Podcasts about sputnik

Сергій Данилов, заступник директора Центру близькосхідних досліджень, на Radio NV про конфлікт між РФ та Азербайджаном, затримання в Баку агентів ФСБ, які працювали у виданні Sputnik Азербайджан, як це вплине на Росію, про розмову Володимира Зеленського з президентом Азербайджану Ільхамом Алієвим.Ведуча – Юлія Петрова

Ázerbajdžánské úřady zakázaly všechny kulturní akce, které pořádaly ruské instituce, ať už státní, nebo soukromé. Stejně tak byla zrušena cesta ruského vicepremiéra Alexeje Overčuka do Baku nebo společné zasedání rusko-ázerbajdžánské meziparlamentní komise v Moskvě. V pondělí bezpečnostní složky obsadily kanceláře ruského mediaholdingu Sputnik, zatkly dva jeho pracovníky a obvinily je, že jsou ve skutečnosti agenty ruské tajné služby FSB.

Ázerbajdžánské úřady zakázaly všechny kulturní akce, které pořádaly ruské instituce, ať už státní, nebo soukromé. Stejně tak byla zrušena cesta ruského vicepremiéra Alexeje Overčuka do Baku nebo společné zasedání rusko-ázerbajdžánské meziparlamentní komise v Moskvě. V pondělí bezpečnostní složky obsadily kanceláře ruského mediaholdingu Sputnik, zatkly dva jeho pracovníky a obvinily je, že jsou ve skutečnosti agenty ruské tajné služby FSB.Všechny díly podcastu Názory a argumenty můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

