of the standard already alluded to this when 45 years ago they wrote: "Simple means for calibration of at least the 6dB level ratio should be published." While we're digging for causes. Why is there not a standards library associated with the IARU, where documents like BM/134 exist and with it their current level of application? Before you tell me, money, I'd point out that in 1981, IARU Region 1 had 263,945.88 dollars, or francs, guilders, pounds or glass beads in the bank, it's unclear which, since there's no units stated. At the 1990 conference IARU Region 2 had a reported net worth of $150,000 with $40,000 annual income and Region 3 reported that "its finances are also sound". How do I know? That's in those conference documents too. Curiously, the 1981 report states that "when presenting the 1981 and subsequent accounts the Treasurer would also prepare a brief report which would explain the reasons for items of such expenditure for which the purpose was not obvious." I wonder what happened to those explanations? So, what is the current status of BM/134 and what are the legal implications of me publishing it on my Github page? While we're at it. I realise that I can "fix" the Wikipedia page, but where do I point it at? I'm Onno VK6FLAB

Childhood epilepsy, medical treatment, and the power of a mother and son working together. Filmmaker Emma Matthews and her son Louis Petit have created a new film, along with his father Chris Petit. D is for Distance focuses on Louis's own experience of severe, drug‑resistant epilepsy. He suffered hundreds of seizures, frightening drug withdrawals and years of uncertainty — until they travelled to the Netherlands to get medical cannabis. Their film opens today at the British Film Institute in London. Emma and Louis join Anita Rani, along with Professor Finbar O'Callaghan from the Epilepsy Research Institute.The sale of second hand clothing is forecast to rise this year to £217bn globally. Here in the UK it's estimated the market has grown to more than £7bn, and nearly one in four fashion transactions. So why are women turning to resale sites like Vinted and Depop? Consumer expert Kate Hardcastle, founder of Insight With Passion, tells us where this growth is coming from and discusses future trends. Composer Tansy Davies tells Anita about The Passion of Mary Magdelene, which has just premiered at The Barbican in London and will be broadcast on BBC Radio 3 on Saturday 4 April at 10.30pm. The piece tells the story of the crucifixion through Jesus's most important female follower and the first person to witness the resurrection. Tansy talks about why she wanted to focus on Mary and examines the conflicting views about Mary Magdalene.In her new book Herlands, BBC global reporter Megha Mohan explores the history of women-led communities both physically and virtually, from co-housing for older women in Paris to the controversial feminist online trolls of South Korea. Megha travelled around the globe to hear from the women who created and care for these communities, which offer refuge, resilience, and connection to the land. Producer: Melanie Abbott Editor: Sarah Crawley

Msgr. Roger J. Landry National Director, The Pontifical Mission Societies Daily Reflection for April 3, 2026 Here is the video of today's reflection. The YouTube generated transcript for today's reflection is: I am Monsignor Roger Landry, national director of the Pontifical Mission Societies. I'm here in the chapel in our New York office on Good […] The post Daily Reflection for the Pontifical Mission Societies, April 3, 2026 appeared first on Catholic Preaching.

7. Cline addresses the vulnerability of the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations, which served as models for "what not to do" during a crisis. Despite their outward appearance of strength, these societies were fragile systems that collapsed completely after the 12th century BC. Their writing system, Linear B, was limited to accounting, leaving no literary records of their downfall. The transition to the Iron Age saw the disappearance of their specific social structures, though names of gods like Zeus and Poseidon endured. This period illustrates how societies can appear vibrant while being internally decayed, leading to a total replacement of their political identities. (7)

4. This file focuses on the "antifragile" societies that thrived amid chaos: the Phoenicians and Cypriots. The Phoenicians transformed into a maritime powerhouse, establishing colonies like Carthage and spreading the standardized alphabet. Meanwhile, the Cypriots pivoted from copper to iron metallurgy, innovating with new technologies that defined the early Iron Age. Cline clarifies that iron weapons did not cause the collapse but were an adaptation to it once tin supplies were cut. Both groups demonstrated genius by seizing opportunities created by broken supply chains, ultimately flourishing while their more rigid, larger neighbors failed to adapt. (4)