Tore Ryen lager en reklame for Sputnik kassetter

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,Once-science-fiction advancements like AI, gene editing, and advanced biotechnology have finally arrived, and they're here to stay. These technologies have seemingly set us on a course towards a brand new future for humanity, one we can hardly even picture today. But progress doesn't happen overnight, and it isn't the result of any one breakthrough.As Jamie Metzl explains in his new book, Superconvergence: How the Genetics, Biotech, and AI Revolutions will Transform our Lives, Work, and World, tech innovations work alongside and because of one another, bringing about the future right under our noses.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I chat with Metzl about how humans have been radically reshaping the world around them since their very beginning, and what the latest and most disruptive technologies mean for the not-too-distant future.Metzl is a senior fellow of the Atlantic Council and a faculty member of NextMed Health. He has previously held a series of positions in the US government, and was appointed to the World Health Organization's advisory committee on human genome editing in 2019. He is the author of several books, including two sci-fi thrillers and his international bestseller, Hacking Darwin.In This Episode* Unstoppable and unpredictable (1:54)* Normalizing the extraordinary (9:46)* Engineering intelligence (13:53)* Distrust of disruption (19:44)* Risk tolerance (24:08)* What is a “newnimal”? (13:11)* Inspired by curiosity (33:42)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Unstoppable and unpredictable (1:54)The name of the game for all of this . . . is to ask “What are the things that we can do to increase the odds of a more positive story and decrease the odds of a more negative story?”Pethokoukis: Are you telling a story of unstoppable technological momentum or are you telling a story kind of like A Christmas Carol, of a future that could be if we do X, Y, and Z, but no guarantees?Metzl: The future of technological progress is like the past: It is unstoppable, but that doesn't mean it's predetermined. The path that we have gone over the last 12,000 years, from the domestication of crops to building our civilizations, languages, industrialization — it's a bad metaphor now, but — this train is accelerating. It's moving faster and faster, so that's not up for grabs. It is not up for grabs whether we are going to have the capacities to engineer novel intelligence and re-engineer life — we are doing both of those things now in the early days.What is up for grabs is how these revolutions will play out, and there are better and worse scenarios that we can imagine. The name of the game for all of this, the reason why I do the work that I do, why I write the books that I write, is to ask “What are the things that we can do to increase the odds of a more positive story and decrease the odds of a more negative story?”Progress has been sort of unstoppable for all that time, though, of course, fits and starts and periods of stagnation —— But when you look back at those fits and starts — the size of the Black Plague or World War II, or wiping out Berlin, and Dresden, and Tokyo, and Hiroshima, and Nagasaki — in spite of all of those things, it's one-directional. Our technologies have gotten more powerful. We've developed more capacities, greater ability to manipulate the world around us, so there will be fits and starts but, as I said, this train is moving. That's why these conversations are so important, because there's so much that we can, and I believe must, do now.There's a widely held opinion that progress over the past 50 years has been slower than people might have expected in the late 1960s, but we seem to have some technologies now for which the momentum seems pretty unstoppable.Of course, a lot of people thought, after ChatGPT came out, that superintelligence would happen within six months. That didn't happen. After CRISPR arrived, I'm sure there were lots of people who expected miracle cures right away.What makes you think that these technologies will look a lot different, and our world will look a lot different than they do right now by decade's end?They certainly will look a lot different, but there's also a lot of hype around these technologies. You use the word “superintelligence,” which is probably a good word. I don't like the words “artificial intelligence,” and I have a six-letter framing for what I believe about AGI — artificial general intelligence — and that is: AGI is BS. We have no idea what human intelligence is, if we define our own intelligence so narrowly that it's just this very narrow form of thinking and then we say, “Wow, we have these machines that are mining the entirety of digitized human cultural history, and wow, they're so brilliant, they can write poems — poems in languages that our ancestors have invented based on the work of humans.” So we humans need to be very careful not to belittle ourselves.But we're already seeing, across the board, if you say, “Is CRISPR on its own going to fundamentally transform all of life?” The answer to that is absolutely no. My last book was about genetic engineering. If genetic engineering is a pie, genome editing is a slice and CRISPR is just a tiny little sliver of that slice. But the reason why my new book is called Superconvergence, the entire thesis is that all of these technologies inspire, and influence, and are embedded in each other. We had the agricultural revolution 12,000 years ago, as I mentioned. That's what led to these other innovations like civilization, like writing, and then the ancient writing codes are the foundation of computer codes which underpin our machine learning and AI systems that are allowing us to unlock secrets of the natural world.People are imagining that AI equals ChatGPT, but that's really not the case (AI equals ChatGPT like electricity equals the power station). The story of AI is empowering us to do all of these other things. As a general-purpose technology, already AI is developing the capacity to help us just do basic things faster. Computer coding is the archetypal example of that. Over the last couple of years, the speed of coding has improved by about 50 percent for the most advanced human coders, and as we code, our coding algorithms are learning about the process of coding. We're just laying a foundation for all of these other things.That's what I call “boring AI.” People are imagining exciting AI, like there's a magic AI button and you just press it and AI cures cancer. That's not how it's going to work. Boring AI is going to be embedded in human resource management. It's going to be embedded just giving us a lot of capabilities to do things better, faster than we've done them before. It doesn't mean that AIs are going to replace us. There are a lot of things that humans do that machines can just do better than we are. That's why most of us aren't doing hunting, or gathering, or farming, because we developed machines and other technologies to feed us with much less human labor input, and we have used that reallocation of our time and energy to write books and invent other things. That's going to happen here.The name of the game for us humans, there's two things: One is figuring out what does it mean to be a great human and over-index on that, and two, lay the foundation so that these multiple overlapping revolutions, as they play out in multiple fields, can be governed wisely. That is the name of the game. So when people say, “Is it going to change our lives?” I think people are thinking of it in the wrong way. This shirt that I'm wearing, this same shirt five years from now, you'll say, “Well, is there AI in your shirt?” — because it doesn't look like AI — and what I'm going to say is “Yes, in the manufacturing of this thread, in the management of the supply chain, in figuring out who gets to go on vacation, when, in the company that's making these buttons.” It's all these little things. People will just call it progress. People are imagining magic AI, all of these interwoven technologies will just feel like accelerating progress, and that will just feel like life.Normalizing the extraordinary (9:46)20, 30 years ago we didn't have the internet. I think things get so normalized that this just feels like life.What you're describing is a technology that economists would call a general-purpose technology. It's a technology embedded in everything, it's everywhere in the economy, much as electricity.What you call “boring AI,” the way I think about it is: I was just reading a Wall Street Journal story about Applebee's talking about using AI for more efficient customer loyalty programs, and they would use machine vision to look at their tables to see if they were cleaned well enough between customers. That, to people, probably doesn't seem particularly science-fictional. It doesn't seem world-changing. Of course, faster growth and a more productive economy is built on those little things, but I guess I would still call those “boring AI.”What to me definitely is not boring AI is the sort of combinatorial aspect that you're talking about where you're talking about AI helping the scientific discovery process and then interweaving with other technologies in kind of the classic Paul Romer combinatorial way.I think a lot of people, if they look back at their lives 20 or 30 years ago, they would say, “Okay, more screen time, but probably pretty much the same.”I don't think they would say that. 20, 30 years ago we didn't have the internet. I think things get so normalized that this just feels like life. If you had told ourselves 30 years ago, “You're going to have access to all the world's knowledge in your pocket.” You and I are — based on appearances, although you look so youthful — roughly the same age, so you probably remember, “Hurry, it's long distance! Run down the stairs!”We live in this radical science-fiction world that has been normalized, and even the things that you are mentioning, if you see open up your newsfeed and you see that there's this been incredible innovation in cancer care, and whether it's gene therapy, or autoimmune stuff, or whatever, you're not thinking, “Oh, that was AI that did that,” because you read the thing and it's like “These researchers at University of X,” but it is AI, it is electricity, it is agriculture. It's because our ancestors learned how to plant seeds and grow plants where you're stationed and not have to do hunting and gathering that you have had this innovation that is keeping your grandmother alive for another 10 years.What you're describing is what I call “magical AI,” and that's not how it works. Some of the stuff is magical: the Jetsons stuff, and self-driving cars, these things that are just autopilot airplanes, we live in a world of magical science fiction and then whenever something shows up, we think, “Oh yeah, no big deal.” We had ChatGPT, now ChatGPT, no big deal?If you had taken your grandparents, your parents, and just said, “Hey, I'm going to put you behind a screen. You're going to have a conversation with something, with a voice, and you're going to do it for five hours,” and let's say they'd never heard of computers and it was all this pleasant voice. In the end they said, “You just had a five-hour conversation with a non-human, and it told you about everything and all of human history, and it wrote poems, and it gave you a recipe for kale mush or whatever you're eating,” you'd say, “Wow!” I think that we are living in that sci-fi world. It's going to get faster, but every innovation, we're not going to say, “Oh, AI did that.” We're just going to say, “Oh, that happened.”Engineering intelligence (13:53)I don't like the word “artificial intelligence” because artificial intelligence means “artificial human intelligence.” This is machine intelligence, which is inspired by the products of human intelligence, but it's a different form of intelligence . . .I sometimes feel in my own writing, and as I peruse the media, like I read a lot more about AI, the digital economy, information technology, and I feel like I certainly write much less about genetic engineering, biotechnology, which obviously is a key theme in your book. What am I missing right now that's happening that may seem normal five years from now, 10 years, but if I were to read about it now or understand it now, I'd think, “Well, that is kind of amazing.”My answer to that is kind of everything. As I said before, we are at the very beginning of this new era of life on earth where one species, among the billions that have ever lived, suddenly has the increasing ability to engineer novel intelligence and re-engineer life.We have evolved by the Darwinian processes of random mutation and natural selection, and we are beginning a new phase of life, a new Cambrian Revolution, where we are creating, certainly with this novel intelligence that we are birthing — I don't like the word “artificial intelligence” because artificial intelligence means “artificial human intelligence.” This is machine intelligence, which is inspired by the products of human intelligence, but it's a different form of intelligence, just like dolphin intelligence is a different form of intelligence than human intelligence, although we are related because of our common mammalian route. That's what's happening here, and our brain function is roughly the same as it's been, certainly at least for tens of thousands of years, but the AI machine intelligence is getting smarter, and we're just experiencing it.It's become so normalized that you can even ask that question. We live in a world where we have these AI systems that are just doing more and cooler stuff every day: driving cars, you talked about discoveries, we have self-driving laboratories that are increasingly autonomous. We have machines that are increasingly writing their own code. We live in a world where machine intelligence has been boxed in these kinds of places like computers, but very soon it's coming out into the world. The AI revolution, and machine-learning revolution, and the robotics revolution are going to be intersecting relatively soon in meaningful ways.AI has advanced more quickly than robotics because it hasn't had to navigate the real world like we have. That's why I'm always so mindful of not denigrating who we are and what we stand for. Four billion years of evolution is a long time. We've learned a lot along the way, so it's going to be hard to put the AI and have it out functioning in the world, interacting in this world that we have largely, but not exclusively, created.But that's all what's coming. Some specific things: 30 years from now, my guess is many people who are listening to this podcast will be fornicating regularly with robots, and it'll be totally normal and comfortable.. . . I think some people are going to be put off by that.Yeah, some people will be put off and some people will be turned on. All I'm saying is it's going to be a mix of different —Jamie, what I would like to do is be 90 years old and be able to still take long walks, be sharp, not have my knee screaming at me. That's what I would like. Can I expect that?I think this can help, but you have to decide how to behave with your personalized robot.That's what I want. I'm looking for the achievement of human suffering. Will there be a world of less human suffering?We live in that world of less human suffering! If you just look at any metric of anything, this is the best time to be alive, and it's getting better and better. . . We're living longer, we're living healthier, we're better educated, we're more informed, we have access to more and better food. This is by far the best time to be alive, and if we don't massively screw it up, and frankly, even if we do, to a certain extent, it'll continue to get better.I write about this in Superconvergence, we're moving in healthcare from our world of generalized healthcare based on population averages to precision healthcare, to predictive and preventive. In education, some of us, like myself, you have had access to great education, but not everybody has that. We're going to have access to fantastic education, personalized education everywhere for students based on their own styles of learning, and capacities, and native languages. This is a wonderful, exciting time.We're going to get all of those things that we can hope for and we're going to get a lot of things that we can't even imagine. And there are going to be very real potential dangers, and if we want to have the good story, as I keep saying, and not have the bad story, now is the time where we need to start making the real investments.Distrust of disruption (19:44)Your job is the disruption of this thing that's come before. . . stopping the advance of progress is just not one of our options.I think some people would, when they hear about all these changes, they'd think what you're telling them is “the bad story.”I just talked about fornicating with robots, it's the bad story?Yeah, some people might find that bad story. But listen, we live at an age where people have recoiled against the disruption of trade, for instance. People are very allergic to the idea of economic disruption. I think about all the debate we had over stem cell therapy back in the early 2000s, 2002. There certainly is going to be a certain contingent that, what they're going to hear what you're saying is: you're going to change what it means to be a human. You're going to change what it means to have a job. I don't know if I want all this. I'm not asking for all this.And we've seen where that pushback has greatly changed, for instance, how we trade with other nations. Are you concerned that that pushback could create regulatory or legislative obstacles to the kind of future you're talking about?All of those things, and some of that pushback, frankly, is healthy. These are fundamental changes, but those people who are pushing back are benchmarking their own lives to the world that they were born into and, in most cases, without recognizing how radical those lives already are, if the people you're talking about are hunter-gatherers in some remote place who've not gone through domestication of agriculture, and industrialization, and all of these kinds of things, that's like, wow, you're going from being this little hunter-gatherer tribe in the middle of Atlantis and all of a sudden you're going to be in a world of gene therapy and shifting trading patterns.But the people who are saying, “Well, my job as a computer programmer, as a whatever, is going to get disrupted,” your job is the disruption. Your job is the disruption of this thing that's come before. As I said at the start of our conversation, stopping the advance of progress is just not one of our options.We could do it, and societies have done it before, and they've lost their economies, they've lost their vitality. Just go to Europe, Europe is having this crisis now because for decades they saw their economy and their society, frankly, as a museum to the past where they didn't want to change, they didn't want to think about the implications of new technologies and new trends. It's why I am just back from Italy. It's wonderful, I love visiting these little farms where they're milking the goats like they've done for centuries and making cheese they've made for centuries, but their economies are shrinking with incredible rapidity where ours and the Chinese are growing.Everybody wants to hold onto the thing that they know. It's a very natural thing, and I'm not saying we should disregard those views, but the societies that have clung too tightly to the way things were tend to lose their vitality and, ultimately, their freedom. That's what you see in the war with Russia and Ukraine. Let's just say there are people in Ukraine who said, “Let's not embrace new disruptive technologies.” Their country would disappear.We live in a competitive world where you can opt out like Europe opted out solely because they lived under the US security umbrella. And now that President Trump is threatening the withdrawal of that security umbrella, Europe is being forced to race not into the future, but to race into the present.Risk tolerance (24:08). . . experts, scientists, even governments don't have any more authority to make these decisions about the future of our species than everybody else.I certainly understand that sort of analogy, and compared to Europe, we look like a far more risk-embracing kind of society. Yet I wonder how resilient that attitude — because obviously I would've said the same thing maybe in 1968 about the United States, and yet a decade later we stopped building nuclear reactors — I wonder how resilient we are to anything going wrong, like something going on with an AI system where somebody dies. Or something that looks like a cure that kills someone. Or even, there seems to be this nuclear power revival, how resilient would that be to any kind of accident? How resilient do you think are we right now to the inevitable bumps along the way?It depends on who you mean by “we.” Let's just say “we” means America because a lot of these dawns aren't the first ones. You talked about gene therapy. This is the second dawn of gene therapy. The first dawn came crashing into a halt in 1999 when a young man at the University of Pennsylvania died as a result of an error carried out by the treating physicians using what had seemed like a revolutionary gene therapy. It's the second dawn of AI after there was a lot of disappointment. There will be accidents . . .Let's just say, hypothetically, there's an accident . . . some kind of self-driving car is going to kill somebody or whatever. And let's say there's a political movement, the Luddites that is successful, and let's just say that every self-driving car in America is attacked and destroyed by mobs and that all of the companies that are making these cars are no longer able to produce or deploy those cars. That's going to be bad for self-driving cars in America — it's not going to be bad for self-driving cars. . . They're going to be developed in some other place. There are lots of societies that have lost their vitality. That's the story of every empire that we read about in history books: there was political corruption, sclerosis. That's very much an option.I'm a patriotic American and I hope America leads these revolutions as long as we can maintain our values for many, many centuries to come, but for that to happen, we need to invest in that. Part of that is investing now so that people don't feel that they are powerless victims of these trends they have no influence over.That's why all of my work is about engaging people in the conversation about how do we deploy these technologies? Because experts, scientists, even governments don't have any more authority to make these decisions about the future of our species than everybody else. What we need to do is have broad, inclusive conversations, engage people in all kinds of processes, including governance and political processes. That's why I write the books that I do. That's why I do podcast interviews like this. My Joe Rogan interviews have reached many tens of millions of people — I know you told me before that you're much bigger than Joe Rogan, so I imagine this interview will reach more than that.I'm quite aspirational.Yeah, but that's the name of the game. With my last book tour, in the same week I spoke to the top scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the seventh and eighth graders at the Solomon Schechter Hebrew Academy of New Jersey, and they asked essentially the exact same questions about the future of human genetic engineering. These are basic human questions that everybody can understand and everybody can and should play a role and have a voice in determining the big decisions and the future of our species.To what extent is the future you're talking about dependent on continued AI advances? If this is as good as it gets, does that change the outlook at all?One, there's no conceivable way that this is as good as it gets because even if the LLMs, large language models — it's not the last word on algorithms, there will be many other philosophies of algorithms, but let's just say that LLMs are the end of the road, that we've just figured out this one thing, and that's all we ever have. Just using the technologies that we have in more creative ways is going to unleash incredible progress. But it's certain that we will continue to have innovations across the field of computer science, in energy production, in algorithm development, in the ways that we have to generate and analyze massive data pools. So we don't need any more to have the revolution that's already started, but we will have more.Politics always, ultimately, can trump everything if we get it wrong. But even then, even if . . . let's just say that the United States becomes an authoritarian, totalitarian hellhole. One, there will be technological innovation like we're seeing now even in China, and two, these are decentralized technologies, so free people elsewhere — maybe it'll be Europe, maybe it'll be Africa or whatever — will deploy these technologies and use them. These are agnostic technologies. They don't have, as I said at the start, an inevitable outcome, and that's why the name of the game for us is to weave our best values into this journey.What is a “newnimal”? (30:11). . . we don't live in a state of nature, we live in a world that has been massively bio-engineered by our ancestors, and that's just the thing that we call life.When I was preparing for this interview and my research assistant was preparing, I said, “We have to have a question about bio-engineered new animals.” One, because I couldn't pronounce your name for these . . . newminals? So pronounce that name and tell me why we want these.It's a made up word, so you can pronounce it however you want. “Newnimals” is as good as anything.We already live in a world of bio-engineered animals. Go back 50,000 years, find me a dog, find me a corn that is recognizable, find me rice, find me wheat, find me a cow that looks remotely like the cow in your local dairy. We already live in that world, it's just people assume that our bioengineered world is some kind of state of nature. We already live in a world where the size of a broiler chicken has tripled over the last 70 years. What we have would have been unrecognizable to our grandparents.We are already genetically modifying animals through breeding, and now we're at the beginning of wanting to have whatever those same modifications are, whether it's producing more milk, producing more meat, living in hotter environments and not dying, or whatever it is that we're aiming for in these animals that we have for a very long time seen not as ends in themselves, but means to the alternate end of our consumption.We're now in the early stages xenotransplantation, modifying the hearts, and livers, and kidneys of pigs so they can be used for human transplantation. I met one of the women who has received — and seems to so far to be thriving — a genetically modified pig kidney. We have 110,000 people in the United States on the waiting list for transplant organs. I really want these people not just to survive, but to survive and thrive. That's another area we can grow.Right now . . . in the world, we slaughter about 93 billion land animals per year. We consume 200 million metric tons of fish. That's a lot of murder, that's a lot of risk of disease. It's a lot of deforestation and destruction of the oceans. We can already do this, but if and when we can grow bioidentical animal products at scale without having all of these negative externalities of whether it's climate change, environmental change, cruelty, deforestation, increased pandemic risk, what a wonderful thing to do!So we have these technologies and you mentioned that people are worried about them, but the reason people are worried about them is they're imagining that right now we live in some kind of unfettered state of nature and we're going to ruin it. But that's why I say we don't live in a state of nature, we live in a world that has been massively bio-engineered by our ancestors, and that's just the thing that we call life.Inspired by curiosity (33:42). . . the people who I love and most admire are the people who are just insatiably curious . . .What sort of forward thinkers, or futurists, or strategic thinkers of the past do you model yourself on, do you think are still worth reading, inspired you?Oh my God, so many, and the people who I love and most admire are the people who are just insatiably curious, who are saying, “I'm going to just look at the world, I'm going to collect data, and I know that everybody says X, but it may be true, it may not be true.” That is the entire history of science. That's Galileo, that's Charles Darwin, who just went around and said, “Hey, with an open mind, how am I going to look at the world and come up with theses?” And then he thought, “Oh s**t, this story that I'm coming up with for how life advances is fundamentally different from what everybody in my society believes and organizes their lives around.” Meaning, in my mind, that's the model, and there are so many people, and that's the great thing about being human.That's what's so exciting about this moment is that everybody has access to these super-empowered tools. We have eight billion humans, but about two billion of those people are just kind of locked out because of crappy education, and poor water sanitation, electricity. We're on the verge of having everybody who has a smartphone has the possibility of getting a world-class personalized education in their own language. How many new innovations will we have when little kids who were in slums in India, or in Pakistan, or in Nairobi, or wherever who have promise can educate themselves, and grow up and cure cancers, or invent new machines, or new algorithms. This is pretty exciting.The summary of the people from the past, they're kind of like the people in the present that I admire the most, are the people who are just insatiably curious and just learning, and now we have a real opportunity so that everybody can be their own Darwin.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* AI Hype Is Proving to Be a Solow's Paradox - Bberg Opinion* Trump Considers Naming Next Fed Chair Early in Bid to Undermine Powell - WSJ* Who Needs the G7? - PS* Advances in AI will boost productivity, living standards over time - Dallas Fed* Industrial Policy via Venture Capital - SSRN* Economic Sentiment and the Role of the Labor Market - St. Louis Fed▶ Business* AI valuations are verging on the unhinged - Economist* Nvidia shares hit record high on renewed AI optimism - FT* OpenAI, Microsoft Rift Hinges on How Smart AI Can Get - WSJ* Takeaways From Hard Fork's Interview With OpenAI's Sam Altman - NYT* Thatcher's legacy endures in Labour's industrial strategy - FT* Reddit vows to stay human to emerge a winner from artificial intelligence - FT▶ Policy/Politics* Anthropic destroyed millions of print books to build its AI models - Ars* Don't Let Silicon Valley Move Fast and Break Children's Minds - NYT Opinion* Is DOGE doomed to fail? Some experts are ready to call it. - Ars* The US is failing its green tech ‘Sputnik moment' - FT▶ AI/Digital* Future of Work with AI Agents: Auditing Automation and Augmentation Potential across the U.S. Workforce - Arxiv* Is the Fed Ready for an AI Economy? - WSJ Opinion* How Much Energy Does Your AI Prompt Use? I Went to a Data Center to Find Out. - WSJ* Meta Poaches Three OpenAI Researchers - WSJ* AI Agents Are Getting Better at Writing Code—and Hacking It as Well - Wired* Exploring the Capabilities of the Frontier Large Language Models for Nuclear Energy Research - Arxiv▶ Biotech/Health* Google's new AI will help researchers understand how our genes work - MIT* Does using ChatGPT change your brain activity? Study sparks debate - Nature* We cure cancer with genetic engineering but ban it on the farm. - ImmunoLogic* ChatGPT and OCD are a dangerous combo - Vox▶ Clean Energy/Climate* Is It Too Soon for Ocean-Based Carbon Credits? - Heatmap* The AI Boom Can Give Rooftop Solar a New Pitch - Bberg Opinion▶ Robotics/Drones/AVs* Tesla's Robotaxi Launch Shows Google's Waymo Is Worth More Than $45 Billion - WSJ* OpenExo: An open-source modular exoskeleton to augment human function - Science Robotics▶ Space/Transportation* Bezos and Blue Origin Try to Capitalize on Trump-Musk Split - WSJ* Giant asteroid could crash into moon in 2032, firing debris towards Earth - The Guardian▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* New Yorkers Vote to Make Their Housing Shortage Worse - WSJ* We Need More Millionaires and Billionaires in Latin America - Bberg Opinion▶ Substacks/Newsletters* Student visas are a critical pipeline for high-skilled, highly-paid talent - AgglomerationsState Power Without State Capacity - Breakthrough JournalFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

ab 1:26 Min. - Die Gruppe OIL: Naturtrüb | Gelesen von „Die Gruppe OIL“ | 5 Std. 1 Min. | Der Diwan Hörbuchverlag || ab 9:23 Min. - Christoph Kramer: Das Leben fing im Sommer an | Gelesen von Christoph Maria Herbst | 5 Std. 54 Min. | Argon Verlag || ab 15:10 Min. - Christian Berkel: Sputnik | Autorenlesung | 10 Std. 40 Min. | Hörbuch Hamburg || ab 25:25 Min. - Liza Szabo: Marie Bot - Ein Kindermädchen zum Aufladen | Gelesen von Lina Beckmann | 4 Std. 5 Min. | Ab 9 Jahren | Hörbuch Hamburg / Silberfisch

America's warfighting advantage depends on an innovation edge. Defense Advanced Research Projects  Agency (DARPA) is a key leader in that realm. Created in response to the launch of Sputnik in 1957, DARPA works to ensure America never again faces a strategic technical surprise. Their programs focus on the fundamental research required to establish proof of concept. This work is especially important given the scale and scope of the technology we face in an era defined by peer competition. Join us as we chat with DARPA Deputy Director Rob McHenry to learn more about his team's current focus areas and key trends they see in the current security environment.

In 1968, six-year-old Andrew Basiago stepped through Tesla's teleportation device and emerged at Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address in 1863. He was part of Project Pegasus, DARPA's classified program using technology reverse-engineered from Tesla's confiscated research. The program began after Sputnik shocked America into creating DARPA to prevent technological surprises. When scientists rediscovered Tesla's stolen files, they found blueprints for a teleportation machine that could bend space and time using zero-point energy. Adult test subjects either vanished, aged rapidly, or arrived in pieces across different moments. Only children's flexible minds could handle temporal displacement, so DARPA recruited 140 young "chrononauts" for missions throughout history. By 1980, the technology evolved to transport people to Mars, where Basiago claims he served alongside Barry Soetoro - later known as Barack Obama. But the program unlocked more than time travel - it opened doorways to infinite parallel realities that the government desperately tries to keep hidden. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCjo9KBpK9I SOURCES & LINKS Tesla's Stolen Tech and the New Arms Race:  • Weather Weapons & Worse | Tesla's Stolen T...  The Most Destructive Weapon Tesla Ever Made:   • The Most Destructive Weapon Tesla Ever Made  Free Energy & Anti-Gravity Cover-Ups:   • Killer Patents & Secret Science Vol. 1 | F...  Chronovisor: The Vatican's Secret Device to See Through Time • Chronovisor: The Vatican's Secret Device t... The Dark Side of DARPA: • The Dark Side of DARPA | The Human Cost of...  Backyard Time Machine: Mike “Mad Man” Marcum: • Backyard Time Machine: The Time Travel Mys...  America's Secret Space Program: • America's Secret Space Program and the Ali...  20 And Back - Super Soldiers Defending the Kuiper Belt: • 20 And Back - The Super Soldiers Defending...  Project Redsun: NASA's Secret Manned Missions to Mars: • Project Redsun: NASA's Secret Manned Missi...  Alien Artifacts on Mars: What NASA doesn't want you to know: • Alien Artifacts on Mars: What NASA doesn't...  The Airforce UFO Cover Up That Drove a Man INSANE: • The Airforce UFO Cover Up That Drove a Man...  Secret 10-Year Mission to Project Serpo: • Secret 10-Year Mission to an Alien Planet ... 

El clima está cambiando a una velocidad nunca vista por la humanidad y nos faltan herramientas para revertir o minimizar los impactos. Por eso hoy escapamos del fin del mundo junto a expertos y expertas en diferentes campos gracias a la Uni Climática. Lo hacemos con Xan López, escritor y coeditor de la revista ‘Corriente cálida', Xavier Cugat, experto en energías renovables, Aitor Sánchez, nutricionista y autor de ‘Mi Dieta Cojea', Francisca Puertas, profesora de Investigación del CSIC y experta en hormigón y Mercedes Vidal, coordinadora de Esquerra Unida i Alternativa y Ex presidenta de Transportes Metropolitanos de Barcelona. Culminamos con Rebeldes por Naturaleza, la sección de Amigas de la Tierra en Carne Cruda, donde hablamos con Miguel Díaz sobre la función de espacios como Sputnik. Más información aquí: ⁠bit.ly/Soluciones1534⁠ Haz posible Carne Cruda: http://bit.ly/ProduceCC

The Black Knight Satellite: Alien Watcher or Orbital Deception?

Director Joe Johnston, who worked in design and VFX for George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, is best known for effects-heavy family pics like Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, The Rocketeer, and Jumanji. But in 1999, he tried his hand at the “based on a true story” inspirational biopic genre, based on the early life of NASA engineer Homer Hickam, as told in Hickam's memoir Rocket Boys. Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Chris Cooper, Chris Owen, and Laura Dern, the film tells the story of a coal miner's son who was inspired by the launch of Sputnik in 1957 to take up rocketry with a group of friends against his father's wishes. A critical and commercial success, the anagramically-titled October Sky sounds stellar. But over two decades later, does it still shoot for the moon, or is it a dud?   For more geeky podcasts visit GonnaGeek.com    You can find us on iTunes under ''Legends Podcast''. Please subscribe and give us a positive review. You can also follow us on Twitter @LegendsPodcast or even better, send us an e-mail: LegendsPodcastS@gmail.com    You can write to Rum Daddy directly: rumdaddylegends@gmail.com    You can find all our contact information here on the Network page of GonnaGeek.com Our complete archive is always available at www.legendspodcast.com, www.legendspodcast.libsyn.com  Music: Title Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

10th Anniversary Special ~ The history of satellites from Sputnik 1 to mega-constellations of Satellites Swarming Our Once Quiet and Dark Skies - Dark Sky Parks are fighting back

Russenhass ist deutsche Staatsräson – und Abort-Journalismus ist Tagesschau-NormalitätEin Standpunkt von Friedhelm Klinkhammer und Volker Bräutigam.Welch eine Niedertracht: Das neonazistische Regime in Kiew hat es (zunächst) abgelehnt, 6.000 Leichen gefallener ukrainischer Soldaten von Russland zurückzunehmen.(1) Doch unser leibhaftiger öffentlich-rechtlicher Skandal, die Tagesschau, versuchte, die Schuld dafür den Russen in die Schuhe zu schieben. Die fiesen Kostenüberlegungen der Ukraine unterschlug sie.(2) – Ebenso erbärmlich: Die Leitung der KZ-Gedenkstätte Dachau ließ von den Kränzen, die zu Ehren der von den Nazis dort ermordeten 4.000 russischen Kriegsgefangenen niedergelegt worden waren, die Schleifen in den russischen Nationalfarben abschneiden.(3) Darüber verlor die Tagesschau erst gleich kein Wort. Es ist ihr Beitrag zur medialen Massenverblödung: Nachrichten verfälschen oder unterdrücken. Nichts, auch nicht der Respekt vor dem schrecklichen Tod junger Soldaten hindert sie daran, ihre russenfeindliche AgitProp an fanatisierte deutsche Einzeller zu liefern. Unsere Gesellschaft nimmt es hin. Wir verlieren den letzten Rest Anstand.Die niederländische Journalistin Sonja van den Ende(4), näher am aktuellen Frontgeschehen und der politischen Realität als irgendein ARD-Korrespondent:„Das ist wirklich schrecklich, das ist ein Verbrechen, denn diese Soldaten haben für ihr Land gekämpft … jetzt sieht es so aus, als wolle die ukrainische Regierung sie nicht zurückholen. Wir wussten, dass in Kiew ein kriminelles Regime herrscht, und diese Situation beweist es.“(5)Doch solche Stimmen können im regierungsamtlich zensierten deutschen Diskurs nicht gehört werden. Wer sich über Ursachen, Hintergründe und Verlauf (nicht nur) des ukrainisch-russischen Krieges vollständiger und objektiver informieren will, ist auf ausländische Quellen ebenso angewiesen wie auf kritisch-alternative deutsche: auf Russia Today(6), Sputnik international(7), Strategic Culture(8), Consortium News(9), Globalbridge(10), Moon of Alabama(11), Schweizer Standpunkt(12) und Sonar21(13) einerseits und NachDenkSeiten(14), Overton(15), Anti-Spiegel(16), Hintergrund(17) und Berliner Zeitung(18) andererseits. Denn selbst humanitäre Projekte wie den am 2. Juni in Istanbul vereinbarten Gefangenen- und Leichenaustausch zwischen Russland und der Ukraine nutzen unsere Mainstreammedien – vom Spiegel bis zum öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunk – um primitiven deutschen Russenhass zu fördern. ...hier weiterlesen: https://apolut.net/6-000-soldatenleichen-werden-antirussische-propaganda-von-f-klinkhammer-und-v-brautigam/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join us for a Cold War era period piece animated film about a giant robot that crash lands on Earth and makes a friend. This is our Midnight Ritual of The Iron Giant(1999) and no, this is not an episode for kids. We cuss..... a lot. TNC: https://linktr.ee/thenightclub -Letterboxd- Travis: https://letterboxd.com/thenightclub/ Ricky: https://letterboxd.com/fvlsekvltrick/ Trevor: https://letterboxd.com/darkfixius/ Cody: https://letterboxd.com/codyco/

Im gleichen Jahr wie der Satellit "Sputnik" kommt in BerlinChristian Berkel zur Welt. Und wie der Satellit wird der spätere Schauspielerin ein Universum der Fragen geschickt. Eine literarische Suchenach der eigenen Herkunft und Identität. Christian Berkel, Sputnik, UllsteinVerlag. Autorin und Sprecherin: Sabine Zaplin

Katrin Schumacher empfiehlt diese drei Bücher: "Goth. Die dunkle Seite des Punk" von John Robb, "Sputnik" von Christian Berkel und "Ungebetene Gäste" von Ayelet Gundar-Goshen.