Journalist and writer Elizabeth Bisland was sent on a trip around the world in 1889, in a sort of race against Nellie Bly. But that was not something she wanted to be known for. Research: Bisland, Elisabeth. “At the Sign of the Hobby Horse.” Houghton, Mifflin and Co. Riverside Press. 1910. https://archive.org/details/atsignofhobbyhor0000eliz/page/n12/mode/1up Bisland, Elizabeth, 1861-1929. “A Candle of Understanding: a Novel.” New York and London: Harper & brothers, 1903. Bisland, Elizabeth. “In Seven Stages: A Flying Trip Around the World.” New York. Harper & Brothers. 1891. https://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/bisland/stages/stages.html Bisland, Elizabeth. “Societies for Minding One's Own Business.” The North American Review. 11/1/1910. Bisland, Elizabeth. “The Art of Travel.” From The woman's book, dealing practically with the modern conditions of home-life, self-support, education, opportunities, and every-day problems. 1894. https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_LBEhBEGmUq4C/ Bisland, Elizabeth. “The Truth About Men and Other Matters.” New York. Avondale Press. 1927. Britannica Editors. "Lafcadio Hearn". Encyclopedia Britannica, 22 Sep. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Lafcadio-Hearn. Accessed 18 February 2026. Codrescu, Andrei. “The Many Lives of Lafcadio Hearn.” The Paris Review. 7/2/2019. https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2019/07/02/the-many-lives-of-lafcadio-hearn/ “Foley, Alethea "Mattie",” Notable Kentucky African Americans Database, accessed February 19, 2026, https://nkaa.uky.edu/nkaa/items/show/300004770. Goodman, Matthew. “Elizabeth Bisland’s Race Around the World.” Public Domain Review. 10/16/2013. https://publicdomainreview.org/essay/elizabeth-bislands-race-around-the-world/ Harrison-Kahan, Lori and Karen E. H. Skinazi. “The Girl Reporter in Fact and Fiction: Miriam Michelson's New Women and Periodical Culture in the Progressive Era.” American Quarterly , Jun., 2002, Vol. 54, No. 2 (Jun., 2002). https://www.jstor.org/stable/30041927 Heitman, Danny. “Lafcadio Hearn in New Orleans.” HUMANITIES, May/June 2012, Volume 33, Number 3. https://www.neh.gov/humanities/2012/mayjune/feature/lafcadio-hearn-in-new-orleans New York Times. “MRS. E.B. WETMORE, AUTHOR, DIES IN SOUTH; Former Elizabeth Bisland of This City to Be Buried in Woodlawn Today.” 1/19/1929. https://www.nytimes.com/1929/01/09/archives/mrs-eb-wetmore-author-dies-in-south-former-elizabeth-bisland-of.html Christopher Goodwin & Associates, Inc. “Historical and Archaeological Investigations of Fort Bisland and Lower Bayou Teche, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.” June 1991. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA242489.pdf Roggenkamp, Karen. “Dignified Sensationalism: ‘Cosmopolitan,’ Elizabeth Bisland, and Trips around the World.” American Periodicals , 2007, Vol. 17, No. 1 (2007). Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20770967 Rose, Alex. “Elizabeth Bisland: Around the World in 76 Days.” Science Museum Group. 1/30/2023. https://blog.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/rare-globe-celebrates-elizabeth-bislands-voyage-around-the-world/ Science Museum Group. “Elizabeth Bisland 1861-1929.” https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/people/cp172999/elizabeth-bisland Tutwiler, Julia R. “The Southern Woman in New York.” The Bookman: A Magazine of Literature and Life. February, 1904. https://archive.org/details/the-bookman-1895-1933/1900-1909/1904/The%20Bookman%20v18n06%20%281904-02%29%20%28unz%29/page/624/mode/1up Tutwiler, Julia R. “The Southern Woman in New York: Part 2.” The Bookman: A Magazine of Literature and Life. March, 1904. https://archive.org/details/bookmanareviewb05unkngoog/page/50/mode/1up Vatican Apostolic Library. “Elizabeth Bisland.” En Route Project. https://enrouteproject.com/en/the-research/the-female-travelers/elizabeth-bisland/ Williams, Susan Millar. “L’enfant Terrible: Elizabeth Bisland and the South.” The Southern Review; Oct 1, 1986; 22, 4; ProQuest pg. 680. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.