Der Schauspieler erzählt seine Lebensgeschichte von der Geburt bis heute - fantasievoll, elegant, lebhaft und immer geprägt von der Liebe zur Mutter.

Seit Jahren gräbt der Schauspieler Christian Berkel in seiner Familiengeschichte. Bereits zwei autofiktionale Romane sind dabei entstanden: "Der Apfelbaum" (2018) und "Ada" (2020). Beide Bücher wurden vom Feuilleton hochgelobt. Jetzt ist das dritte Buch der Familientrilogie erschienen: "Sputnik". Christian Berkel blickt weit zurück in seine Kindheit, die flankiert wurde von politisch bewegten Zeiten, der 68er-Begung, dem Besuch des Schahs in Deutschland 1967, die Ermordung von Benno Ohnesorg. Und er erlebte immer wieder das Schweigen über Verbrechen im Nationalsozialismus. Christian Berkel erspürt als Kind die Stimmung in der Familie und in der Gesellschaft. Seine Mutter musste als Jüdin aus Deutschland fliehen. Sie hat Verfolgung, Flucht und Internierungslager überlebt, fand in Deutschland, Jahre nach dem Krieg ihre Familie und wieder ein Zuhause. Auch sie konnte lange nicht über das Erlebte sprechen. Bis sie ihr Schweigen brach. Mit seinem autofiktionalen Roman "Sputnik" setzt Christian Berkel Mosaiksteine seiner Familienvergangenheit zusammen, denkt nach über die deutsche Nachkriegsgeschichte, über Schuld, Verantwortung. Aber auch über eine unbeschwerte Jugend in Frankreich, die prägende Momente hatte, weil sie ein kulturelles Feuerwerk waren aus Sprache, Musik, Theater und Literatur. Darüber spricht der Schauspieler Christian Berkel mit Claudia Christophersen in NDR Kultur à la carte.

What happens when courts override presidents and investors exhale? Michelle Martin unpacks how a U.S. court ruling striking down Trump’s 'reciprocal tariffs' may change the rules of market risk. Is China's AI stock rally a true Sputnik moment—or just another headline-fueled sugar high? Michelle and Arun Pai of Monk’s Hill Ventures dig into Gushengtang, Bairong, DeepSeek, and more. Plus, why Salesforce is making an $8 billion move on Informatica—and what it signals about the AI arms race. Hosted by Michelle Martin with guest Arun Pai from Monk’s Hill Ventures.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From 2001- Paul Dickson discusses his book "Sputnik: The Shock of the Century." The title refers to the Soviet satellite that was sent into orbit in 1957 - a development which was nothing less than terrifying for many Americans who feared what the Soviet Union might be able to do with such technology.

Já foi tempo em que liderar era bater na mesa e decidir. Hoje, liderança virou sinônimo de ansiedade, solidão e cansaço disfarçado de sorrisos em reuniões no Zoom. A pesquisa da SPUTNiK escancarou: 79% dos líderes penam com o choque de gerações, metade não enxerga clareza estratégica e só 24% têm mentoria real. A pergunta que fica é: quem cuida de quem cuida? Liderança forte não nasce de frases prontas, nasce de apoio, escuta, mentoria e coragem. Bora falar de liderança nutritiva?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Já foi tempo em que liderar era bater na mesa e decidir. Hoje, liderança virou sinônimo de ansiedade, solidão e cansaço disfarçado de sorrisos em reuniões no Zoom. A pesquisa da SPUTNiK escancarou: 79% dos líderes penam com o choque de gerações, metade não enxerga clareza estratégica e só 24% têm mentoria real. A pergunta que fica é: quem cuida de quem cuida? Liderança forte não nasce de frases prontas, nasce de apoio, escuta, mentoria e coragem. Bora falar de liderança nutritiva?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The newest episode of Finding Demo Surf Fishing has dropped and we are talking about taxes. Audio:  https://share.transistor.fm/s/b201486aEpisode Title: Taxes on Taxes on TaxesSummary:In this eye-opening episode, we dig into the fishing excise tax—the hidden fee built into nearly every piece of fishing gear you buy.While it's meant to fund conservation, access, and habitat restoration, we ask the tough questions:Where does that money actually go?Who decides how it's spent?Are surf anglers getting shortchanged compared to boaters and other user groups?We explore the history of the tax, how it's structured, and why most anglers don't even realize they're paying it. You'll hear real examples of mismanagement, underfunded coastal access, and political gridlock—but also the success stories, like the Chesapeake Bay restoration effort, that prove this system can work when done right.Whether you're knee-deep in the surf or casting from a pier, if you fish—you fund this. It's time to understand how it works and what needs to change.What You'll Learn:The origin and intent of the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration ActWhy surf and shore anglers often get less benefit from the taxes they payHow tax revenue is distributed—and how that could be improvedSuccess stories: where the tax is working as intendedSimple ways anglers can get involved and push for changeResources & Mentions:The Dingell-Johnson ActThe Wallop-Breaux AmendmentChesapeake Bay Restoration ProjectYour state fish and wildlife agency (for checking access project allocations)Tag us and share your thoughts on Instagram, Facebook, or wherever you fish online.Available now wherever you get your podcasts.Subscribe, rate, and leave a review to help us keep this conversation going!This Episode Is Sponsored By:  DS Custom Tackle: Tackle Supply for all anglers.  Floats, rigs, jigs, bait, and moreBait Check:  Ninja Tackle: Ninja Dagger, 7' Travel Rod, Bummy Stick, Akios reels, rigs, bait, and firearm accessories (optics, Glock parts, attachments, and more)Bait Check:  Kids Can Fish Foundation: Kids Can Fish is a state and federally-recognized 501(c)(3) charitable foundation.  Their mission is to teach kids fishing fundamentals and, most importantly, HAVE FUN!!   Theme Song Dirty Rock by TwisteriumMentions:Frisky FinsSalty's Pompano RigsThe Sinker GuyFishbitesPenn FishingASA FishingTHE IRS!  No tag for youThe Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust FundCongressional Sportsmen's FoundationU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service#findingdemosurffishing  #SurfFishing #FishingPodcast #AnglingPodcast #SaltwaterFishing #BeachFishing #Surfcasting #PodcastRecommendations #OutdoorPodcast #FishingCommunity #FishingTips #PodcastLife #Fishbites #FriskyFins #SaltysPompanoRigs #TheSinkerGuy #PennFishing #ASAFishing #IRS #TheSportFishRestorationandBoatingTrustFund #CongressionalSportsmensFoundation #USFishandWildlifeService #FishingPodcast #SaltwaterFishing #ExciseTax #SurfFishing #ConservationFunding #FishingGearTax #FishingCommunity #AnglerTalk #FishSmarter

Správanie sa vlády pri pandemickej dohode a nezmyselné naratívy Petra Kotlára o očkovaní spochybňujú modernú medicínu. Prečo by potom mali ľudia dôverovať lekárom, keď im radia napríklad lieky na vysoký tlak, pýta sa lekár Peter Sabaka.Dôsledkom podľa neho bude, že Slováci budú ešte viac chorí. Virológ z SAV Boris Klempa tiež vôbec nerozumie argumentom Roberta Fica, prečo malo Slovensko voči pandemickej dohode výhrady. Argument suverenitou podľa neho neobstojí. Naopak – prípadné nepristúpenie k dohode nás ohrozí v prípade budúcej pandémie.V podcaste s odborníkmi sa dozviete:– od 1. minúty – ako hodnotia výsledok hlasovania o pandemickej dohode;– od 1:50 – či k pandemickej dohode pristúpi ktorákoľvek ďalšia vláda;– po 2:30 – že Slovensko si robí hanbu sprisahaneckými teóriami;– od 3:30 – aké by mohli byť následky pre slovenských pacientov, vedcov a lekárov, keby sme k dohode nepristúpili;– po 4:30 – či by Slovensko samo zvládalo pandémie lepšie ako Švédsko;– od 6:20 – že Slovensko symbolicky odmieta podanú ruku medzinárodného spoločenstva do budúcna;– okolo 8:00 – že Slovensko je považované za bohatú krajinu a či by sme na to nedoplatili;– po 10:30 – ako by sme mohli mať nedostatok najnovších liekov a metódy diagnostiky;– od 12:00 – že pandemická dohoda je len kúsok skladačky v Kotlárovom naratíve;– po 13:20 – že Kotlár by vedel, na čo ľudia zomierali, keby bol počas pandémie reálne v nemocnici;– od 15:00 – čo sa bude písať v učebniciach dejepisu o pandémii covidu;– po 17:00 – že o kukurici hovorí len Peter Kotlár a nikto iný;– od 19:00 – že Kotlárom citovaná štúdia vakcíny odporúča, akurát ich chce do budúcna zlepšiť;– po 20:20 – čo znamená, že vo vakcínach je DNA a prečo je to normálne;– od 22:00 – že najviac DNA bolo v ruskej vakcíne Sputnik a v AstraZeneca;– po 23:00 – či Kotlár tomu nerozumie, alebo len pretláča naratív;– od 24:00 – že na Kotlárovom obrázku môže byť pokojne aj cibuľa;– po 25:00 – či sú voči Svetovej zdravotníckej organizácii aj legitímne výhrady;– od 28:40 – že vláda spochybňuje modernú medicínu a to môže uškodiť ľuďom a ich zdraviu;– po 30:00 – či teda Kotlár a Fico priamo ohrozujú životy a zdravie ľudí;– od 31:00 – aký je to pocit, keď ľudia útočia na odborníkov;– po 32:30 – ako vyzerali útoky na Petra Sabaku;– od 34:45 – či verí ministrovi vnútra, že bude riešiť nenávistné útoky;– po 35:30 – či má dôveru v štát, ktorý má zaručiť bezpečnosť;– od 37:00 – čo vysúdil od extrémistov z Republiky.

Správanie sa vlády pri pandemickej dohode a nezmyselné naratívy Petra Kotlára o očkovaní spochybňujú modernú medicínu. Prečo by potom mali ľudia dôverovať lekárom, keď im radia napríklad lieky na vysoký tlak, pýta sa lekár Peter Sabaka.Dôsledkom podľa neho bude, že Slováci budú ešte viac chorí. Virológ z SAV Boris Klempa tiež vôbec nerozumie argumentom Roberta Fica, prečo malo Slovensko voči pandemickej dohode výhrady. Argument suverenitou podľa neho neobstojí. Naopak – prípadné nepristúpenie k dohode nás ohrozí v prípade budúcej pandémie.V podcaste s odborníkmi sa dozviete:– od 1. minúty – ako hodnotia výsledok hlasovania o pandemickej dohode;– od 1:50 – či k pandemickej dohode pristúpi ktorákoľvek ďalšia vláda;– po 2:30 – že Slovensko si robí hanbu sprisahaneckými teóriami;– od 3:30 – aké by mohli byť následky pre slovenských pacientov, vedcov a lekárov, keby sme k dohode nepristúpili;– po 4:30 – či by Slovensko samo zvládalo pandémie lepšie ako Švédsko;– od 6:20 – že Slovensko symbolicky odmieta podanú ruku medzinárodného spoločenstva do budúcna;– okolo 8:00 – že Slovensko je považované za bohatú krajinu a či by sme na to nedoplatili;– po 10:30 – ako by sme mohli mať nedostatok najnovších liekov a metódy diagnostiky;– od 12:00 – že pandemická dohoda je len kúsok skladačky v Kotlárovom naratíve;– po 13:20 – že Kotlár by vedel, na čo ľudia zomierali, keby bol počas pandémie reálne v nemocnici;– od 15:00 – čo sa bude písať v učebniciach dejepisu o pandémii covidu;– po 17:00 – že o kukurici hovorí len Peter Kotlár a nikto iný;– od 19:00 – že Kotlárom citovaná štúdia vakcíny odporúča, akurát ich chce do budúcna zlepšiť;– po 20:20 – čo znamená, že vo vakcínach je DNA a prečo je to normálne;– od 22:00 – že najviac DNA bolo v ruskej vakcíne Sputnik a v AstraZeneca;– po 23:00 – či Kotlár tomu nerozumie, alebo len pretláča naratív;– od 24:00 – že na Kotlárovom obrázku môže byť pokojne aj cibuľa;– po 25:00 – či sú voči Svetovej zdravotníckej organizácii aj legitímne výhrady;– od 28:40 – že vláda spochybňuje modernú medicínu a to môže uškodiť ľuďom a ich zdraviu;– po 30:00 – či teda Kotlár a Fico priamo ohrozujú životy a zdravie ľudí;– od 31:00 – aký je to pocit, keď ľudia útočia na odborníkov;– po 32:30 – ako vyzerali útoky na Petra Sabaku;– od 34:45 – či verí ministrovi vnútra, že bude riešiť nenávistné útoky;– po 35:30 – či má dôveru v štát, ktorý má zaručiť bezpečnosť;– od 37:00 – čo vysúdil od extrémistov z Republiky.

Our analysts Adam Jonas and Sheng Zhong discuss the rapidly evolving humanoid technologies and investment opportunities that could lead to a $5 trillion market by 2050. Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Adam Jonas: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Adam Jonas Morgan Stanley's Global Head of Autos and Shared Mobility.Sheng Zhong: And I'm Sheng Zhong, Head of China Industrials.Adam Jonas: Today we're talking about humanoid robots and the $5 trillion global market opportunity we see by 2050.It's Thursday, May 15th at 9am in New York.If you're a Gen Xer or a boomer, you probably grew up with the idea of Rosie, the robot from the Jetsons. Rosie was a mechanical butler who cooked, cleaned, and did the laundry while dishing out a side of sarcasm.Today's idea of a humanoid robot for the home is much more evolved. We want robots that can adapt to unpredictable environments, and not just clean up a messy kitchen but also provide care for an elderly relative. This is really the next frontier in the development of AI. In other words, AI must become more human-like or humanoid, and this is happening.So, Sheng, let's start with setting some expectations. What do humanoid robots look like today and how close are we to seeing one in every home?Sheng Zhong: The humanoid is like a young child, in my opinion, although their abilities are different. A robot is born with a developed brain that is Large Language Model, and its body function develops fast.Less than three years ago, a robot barely can walk, but now they can jump, they can run. And just in last week, Beijing had a humanoid half marathon. While robot may lack on connecting its brain to its body action for work execution; sometimes they fail a lot of things. Maybe they break cups, glasses, and even they may fall down.So, you definitely don't want a robot at home like that, until they are safe enough and can help on something. To achieve that a lot of training and practice are needed on how to do things at a high success rate. And it takes time, maybe five years, 10. But in the long term, to have a Rosie at every family is a goal.So, Adam, our U.S. team has argued that the global humanoid Total Adjustable Market will reach $5 trillion USD by 2050. What is the current size of this market and how do we get to that eye-popping number in next 25 years?Adam Jonas: So, the current size of the market, because it's in development phase, is extremely low. I won't put it a zero but call it a black zero – when you look back in time at where we came from. The startups, or the public companies working on this are maybe generating single digit million type dollar revenues. In order to get to that number of $5 trillion by 2050 – that would imply roughly 1 billion humanoids in service, by that year. And that is the amount of the replacement value of actual units sold into that population of 1 billion humanoid robots on our global TAM model.The more interesting way to think about the TAM though is the substitution of labor. There are currently, for example, 4 billion people in the global labor market at $10,000 per person. That's $40 trillion. You know, we're talking 30 or 40 per cent of global GDP. And so, imagining it that way, not just in terms of the unit times price, but the value that these humanoids, can represent is, we think, a more accurate way of thinking about the true economic potential of this adjustable market.Sheng Zhong: So, with all these humanoids in use by 2050, could you paint us a picture in broad strokes of what the economy might look like in terms of labor market and economic growth?Adam Jonas: We can only work through a scenario analysis and there's certainly a lot of false precision that could be dangerous here. But, you know, there's no limit to the imagination to think about what happens to a world where you actually produce your labor; what it means for dependency ratios, retirement age, the whole concept of a GDP could change.I don't think it's an exaggeration to contemplate these technologies being comparable to that of electric light or the wheel or movable type or paper. Things that just completely transform an economy and don't just increase it by five or 10 per cent but could increase it by five or 10 times or more. And so, there are all sorts of moral and ethical and legal issues that are also brought up.The response to which; our response to which will also dictate the end state. And then the question of national security issues and what this means for nation states and, we've seen in our tumultuous human history that when there are changes of technologies – even if they seem to be innocent at first, and for the benefit of mankind – can often be uh, used to, grow power and to create conflict. So Sheng, how should investors approach the humanoid theme and is it investible right now?Sheng Zhong: Yes, it's not too early to invest in this mega trend. Humanoid will be a huge market in the future, like you said. And it starts now. There are multi parties in this industry, including the leading companies from various background: the capital, the smart people, and the government. So, I believe the industry will evolve rapidly. And in Morgan Stanley's Humanoid: A Hundred Report a hundred names was identified in three categories. They are brand developers, bodies components suppliers, and the robot integrators. And we'd like to stick with the leading companies in all these categories, which have leading edge technology and good track record. But at the meantime, I would emphasize that we should keep close eyes on the disruptors.Adam Jonas: So, Sheng, it seems that national support for the humanoid and embodied AI theme in China is at least today, far greater than in any other nation. What policy support are you seeing and how exactly does it compare to other regions?Sheng Zhong: Government plays an important role in the industry development in China, and I see that in humanoid industry as well. So currently, the local government, they set out the target, and they connect local resources for supply chain corporation. And on the capital perspective, we see the government background funds flow into the industry as well. And even on the R&D, there are Robot Chinese Center set up by the government and corporates together. In the past there were successful experience in China, that new industry grow with government support, like solar panels, electronic vehicles. And I believe China government want to replicate this success in humanoids. So, I won't be surprised to see in the near future there will be national humanoid target industry standard setup or adoption subsidies even at some time.And in fact we see the government supports in other countries as well. Like in South Korea there is a K Humanoid Alliance and Korean Ministry of Trade has full support in terms of the subsidy on robotic R&D infrastructure and verification.So, what is U.S. doing now to keep up with China? And is the gap closing or widening?Adam Jonas: So, Sheng, I think that there's a real wake up call going on here. Again, some have called it a Sputnik moment. Of course the DeepSeek moment in terms of the GenAI and the ability for Chinese companies to show just extraordinary and remarkable level of ingenuity and competition in these key fields, even if they lack the most leading-edge compute resources like the U.S. has – has really again been quite shocking to the rest of the world. And it certainly gotten the attention of the administration, and lawmakers in the DOD. But then thinking further about other incentives, both carrot and stick to encourage onshoring of critical embodiment of AI industries – including the manufacturing of these types of products across not just humanoids, but electronic vertical takeoff and landing aircraft drones, autonomous vehicles – will become increasingly evident. These technologies are not seen as, ‘Hey, let's have a Rosie, the robot. This is fun. This is nice to have.' No, Sheng. This is seen as existential technology that we have to get right.Finally, Sheng, as far as moving humanoid technology to open source, is this a region specific or a global trend? And what is your outlook on this issue?Sheng Zhong: I actually think this could be a global trend because for technology and especially for humanoid, the Vision Language Model is obviously if there is more adoption, then more data can be collected, and the model will be smarter. So maybe unlike the Windows and Android dominant global market, I think for humanoid there could be regional level open-source models; and China will develop its own model. For any technology the application on the downstream is key. For humanoid as an AI embodiment, the software value needs to be realized on hardware. So I think it's key to have mass production of nice performance humanoid at a competitive cost.Adam Jonas: Listen, if I can get a humanoid robot to take my dog, Foster out and clean up after him, I'm gonna be pretty excited. As I am sure some of our listeners will be as well. Sheng, thank you so much for this peak into our near future.Sheng Zhong: Thank you very much, Adam, and great speaking with you,Adam Jonas: And thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

Nedávny návrat starej sovietskej vesmírnej družice na Zem oživil otázky o najstarších ľudských objektoch vo vesmíre. Medzi nimi rezonuje aj kuriózny príbeh o kanalizačnom poklope, ktorý mal byť do vesmíru vystrelený počas amerického jadrového testu v 50. rokoch. Čo je na tom pravdy a ktoré objekty skutočne dosiahli vesmír ako prvé? V novom dieli podcastu SHARE sa Maroš Žofčin rozpráva s redaktorom Živé.sk a astrofyzikom Marekom Jurčíkom o mýtoch a faktoch spojených s prvými ľudskými výpravami za hranice atmosféry, o divokých časoch jadrových testov a o zaujímavom príbehu rakety V-2.Redaktori Živé.sk vydávajú knihu: Zo série rozhovorov sa dozviete, ako umelá inteligencia čoskoro zásadne zmení svet okolo nás:TIP: https://zive.aktuality.sk/clanok/0RfdZVW/nahliadnite-do-buducnosti-vydavame-knihu-o-umelej-inteligencii/V podcaste hovoríme aj o týchto témach:Príbeh o kanalizačnom poklope vystrelenom do vesmíru: Mýtus a realita.Čo bolo skutočne prvým ľudským objektom vo vesmíre?Prečo Sputnik nebol prvý predmet vo vesmíre, ale na obežnej dráhe.Divoké 50. roky: Atómové testy a ich kuriózne vedľajšie produkty.Šialené podzemné nukleárne výbuchy.Odkazy na informácie spomínané v podcaste:Pravda alebo mýtus? Američania počas atómového testu vystrelili do vesmíru kanalizačný poklopTest pohonu Orion s nenukleárnymi náložamiOperácia Plumbbob - podzemné nukleárne testyPodcast SHARE pripravuje magazín Živé.sk.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has had a state visit to Russia.The visit coincides with Russia's Victory Day celebrations on May 9, marking the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945, which brought an end to the Second World War in Europe.This year also marks the 80th anniversary of victory in the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, signifying the complete triumph of the global fight in the World Anti-Fascist War.How will President Xi's visit to Russia further deepen bilateral strategic ties? Why are stable China-Russia relations crucial for regional and global stability? And will the world draw lessons from 80 years ago to preserve peace, or are we heading toward a more turbulent future?CGTN Radio host Xu Yawen speaks with Chen Weihua, the EU bureau chief of China Daily, Evgenii Pavlov, a journalist with Sputnik, Beijing, and Angelo Giuliano, a Swiss-Italian political analyst based in Hong Kong, to delve into these topics.

Episode 130 In part 23 of our Sinai and Synapses interview series, we are talking with Dr Fred Ledley. He is a professor of natural & applied science and management at Bentley University in Waltham, MA and director of the center for integration of science and industry. A physician and pediatrician by training, he has performed research in genomics on the faculties of the Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Hospital, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute and founded several biotechnology companies focused on gene therapy or personalized medicine. A widely published researcher, his current work focuses on advancing the translation of scientific discoveries for public value by developing synergies between science, medicine, business, and public policy. He has previously participated in the national, NIH-funded program in “Genetics, Religion and Ethics”, part of the ELSI program of the Human Genome project, and a Templeton-funded program “New Visions in Science, Nature and Religion” at US Santa Barbara. He has written a novel, Sputnik's Child, which explores how science and technology became a faith for members of the baby boom generation and the limits of this faith. He plays clarinet in Shpilkes Klezmer Band and has served on the board of the Boston Jewish Music Festival, Jewish Arts Collaborative, and Celebrity Series of Boston. He joined in a Bnai Mitzvah with his wife, Tamara, at age 31, occasionally reads Torah and serves as darshan as a member of Temple Aliyah in Needham MA, and considers music, hiking the forest, and observing solar eclipses to be spiritual experiences. Check out his book, "Sputnik's Child" here - https://amzn.to/4dgiZAD   Sinai and Synapses - https://sinaiandsynapses.org/   Support this podcast on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/DowntheWormholepodcast   More information at https://www.downthewormhole.com/   produced by Zack Jackson music by Zack Jackson and Barton Willis 

Swiss watch company Swatch came up with a new way to tell time in 1998, known as "Internet Time" or ".beats time." It led to an international controversy over advertising, radio frequencies, and Russia's Mir space station. Hosted by Corbin Davenport, guest starring Cody Toombs. Follow on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/techtalesshow.com Follow on Mastodon/Fediverse: https://mas.to/@techtales Support the Show: https://techtalesshow.com/support Watches: • https://www.swatch.com/en-en/webmaster-ii-sqb101c/SQB101C.html • https://www.swatch.com/en-en/great-australian-byte-sqz100/SQZ100.html • https://www.swatch.com/en-en/webstream-green-yqs1001ag/YQS1001AG.html • https://www.swatch.com/en-en/moon-or-beat-iv-yfs4010/YFS4010.html • https://www.swatch.com/en-en/sonic-the-hedgehog-sqk101/SQK101.html Sources: • https://www.zdnet.com/article/swatch-wont-take-apple-to-court-over-iwatch-trademark/ • https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37350870 • https://www.wnyc.org/story/tldr-15-internet-time/ • https://www.wired.com/1998/12/time-for-a-change/ • https://news.mit.edu/1998/summit-1118 • https://segaretro.org/Press_release:_2000-02-24:_Sega_and_Swatch_Team_Up:_Two_Major_Players_Meet_in_Cyberspace • https://lpcwiki.miraheze.org/wiki/Ericsson_T20 • https://novayagazeta.eu/articles/2024/05/14/lost-in-space-en • https://www.wired.com/1999/04/spam-thats-out-of-this-world/ • https://web.archive.org/web/19991110070006/http://www.ccr.jussieu.fr/physio/amsat-france/Press-rel-05.htm • https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/sputnik-40.htm • https://www.pso-world.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=883 • https://web.archive.org/web/20010215002746/http://hamradio-online.com/1999/apr/arrl-swatch.html • https://latimes.newspapers.com/article/the-los-angeles-times-swatch-beatnik-can/170703674/ • https://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=25685 Chapters: 0:00:00 Intro 0:00:27 Swatch & Internet Time 0:07:50 The Watches 0:16:44 Adoption of Internet Time 0:20:05 Sputnik 99 0:36:18 Swatch vs. Apple 0:38:00 Outro

I denne RumNyt sætter vi i vores hovedhistorie fokus på ESAs Biomass-mission, der snart skal sendes i kredsløb, og i de næste 5 år skal kortlægge og måle biomassen især i de store tropiske skove og jungler rundt om på kloden. Biomass er udstyret med en smart radar, der gør det muligt at skabe et detaljeret og dynamisk 3D-kort over bevoksningen på steder hvor man ellers aldrig ville kunne samle data. Missionen er i øvrigt en del af ESAs serie af store Earth Explorers missioner. I de korte rumnyheder skal vi som sædvanligt langt ud i hjørnerne. Vi fortæller blandt andet om en kommende supernova som ligger i vores kosmiske baghave, om udviklingen af ultrapræcise atomure og om hvordan vi stadig venter på de første observationer på ESOs ELT – Extremely Large Telescope. Endelig skal vi også kort vende den (ret spekulative) plan om at hente en af verdens første kunstige satellitter, Vanguard 1, der blev opsendt helt tilbage i 1958, men som nogen drømmer om at bringe tilbage til Jorden igen... Lyt med

To get live links to the music we play and resources we offer, visit www.WOSPodcast.comThis show includes the following songs:Erica Daniels - It Probably Ain't FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYTova Glyt - Heading North FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYField+Fire - Watch FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYKamala - Peaceful FOLLOW ON SHAZAMAndrea Jean - So, I Sing a Song FOLLOW ON YOUTUBEAmanda Bjorn - Until We Become Earth FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYHelen Maw - The Moment FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYTéa Renee - Fragile Bones FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYAdah Dylan - FUTURE SHOCK FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYMaxine Julian - Two After Twelve FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYLaura Da Sousa - Back to the End FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYCaptain Seren - Angel Of My Life FOLLOW ON YOUTUBEMel Dalton x The Midnight Juliets - The Key of H FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYMama Tjutju - Everything Breathes FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYSputnik The Band - Good Company FOLLOW ON SPOTIFYFor Music Biz Resources Visit www.FEMusician.com and www.ProfitableMusician.comVisit our Sponsor Profitable Musician Newsletter at profitablemusician.com/joinVisit our Sponsor Captain Seren at https://captain-seren.rocksVisit our Sponsor Kick Bookkeeping at http://profitablemusician.com/kickVisit our Sponsor Track Stage at https://profitablemusician.com/trackstageVisit www.wosradio.com for more details and to submit music to our review board for consideration.Visit our resources for Indie Artists: https://www.wosradio.com/resourcesBecome more Profitable in just 3 minutes per day. http://profitablemusician.com/join

No episódio 89 do podcast Fronteiras no Tempo, os historiadores C. A., Marcelo Beraba e o Estagiário Rodolfo se reúnem para uma conversa envolvente e cheia de curiosidades sobre os primórdios do cinema brasileiro. Da chegada das primeiras imagens em movimento ao Brasil, passando pelas primeiras experiências, a criação dos estúdios pioneiros e as transformações tecnológicas e culturais, este episódio traça um panorama rico e acessível da sétima arte no país até meados do século XX. Com uma abordagem descontraída, mas sempre embasada, os participantes discutem as influências internacionais, o papel dos cineastas nacionais, os desafios enfrentados e os impactos culturais, sociais e políticos deixados pela produção audiovisual naqueles contextos em que se desenvolveu. Se você curte história, cinema ou simplesmente adora descobrir como as artes se entrelaçam com os acontecimentos do passado, este episódio é pra você! Dá o play e vem com a gente nessa viagem cinematográfica no tempo! Artes do Episódio: Danilo Pastor (Nativa Multimídia) Mencionado no Episódio A Chegada de um Trem na Estação LUMIÈRE, Louis; LUMIÈRE, Auguste. A chegada de um trem na estação. França: Société Lumière, 1896. 1 filme (1 min), preto e branco, mudo. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/RP7OMTA4gOE. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Os Óculos do Vovô GONZAGA, Francisco Santos. Os óculos do vovô. Belém: Francisco Santos, 1913. 1 filme (12 min), preto e branco, mudo. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/noo_hOlREOQ. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Cinema da Votorantim Autor desconhecido. Cinema da Votorantim. [S.l.: s.n.], [data desconhecida]. 1 filme (duração desconhecida), colorido. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/ochhQg3dElA. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Descobrimento do Brasil MAURO, Humberto. Descobrimento do Brasil. Brasil: INCE, 1937. 1 filme (60 min), preto e branco, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/hUpJpsX0Awg. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Acabaram-se os Otários BARROS, Luiz de. Acabaram-se os otários. São Paulo: Cinédia, 1929. 1 filme (duração desconhecida), preto e branco, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/tFD3_H5pQeo. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. O Homem do Sputnik MANGA, Carlos. O homem do Sputnik. Brasil: Atlântida Cinematográfica, 1959. 1 filme (95 min), preto e branco, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/f_S4Ju7EZI4. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. O Cangaceiro BARRETO, Lima. O cangaceiro. Brasil: Companhia Cinematográfica Vera Cruz, 1953. 1 filme (105 min), preto e branco, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/oOumq-kWf-Y. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. O Corintiano AMARAL, Milton. O corintiano. Brasil: PAM Filmes, 1966. 1 filme (98 min), preto e branco, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/chjyJKuScZ0. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Tristeza do Jeca MAZZAROPI, Amácio. Tristeza do Jeca. Brasil: PAM Filmes, 1961. 1 filme (95 min), colorido, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/34nFnfD8AeQ. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Aconteceu em Havana LANG, Walter. Aconteceu em Havana. Estados Unidos: Twentieth Century Fox, 1941. 1 filme (81 min), colorido, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/8CKIFk6SMGA. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Rio, 40 Graus SANTOS, Nelson Pereira dos. Rio, 40 graus. Brasil: Nelson Pereira dos Santos Produções Cinematográficas, 1955. 1 filme (100 min), preto e branco, sonoro. Disponível em: https://youtu.be/V81QK2SNuIo. Acesso em: [07/04/2025]. Financiamento Coletivo Existem duas formas de nos apoiar Pix recorrente – chave: fronteirasnotempo@gmail.com Apoia-se – https://apoia.se/fronteirasnotempo INSCREVA-SE PARA PARTICIPAR DO HISTORICIDADE O Historicidade é o programa de entrevistas do Fronteiras no Tempo: um podcast de história. O objetivo principal é realizar divulgação científica na área de ciências humanas, sociais e de estudos interdisciplinares com qualidade. Será um prazer poder compartilhar o seu trabalho com nosso público. Preencha o formulário se tem interesse em participar. Link para inscrição: https://forms.gle/4KMQXTmVLFiTp4iC8 Selo saberes históricos Agora o Fronteiras no Tempo tem o selo saberes históricos. O que é este selo? “O Selo Saberes Históricos é um sinal de reconhecimento atribuído a:● Práticas de divulgação de saberes ou produções de conteúdo histórico ou historiográfico● Realizadas em redes sociais ou mídias digitais, voltadas para públicos mais amplos e diversificados● Comprometidas com valores científicos e éticos.”Saiba mais: https://www.forumsabereshistoricos.com/ Redes Sociais Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, Instagram Contato fronteirasnotempo@gmail.com Como citar esse episódio Fronteiras no Tempo #89 História do Cinema brasileiro. Locução Cesar Agenor Fernandes da Silva, Marcelo de Souza Silva, Rodolfo Grande Neto e Willian Spengler [S.l.] Portal Deviante, 08/04/2025. Podcast. Disponível em: https://www.deviante.com.br/?p=64885&preview=true Expediente Produção Geral e Hosts: C. A. e Beraba. Recordar é viver: Willian Spengler. Edição e Arte do Episódio: Danilo Pastor (Nativa Multimídia). Madrinhas e Padrinhos Apoios a partir de 12 de junho de 2024 Alexsandro de Souza Junior, Aline Silva Lima, André Santos, André Trapani, Andréa Gomes da Silva, Andressa Marcelino Cardoso, Augusto Carvalho, Carolina Pereira Lyon, Charles Calisto Souza, Elisnei Menezes de Oliveira, Erick Marlon Fernandes da Silva, Flávio Henrique Dias Saldanha, Gislaine Colman, Iara Grisi, João Ariedi, Klaus Henrique de Oliveira, Manuel Macias, Marlon Fernandes da Silva, Pedro Júnior Coelho da Silva Nunes, Rafael Henrique Silva, Raul Sousa Silva Junior, Renata de Souza Silva, Ricardo Orosco, Rodrigo Mello Campos, Rubens Lima e Willian SpenglerSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode 361: On October 4, 1957, as the world's eyes turned skyward to witness the launch of Sputnik 1, another technological marvel was about to be unveiled in a hangar in Malton, Ontario. The Avro Arrow, Canada's ambitious supersonic interceptor, was poised to revolutionize aviation. But within two years, it would vanish without a trace, leaving behind a legacy of controversy and conspiracy. Sources: Avro Arrow | The Canadian Encyclopedia Avro Arrow | canadahistory.com Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow | Wikipedia Avro CF-100 Canuck | The Canadian Encyclopedia Broken Arrow | Legion Magazine A legend in aviation still hard at work | Canadian Military History Janusz Zurakowski - Canada's Aviation Hall of Fame Avro Arrow - List of Firsts - Canadians At Arms CF-105, the Arrow Program Avro Arrow: Canada's Lost Dream of Aviation Supremacy Canadian Aviation And The Avro Arrow Book By Fred Smye Avro Arrow Pictures | avro-arrow.org The Avro Arrow: Exploding The Myths And Misconceptions Royal Canadian Air Force The Avro Arrow New Edition: The Story Of The Great Canadian Cold War Interceptor Jet In Pictures And Documents Book By Lawrence Miller The Avro Arrow: For The Record Book By Palmiro Campagna Storms Of Controversy: The Secret Avro Arrow Files Revealed Book By Palmiro Campagna Who Killed The Avro Arrow? Book By Chris Gainor Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Want to get rich quick? You're not alone. Right now, Americans spend over $100 billion, yes billion, every year on lottery tickets. Today on the show, in collaboration with Scratch and Win from WGBH, how the mafia, Sputnik, medical equipment, and the electoral college led to American's obsession with playing the numbers.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

At the start of 2025 the AI industry and stock market were both blindsided. By the end of Monday, Jan. 27, nearly $1 trillion in value had been wiped off the Nasdaq 100. U.S. tech companies that had invested billions of dollars in AI now faced new competition from DeepSeek, a Chinese AI startup. Supposedly only costing $6 million to develop, and as intelligent as OpenAI's reasoning models, the open-source application became the most downloaded free app for iPhone when released. For Brandon Nuttall, chief digital and AI officer at industry data solutions provider Xceedance, this was a Sputnik moment for the AI industry–referring to moment in which the Soviet Union surprised the United States and jump-started the space race in 1957 by sending the first artificial satellite into space. In this podcast, Nuttall discusses the risks for companies that use DeepSeek, how the AI was created, and why it needs significantly less energy than other large language models.

To roast coffee faster, you need to turn up the heat….right?   No!    In this episode, we explore the three powerful methods of heat transfer that revolutionised roasting. We'll journey from humble beginnings—when roasting three kilos took half an hour—to machines that now roast hundreds of kilos of coffee in the time it takes you to boil a kettle.    But beans roasted at lightning speed look strange, and taste… well, you'll find out. Join us as we test-drive an industrial tangential roaster where first crack remind me of fireworks crackers.    We also see the whale-sized roaster so massive it's worth you a Guinness World Record.    We have the technology today to roast coffee faster than ever, so why aren't we all roasting at recording-breaking speeds?   ---------------   Please spread the word about The Science of Coffee! Leave a 5 star rating on Spotify Follow me on Instagram and tag me in an Instagram story Write a review on Apple Podcasts Discover how I make these Filter Stories episodes by subscribing to my Substack newsletter   Check out the Probat roasters mentioned in this episode:   Emmerich Spherical Roaster - "Pink Hydrant" Large ball roaster - “Sputnik in a pizza oven” G45 early drum roaster - “Old school steam train”  Early tangential roaster Sample tangential roaster - "Shoebox" Neptune 4000, the largest drum roaster in the world! - "The whale"   And there are lots of other specialty roasters from Probat I didn't have time to showcase, including their new hydrogen powered roasters. See them all for yourself!.   Theodor von Gimborn's wikipedia page     Go deeper into the science of roasting   Read Mark Al-Shemmeri's coffee roasting blog Do a Certificate of Advanced Studies with the Coffee Excellence Centre Explore Barista Hustle's online roasting learning Learn more from Morten Münchow and his coffee roasting courses Read Morten's paper in collaboration with the University of Copenhagen on Roasting Conditions and Coffee Flavour Follow Filter Stories on Instagram for my infographics Learn more about first crack on my episode Coffee Roasting, Part 1: How heat transforms coffee beans     Season 3 is made possible by these leading coffee organizations:   The Coffee Quest | BWT | TODDY | Algrano | Probat  

The Cognitive Crucible is a forum that presents different perspectives and emerging thought leadership related to the information environment. The opinions expressed by guests are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of or endorsement by the Information Professionals Association. During this episode, Chris Greenway discusses the origins and evolution of BBC Monitoring, a service that gathers news from various sources. BBC Monitoring began in the 1930s as a response to the BBC's external broadcasts, with the initial focus on Arabic, Spanish, and Portuguese languages. The British government showed interest in monitoring, leading to a partnership with the BBC. By the height of World War II, the service had expanded to a thousand people and developed a relationship with American partners. Chris also discusses the significant role of open-source intelligence (OSINT) as well as products and services offered by BBC Monitoring. Recording Date: 17 Feb 2025 Research Question: Chris Greenway suggests an interested student or researcher take part in a narrative assessment: have a look at Sputnik, or RT. What narrative are they trying to project to you? And can you “reverse engineer” those narratives to reveal the objective of the Russian government? Resources: Cognitive Crucible Podcast Episodes Mentioned #148 Kalev Leetaru on GDELT BBC Monitoring Sefton Delmer Black boomerang by Sefton Delmer Link to full show notes and resources Guest Bio: Chris Greenway has worked for BBC Monitoring (BBCM) since 1981, helping the organisation's users to understand the world and threats to international stability through coverage of global media. Joining the service in the shortwave era, he first worked at its signals-receiving station, providing colleagues with feeds from radio stations and news agencies around the world. Two years later he joined the editorial teams who compiled the regional editions of Monitoring's daily newspaper, the Summary of World Broadcasts, working on the Soviet, East European, Middle East and Africa desks. That led to a total of eight years of postings to BBCM's outstation in Nairobi, monitoring Africa, interspersed with duties back at BBCM's UK HQ where he held various editorial and management posts. Since 2006, he has been part of a team coordinating the organisation's daily global operations and output. Chris combines his work with a personal interest in the history of, and current developments in, broadcasting, media monitoring and international information warfare. About: The Information Professionals Association (IPA) is a non-profit organization dedicated to exploring the role of information activities, such as influence and cognitive security, within the national security sector and helping to bridge the divide between operations and research. Its goal is to increase interdisciplinary collaboration between scholars and practitioners and policymakers with an interest in this domain. For more information, please contact us at communications@information-professionals.org. Or, connect directly with The Cognitive Crucible podcast host, John Bicknell, on LinkedIn. Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, 1) IPA earns from qualifying purchases, 2) IPA gets commissions for purchases made through links in this post.

This week we talk about Luna 2, soft-landings, and Firefly Aerospace.We also discuss the private space launch industry, lunar landers, and regolith.Recommended Book: The Mercy of Gods by James S.A. CoreyTranscriptIn 1959, Luna 2, a Soviet impactor-style spacecraft, successfully reached the surface of the Moon—the first-ever human-made object to do so.Luna 2 was very of its era; a relatively simple device, similar in many ways to the better-known Sputnik satellite, but getting a craft to the moon is far more difficult than placing something in orbit around Earth, in part because of the distance involved—the Moon is about 30-Earth's from the surface of the earth, that figure varying based on where in its elliptical orbit it is at the moment, but that's a good average, around 239,000 miles which is about 384,000 km, while Sputnik's orbit only took it something like 359 miles, around 578 km from the surface. That's somewhere in the neighborhood of 670-times the distance.So new considerations, like fuel to get there, but also charting paths to the moon that would allow the human-made object to actually hit it, rather than flying off into space, and even figuring out whether craft would need to be designed differently if they made it out of Earth's magnetic field, were significant hurdles that had to be leapt to make this mission a success; everything was brand new, and there were gobs of unknowns.That said, this craft didn't settle onto the moon—it plowed into it like a bullet, a so-called ‘hard landing.' Which was still an astonishing feet of research and engineering, as at this point in history most rockets were still blowing up before making it off the launch pad, including the projects that eventually led to the design and launch of Luna 2.The US managed their own hard landing on the Moon in 1962, and it wasn't until 1966 that the first soft landing—the craft slowing itself before impact, so that some kind of intact device would actually continue to exist and function on the surface of the moon—was accomplished by the Luna 9.The Luna 9 used an ejectable capsule that was protected by airbags, which helped it survive its 34 mph, which is about 54 kmh impact. This successful mission returned the first panoramic photographs from the surface of the moon, which was another notable, historic, incredibly difficult at the time feat.A series of rapid-fire firsts followed these initial visits, including the first-ever crewed flight to the Moon, made by the US Apollo 8 mission in 1968—that one didn't land, but it did circle the Moon 10 times before returning to Earth, the first successful crewed mission to the surface of the Moon made by the Apollo 11 team in 1969, and by the early 70s humans had made several more moon landings: all of them were American missions, as the US is still the only country to have performed successful crewed missions to the Moon's surface, but the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 missions all put people on the lunar surface, and then returned them safely to Earth.The Luna 24, another Soviet mission launched in 1976, was the last big space race era mission to return lunar samples—chunks of moon rock and regolith—to earth, though it was a robotic mission, no humans aboard. And by many measures, the space race actually ended the previous year, in 1975, when Apollo and Soyuz capsules, US and Soviet missions, respectively, docked in orbit, creating the first international space mission, and allowing US astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts to shake hands, symbolically burying the hatchet, at least in terms of that particular, non-earthbound rivalry.What I'd like to talk about today is a recent, successful soft landing on the lunar surface that's historic in nature, but also contemporarily significant for several other reasons.—Firefly Space Systems was founded in the US in 2014 by a team of entrepreneurs who wanted to compete with then-burgeoning private space companies like SpaceX and Virgin Galactic by, like these competitors, reducing the cost of getting stuff into low Earth orbit.They were planning to become profitable within four years on the back of the also-burgeoning small satellite industry, which basically means selling space on their rockets, which are capable of carrying multiple small satellites on what's often called a ‘rideshare' basis, to companies and agencies that were keen to launch their own orbital assets.These smaller satellites were becoming increasingly popular and doable because the tech required was shrinking and becoming cheaper, and that meant you no longer needed a boggling amount of money to do basic research or to lob a communications satellite into orbit; you could spent a few million dollars instead of tens or hundreds of millions, and buy space on a rocket carrying many small satellites, rather than needing to splurge on a rocket all by yourself, that rocket carrying only your giant, extremely costly and large conventional satellite.This path, it was hoped, would provide them the benefits of economies of scale, allowing them to build and launch more rockets, which in turn would bring the costs of such rockets and launches down, over time.And the general concept was sound—that's basically what SpaceX has managed to do, with mammoth success, over the past decade completely rewiring how the space launch industry works; their many, reusable rockets and rocket components, and abundant launches, many of which are used to lob their own StarLink in-orbit satellites into space, while also usually carrying smaller satellites provided by clients who pay to go along for the ride, bringing all of these costs down dramatically.So that model is basically what Firefly was aiming for, as well—but the Firefly team, which was made up of folks from Virgin Galactic, SpaceX, and other industry entities was sued by Virgin Galactic, which alleged that a former employee who left them to work for Firefly provided Firefly with intellectual property and committed what amounts to espionage, destroying data and hardware before they left.These allegations were confirmed in 2016, and some of Firefly's most vital customers and investors backed out, leaving the company without enough money to move forward. A second lawsuit from Virgin Orbit against Firefly and some of its people hit that same year, and that left the company insolvent, its assets put up for auction in 2017.Those assets were bought by an investment company called Noosphere Ventures, which relaunched Firefly Space Systems as Firefly Aerospace. They then reworked the designs of their rockets a bit and relocated some of the company's research assets to Ukraine, where the head of Noosphere Ventures is from.They picked up a few customers in the following years, and they leased a private launch pad in Florida and another in California. In 2021, they were awarded more than $90 million to develop exploration tech for the Artemis Moon program, which was scheduled for 2023 and was meant to help develop the US's private space industry; NASA was trying out a model that would see them hire private companies to deliver assets for a future moon-based mission, establishing long-term human presence on the moon, over the course of several years, and doing so on a budget by basically not having to build every single aspect of the mission themselves.That same year, the head of Noosphere Ventures was asked by the US Committee on Foreign Investment to sell nearly 50% of his stake in Firefly for national security reasons; he was born in Ukraine, and the Committee was apparently concerned about so much of the company's infrastructure being located in a country that, even before Russia invaded the following year, was considered to be a precarious spot for security-vital US research and development assets.This is considered to be something of a scandal, as it was implied that this Ukrainian owner was himself under suspicion of maybe being a Russian asset—something that seems to have been all implication and no substance, as he's since moved back to Ukraine and has gone on to be something of a war hero, providing all sorts of tech and other resources to the anti-invasion effort.But back then, he complied with this request, though not at all happily—and it sounds like that unhappiness was probably justified, though there are still some classified documents on the matter that maybe say otherwise; we don't know for sure publicly right now.In any event, he and Noosphere sold most of their stake in Firefly to a US company called AE Industrial Partners, and the following year, in 2022 it successfully launched, for the first time, its Alpha rocket, intended to be its core launch option for small satellite, rideshare-style customers.The satellites placed in orbit by that first launch didn't reach their intended height, so while the rocket made it into orbit, another launch, where the satellites were placed where they were supposed to go, actually happened in 2023, is generally considered to be the first, true successful launch of the Alpha rocket.All of which is interesting because this component of the larger space industry has been heating up; SpaceX has dominated, soaking up most of the oxygen in the room and claiming the lion's share of available contracts. But there are quite a few private space companies from around the world profitably launching rockets at a rapid cadence, these days. And many of them are using the same general model of inexpensive rideshare rockets carrying smaller satellites into orbit, and the money from those launches then funds their other explorations, ranging from government mission components like rovers, to plans for futuristic space stations that might someday replace the aging International Space Station, to larger rockets and launch craft that might further reduce the cost of launching stuff into space, while also potentially serving as in-orbit or off-planet habitations—as is the case with SpaceX's massive Starship craft.This is also notable, though, because Firefly launched a lander as part of its Blue Ghost mission, to the Moon on January 15 of 2025. That craft reached the moon, and successfully soft-landed there, on March 2 the same year.This lander was partly funded by that aforementioned 2021 Artemis award by NASA—it ultimately received just over $100 million from the agency to conduct this mission—and it was launched atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, as the company's own Alpha rockets don't yet have the right specs to launch their lander, the Blue Ghost M1; which interestingly shared space in this rocket with another lander produced by a Japanese company called ispace, whose name you might recognize, as ispace managed to get a previous lunar lander, the Hakuto-R 1, to the moon in 2023, but communication was lost with the craft a few seconds before it was scheduled to land. It was confirmed later that year that the lander crashed; though again, even just getting something to the moon is a pretty impressive feat.So this SpaceX rocket, launched in mid-January of 2025, had two competing lunar landers on it, one made by Firefly and one made by ispace. That latter lander is scheduled to arrive on the surface sometime in early May of this year, though that might change, based on all sorts of variables. But the former, Firefly's Blue Ghost, successfully touched-down, soft-landing on the lunar surface on March 2.There's another lander from Intuitive Machines—the American company that can claim to be the first to successfully soft-land on the lunar surface, but whose first effort tipped over. Their new lander could arrive as soon as March 6, just days after Blue Ghost, and it'll be aiming for an area just 100 miles from the moon's south pole; an area that's of particular interest because of water ice contained in permanently shadowed areas thereabouts, which could be vital for long-term human occupation of the moon.So things are heating up on the lunar surface these days, but soft-landing something on the moon is still an accomplishment that few nations, much less private companies, have managed.In the past decade alone, India, Russia, and a nonprofit based in Israel have attempted and failed to achieve soft-landings, and those aforementioned Japanese and US companies managed to soft-land on the moon, but their landers tipped over, limiting the amount of research they could conduct once there. China is the only nation to have successfully achieved this feat on their first attempt, and they benefitted from decades of preexisting research and engineering know-how.And it's not surprising that this is such a rare feat: in addition to the incredible distances involved, the Blue Ghost lander was traveling at around 3,800 mph, which is more than 6,100 kpm just 11 minutes before it landed. It then had to slow itself down, while also adjusting its orientation in order to safely land on an uneven, crater-paved moonscape; it slowed to the pace of a slow walk just before it touched down.Science-wise, this lander is carrying tools that will help it measure the stickiness of regolith on different materials, that will allow for more precise measurements of the distance between earth and the moon, and that will help researchers study solar winds, radiation-tolerant technologies, and the moon's mantle. It has equipment that allowed it to detect GPS and Galileo signals from earth, which suggests these satellites might be used by craft and rovers on the moon, for navigation, at some point, and it has a drill that will allow it to penetrate the lunar regolith up to nine feet deep, among several other project assets.This has also served as a sort of proof of concept for this lander and mission type, as another Blue Ghost lander is scheduled to launch in 2026, that one aiming for the far side of the moon, with a third currently meant to head out in 2028, destined for a currently under-explored volcanic region.The aggregate goal of these US missions, alongside the research tools they deliver, is to eventually start building-out and supplying the necessary infrastructure for long-term human occupation of the moon, culminating with the construction of a permanently crewed base there.These sorts of ambitions aren't new, but this approach—funding companies to handle a lot of the legwork, rather than keeping those sorts of efforts in-house, within NASA—is novel, and it arguably recognizes the nature of the moment, which is increasingly defined by cheaper and cheaper, and in most ways better and better offerings by private space companies, while those deployed by NASA are still really solid and impressive, but incredibly slow and expensive to develop and deploy, in comparison.This is also happening at a moment of heightened geopolitical competition in space, and one in which private entities are equipping the nation states that would have traditionally dominates this industry.China's space agency has enjoyed a flurry of moon-related successes in recent years, and many of these missions have relied at least in part on efforts by private, or pseudo-private, as tends to be the case in China, companies.Business entities from all over the world are also regularly making the satellites and probes and components of landers that make these things work, so solar system exploration and space travel are no longer the exclusive wheelhouses of government agencies—the private sector is becoming a lot more influential in this area, and that's led to some novel security issues, alongside massive swings in influence and power for the folks running these companies: perhaps most notably SpaceX CEO Elon Musk's increasing sway over governments and even inter-governmental conflict, due in part to his company's space launch capabilities, and their capacity to beam internet down to conflict zones, earthside, via their StarLink satellite array.So this is an area that's heating up, both for earthbound and space-faring reasons, and the incentives and peculiarities of the private market are increasingly shaping the type of research and missions being conducted, while also changing the math of what's possible, how quickly, and maybe even what level of risk is acceptable within a given mission or program.Show Noteshttps://www.cnn.com/science/live-news/moon-landing-blue-ghost-03-02-25/index.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakuto-R_Mission_1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakuto-R_Mission_2https://spacenews.com/ae-industrial-partners-to-acquire-stake-in-firefly-from-noosphere/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_programhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_Alphahttps://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-selects-firefly-aerospace-for-artemis-commercial-moon-delivery-in-2023/https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/22/18234604/firefly-aerospace-cape-canaveral-florida-launch-site-slc-20https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25861-next-generation-of-space-cowboys-get-ready-to-fly/https://apnews.com/article/moon-landings-failures-successes-545ea2f3ffa5a15893054b6f43bdbb98https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/science/blue-ghost-firefly-mission-1-moon-landing.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_Aerospacehttps://www.space.com/the-universe/moon/were-on-the-moon-private-blue-ghost-moon-lander-aces-historic-lunar-landing-for-nasahttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9208qv1kzohttps://www.reuters.com/technology/space/us-firm-fireflys-blue-ghost-moon-lander-locks-lunar-touchdown-2025-03-02/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/26/science/intuitive-machines-second-moon-landing-launch-how-to-watch.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_south_polehttps://www.livescience.com/space/the-moon/how-far-away-is-the-moonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landinghttps://www.space.com/12841-moon-exploration-lunar-mission-timeline.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_24 This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

Tonight, we'll read a Snoozecast original, “Spandex Jackets (One for Everyone).” Listeners who are fans of Steely Dan may be aware that the title is a reference to Donald Fagen's 1982 track “I.G.Y. (What a Beautiful World)”. The story itself draws inspiration from the song which paints a retro-futuristic dream of undersea rails, solar-powered cities and the promise of a gloriously bright tomorrow. The acronym in the song title I.G.Y. references the “International Geophysical Year” a real life global scientific project that ran from July 1, 1957 to December 31st 1958. It brought together scientists from 67 nations to collaborate on studying Earth's geophysical properties, including its atmosphere, oceans, and polar regions. IGY marked significant advancements in space research, such as the launch of the first artificial satellites (Sputnik by the Soviet Union and Explorer by the United States). Its spirit of international cooperation laid the groundwork for many subsequent collaborative scientific endeavors. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When the Chinese developer of DeepSeek released its model R1, a rift opened up in Silicon Valley. The company, a relatively unknown player, appeared to have created a better and cheaper model than its American competitors. Some big voices in the tech world called it a “Sputnik moment.” Others worried that the open-source model would allow malicious actors to harness the power of this AI technology. But did the arrival of DeepSeek significantly change how artificial intelligence will unfold? We explore that question and ask whether one particular sci-fi franchise got it right when portraying our anxiety about runaway AI.   Guests: Alex Kantrowitz – Tech journalist and founder of the podcast and newsletter Big Technology Kristian Hammond – Professor of computer science at Northwestern University and Director of the Center for Advancing Safety of Machine Intelligence Dorian Lynskey – podcaster and author of “Everything Must Go: The Stories We Tell About the End of the World” Featuring music by Dewey Dellay and Jun Miyake Big Picture Science is part of the Airwave Media podcast network. Please contact advertising@airwavemedia.com to inquire about advertising on Big Picture Science. You can get early access to ad-free versions of every episode by joining us on Patreon. Thanks for your support! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send Everyday AI and Jordan a text message$100 million fine if your company uses DeepSeek? What happened, here? A few weeks ago, DeepSeek was the internet's darling. After grabbing international headlines and shaking the U.S. stock market to its core, it's been a shake week or two for the Chinese AI company. So what's actually happening here? Should you actually use the model? Is it safe? Is it really a SOTA open source model? Newsletter: Sign up for our free daily newsletterMore on this Episode: Episode PageJoin the discussion: Ask Jordan questions on DeepSeekUpcoming Episodes: Check out the upcoming Everyday AI Livestream lineupWebsite: YourEverydayAI.comEmail The Show: info@youreverydayai.comConnect with Jordan on LinkedInTopics Covered in This Episode:1. Popularity of DeepSeek 2. DeepSeek's capabilities and benchmarks3. DeepSeek causing market disruptions4. Global Reactions and Controversies5. Analysis and Criticism of DeepSeekTimestamps:00:00 "DeepSeek: AI Revolution or Threat?"03:20 Daily AI news09:06 DeepSeek's Advanced AI Models09:56 US Alternatives Boost DeepSeek Legitimacy15:34 Data Security Risks with China17:02 Potential Chinese AI Ban Looms21:13 Confidence in Model and Media Blame25:26 "Data Privacy Concerns with DeepSeek"30:04 DeepSeek Model Cost Controversy33:12 DeepSeek's Costs and Legal Issues36:55 DeepSeek Bans Amid Security Leaks38:24 Deep Seek Ban on Devices42:44 Data Privacy Concerns in AI Platforms46:55 DeepSeek: Not Truly Open Source48:36 AI Podcast Success Story52:48 DeepSeek AI: Threat or Hype?Keywords:Generative AI, DeepSeek, Chinese AI company, US Senate bill, $100,000,000 fines, prison sentences, national security threat, AI Sputnik moment, Microsoft, Perplexity, AWS, AI predictions, OpenAI, o3 model, International Olympiad in Informatics, Alibaba, iPhone AI features, Apple, ByteDance, Baidu, Tencent, Elon Musk, OpenAI takeover bid, transparency, data privacy, open source, state of the art model, LLMs, reasoning models, regulatory oversight, proprietary documents. Ready for ROI on GenAI? Go to youreverydayai.com/partner

Senator Chris Murphy joins Offline with a warning for his fellow Democrats: the longer we take to counter Trump's horrifying shock and awe strategy, the harder it will be to get up off the mat.  The Connecticut Senator shares how the pardoning of January 6th protestors has impacted his personal security, what the Republican party is getting right about helping people find purpose, and why the handover of power to tech overlords is such a bad, bad idea. But first! Jon and Max dive into DeepSeek to unravel whether it's the Sputnik of AI, debate if Republican influencers are using a new playbook, and unpack Elon Musk's recent comments at a German far right rally. Then, they bid farewell to the Gulf of Mexico and offer some context on why Google is bending to Trump's whims. For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@crooked.com and include the name of the podcast.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and Kash Patel went before Congress this week, and Sarah Isgur, Steve Hayes, Mike Warren, and David French consider whether confirmation hearings are a giant waste of time. Also, Donald Trump's shaming of Colombia's president made Sarah rediscover the allure of Great Men of History theory.The Agenda: —The hearings that weren't worth your (and the nation's) time —Gerrymandering isn't the problem you think it is (or is it?) —Everything is broken and I didn't break it —Trump bullies his way to foreign policy wins —The power of leadership over the human heart —Is DeepSeek our Sputnik moment? (And should we retire Sputnik comparisons?)Show Notes: —John McCormack on RFK's confirmation process —The Dispatch explainer on Trump's Colombian feud The Dispatch Podcast is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including members-only newsletters, bonus podcast episodes, and weekly livestreams—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices