Podcasts about Steens

In this episode of the Malibu Guru Podcast, Joe sits down with Doug and Valerie Steen to explore the inspiring story behind Semiplane—a newly established Garmin dealership based in Lufkin, Texas. With rich backgrounds in aviation and a passion for innovation, the Steens share how they pivoted from previous careers to launch a business dedicated to serving the PA-46 community and beyond.Visit SemiPlane: https://www.semiplane.comNew members who join PMOPA receive 10% OFF their first year's dues. Visit www.pmopa.com and use code: MalibuGuru

Vi fortsætter hvor vi slap med Steen Bitsch fra VA, men i denne episode kigger vi mere ind i hvad fremtiden bringer. En at Steens kæpheste er kaskadeudnyttelse af CO2 så det bliver der talt lidt om. Vi kommer også ind på hvorvidt biogasinvesteringer er en god forretning, og hvor langt vi skal ud i fremtiden for at det kan betale sig. Lyt med og bliv endnu klogere på VA, og hvad de gør for at imødekomme den grønne omstilling. I podcastserien “LP EKSTRA” tager vi fat i de emner, der er aktuelle lige nu, og stiller nogle af de spørgsmål, som vi allesammen går og tænker på!

這張有 kā 太陽影像調較清楚 ê 彩色相片，是 5 月 15 紀錄 太陽色球層 ê 水素原子發射線 ê 合成影像。時間愈倚 第 25 个太陽週期 上強 ê 時期，太陽就愈活跳，規个太陽表面 嘛攏是 太陽活跳區 kah 拗來彎去、敢若蛇咧趖 ê 太陽絲。浮 tī 太陽活跳區強磁場頂懸--ê，是電漿絲。In 出現 tī 太陽邊緣 ê 部份會較光，就是咱咧講 ê 日珥。太陽邊緣 4 點鐘方向 kah 9 點鐘方向附近出現 ê 大型日珥，是 彼工 有 2 个足強 ê X 級太陽爍光 出現了後產生 ê 爍光尾仔環。實際上，4 點鐘方向 ê 日珥 kah 才拄 ùi 太陽邊緣 踅過來--ê 夭壽大 ê 太陽活跳區 AR 3664 有關係。 ——— 這是 NASA Astronomy Picture of the Day ê 台語文 podcast 原文版：https://apod.nasa.gov/ 台文版：https://apod.tw/ 今仔日 ê 文章： https://apod.tw/daily/20240615/ 影像：Steen Søndergaard 音樂：P!SCO - 鼎鼎 聲優：阿錕 翻譯：An-Li Tsai (NSYSU) 原文：https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap240615.html Powered by Firstory Hosting

Inför den femte finalmatchen snackar Adam, Jonta och Uffe igenom seriens förlopp och händelser. En större analys på Alexander Steens nya position och framtid i St Louis Blues avhandlas och avslutningsvis kastar trion sig över lyssnarfrågorna: Är Bobrovsky eller Vasilevsky den bästa ryska målvakten i NHL?

Grazing hogs and honeybees... well, kind of. Listen to hosts Jared and Justin chat with Rob Dowdle of Dowdle Family Farms in Steens, Mississippi about how he raises pigs, cattle, and honeybees. Throughout the episode, the guys discuss the details of raising honeybees, how Rob is trying to accomplish year-round grazing with his livestock, what it's like to be from a "humble" state like South Dakota or Mississippi, and a few things in between. Tune in! Find Dowdle Family Farms on YouTube and FacebookFollow Roots + Ruminants on social and watch full episodes on YouTube! Facebook: Roots + Ruminants PodcastX: @RootsRuminantsInstagram: @RootsAndRuminantsPodcastTikTok: @RootsAndRuminantsPodcastYouTube: @RootsAndRuminants 

Have you ever wondered what it's like going out in the wild looking for wild horses in Oregon? Sonya Spaziani, otherwise known as Mustang Meg, has been following Oregon's wild horses since 1994. She joins me this week to share more about her experiences documenting, following, and photographing wild horses and educate all of us about why we need to preserve them.   Learn more about Mustang Meg's journey, where her interest in wild horses came from, and how she started documenting wild horses in Oregon. She shares more about her favorite encounters out on the Steens, what she enjoys most about what she does, the differences between Oregon's wild horses and horses from other states, and what she hopes to see for the future of these beautiful horses moving forward.   Get full show notes and more information here: https://www.wildhoofbeats.com/30

Vi befinner oss i 1204. Massimo Gasparino er med på det som skal bli historiens fjerde korstog for å gjenvinne Jerusalem for Europas sanne kristne. Men de er ikke i Jerusalem, de er i Konstantinopel, og Gasparino er innesperret på et rom mens hans overordnede, dogen av Venezia Enricho Dandolo, gir ordren om å plyndre det som på dette tidspunktet er verdens rikeste by. Hvordan kunne dette skje? Gasparino skriver et brev til Paven for å bekjenne sviket de begge har blitt utsatt for, men vil han klare å smugle det ut?Gjennom et fortettet kammerspill tar Thorvald Steen oss i Påklederen med til en lite kjent del av vår historie, og kompliserer ytterligere vårt bilde av korsfarerne. Hvilke likheter finner vi mellom disse maktsyke og plyndrende korsfarerne og dagens «hellige krigere» – enten de ikler seg symbolene fra kristendommen eller islam? Hvorfor forsvinner enkelte hendelser fra vår kollektive historie?Thorvald Steen har gitt ut mer enn 40 romaner, skuespill, diktsamlinger og barnebøker, deriblant en rekke historiske romaner, som Kamelskyer, Konstantinopel og Løvehjerte. Bøkene hans er oversatt til mer enn 26 språk. Han har tidligere ledet Den norske forfatterforening og vært tillitsvalgt i Norsk PEN, samt instrumentell i historie- og kultursatsningen Saladindagene på Litteraturhuset gjennom mer enn ti år.En annen som har lang erfaring med å lage romaner ut av historisk stoff, er historiker og forfatter Aina Basso. Hun har fulgt Steens prosjekt med nysgjerrighet, og møter ham på Litteraturhuset til samtale om å grave fram ukjente sider av historien, om å formidle gjennom skjønnlitteraturen, og hva historien kan lære oss om vår egen samtid. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Morgenbladets tre podkaster om kultur, bøker og politikk og økonomi har samlet seg for å diskutere estetikk og politikk i tv-serien Makta. Hvorfor har både Elise Dybvig, Ane Farsethås og Aslak Bonde endret mening om tv-serien mellom første og og andre del? Og er det ikke noe skolefjernsyn-aktig over episodene på Utøya og om Alta-aksjonen?Aslak forteller dessuten om hvordan det gikk den gangen han som ung NRK-journalist konfronterte Reiulf Steen med et brev han hadde sendt til møbelhandler Arvid Engen, Ane lar seg ikke begeistre for Utøya-episoden og Steens enetale, mens Elise mener Makta på det dårligste kan sammenliknes med The Crown. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Afsnit 525 Steen Stig Lommer. Steen er skuespiller og teaterchef på Grønnegårds Teatret. Kigger man på Steens opvækst, undres man ikke over hvorfor han har levet det meste af sit liv i og omkring skuespilverdenen, for han er bl.a. søn af Stig Lommer og Lone Hertz, vokset op med Axel Strøbye som far og har Dirch Passer som gudfar. Men dagens afsnit handler dog mere om Steens vej ind i skuespilfaget igennem en skæbnesvanger tur til Los Angeles, der ikke kun ændrede hans perspektiv på ham selv og hans karriere, men lige så meget hans på det land han er velsignet med at være vokset op i. Gå fornøjelse, Christian.

Description: This SHINE podcast interview is with my friend, colleague, and Chief People Officer Siminia Simion.  In this interview, Siminia and I speak about a few very important themes. First we speak about how we can increase our conscious “inner game” skills to be skillful in asking for what we desire and negotiate anything.  We talk about how we can embody skills of empathy and humility to be compassionate leaders during hiring and layoffs.  I use a powerful coaching framework to guide Siminia in how to ask for more in a future negotiation.  Lastly, we share important topics of what you can negotiate for in the initial interview and offer stages of a professional role. This inspiring episode will empower you to own your worth, identify and ask for the tangible and intangible needs you deserve.  Episode Links: Simina Simion Ask for More Book by Alexandra Carter How to Ask for a Raise SHINE Links: Thank you for listening. Want to build a high trust, innovative, and inclusive culture at work? Sign up for our newsletter and get the free handout and be alerted to more inspiring Shine episodes  Building Trust Free Gift Carley Links: LinkedIn Consultation Call with Carley Book Carley for Speaking Leading from Wholeness Learning & Developmen Carley's Book  Executive Coaching with Carley   Well Being Resources:  Inner Game Meditations Inner Game Leadership Assessment   Social:  LinkedIn  Instagram Website  Shine Podcast Page    Imperfect Shownotes Hi, welcome to the shine podcast. My name is Carley Hauck. I'm your host, this is the fifth season of the shine podcast. I started the shine podcast as a way of doing research for my book on conscious leadership in business. And you will find interviews with scientists, researchers and business leaders on the intersection of conscious inclusive leadership, the recipe for high performing teams and awareness practices. My book debuted in 2021 Shine ignite your inner game of conscious leadership and was voted one of the best books to read in 2022. By mindful magazine, I facilitate two episodes a month of the shine podcast.    And before I tell you about the topic for today, please go over to Apple podcasts or your favorite podcast carrier and hit the subscribe button so you don't miss any future episodes. The focus of this season is on the essentials for wellbeing. And that encompasses the intersection of our personal well being the collective well being of our workplace, and how that fosters and nurtures the planet's well being they are all connected. I focus on well being this season, because I really want to crack the code and inspire folks to prioritize their individual well being and therefore that will transcend into the collective and the planet's well being.    And I have developed a inner game leadership assessment that I gave out to 100 different leaders last year. And the leadership assessment is based on the framework of the inner game, which is what we're cultivating on the inside to be conscious leaders. And it shows up on the outside when we cultivated the certain qualities. And two of the nine leadership competencies that were lowest from the sample of 100 leaders were psychological and physical well being. Therefore, that is why we are focusing on well being and if you're curious about where your strengths and gaps are, around the qualities to become a conscious leader, you can take the assessment and find out your score for free. I recently opened to the assessment tool to the public and the link will be in the show notes.    Now on to our episode. I am so excited to have this conversation about how to ask for more. And really wonderful practical tips for negotiation. Samina. Thank you so much for being here. Arlie thank you so much for having me. I'm excited to chat with you today. Well introduce yourself to all of these wonderful listeners.   So my name is Amina I, I am a mom, I'm a wife. I am a people leader in the tech world. And I'm also an immigrant. And I came to this country about 13 years ago with big dreams and a passion to add value. And here I am today hopefully being hopeful that I've learned a lot and I grew a lot as a person and as a leader.   Thank you and what country did you emigrate from?   I was born in Romania.   Mm hmm. Lovely. Well, we connected because of the people tech Partners Group that I have been kind of Yeah, just immersed in the last year so many incredible people leaders in that group. And then I also found out that you were good friends with an pal who is another shining light leader in my life. So I'm again just really happy that we've been able to foster this new connection and relationship and I am going to just tee up the podcast a bit so folks know what we're going to be talking about.    So Samina and I are going to speak about some of her inner game conscious leadership qualities that have supported her to be the incredible chief people officer that she is. And we're going to talk a little bit more about what has been challenging for her as a CPO, especially given the current economy and the future of work climate. And then we're going to run through a negotiation conversation, that will be me being the coach. It's one of the wonderful hats that I wear. And then really working through a framework that is going to be something that you can apply to yourself, or to support somebody else as they're trying to figure out their negotiation terms for a new role. Or frankly, it could even be how do you negotiate buying a new house or car or a conversation with your partner? I mean, it's all clickable.    And then we're going to talk about what kinds of things can we negotiate for with roles at the beginning and even you know, when the offer has been given? And specifically, what should female executives be asking for Samina is also going to share some tips. And then at the very end, I will record this coaching framework that Sumeet and I are going to roleplay together so it's packed, it's going to be so great. And let's go ahead and start. So the intersection of this podcast really talks about conscious leadership, high performing teams awareness practices, Samina, I know you're a bit familiar with the framework of conscious leadership that I've developed, there's nine different qualities. And you have read my book. So what leadership quality do you feel is your strongest and which one is an opportunity for growth?   Great question. And I feel that resilience is one of my strongest qualities. And probably the second after that is empathy. And the third is humility. But I'll talk about resilience a little bit more. Yeah, it started from, you know, early age, when I realized that I needed to be courageous in order to grow. And I took a few steps, including the one to relocate into a completely new country and start from scratch my career, my community, and realized very early on, that is not always a smooth sailing. And you're going to experience turbulences, and I'm a big fan of Brene, brown, and I like to, to share this point of view with folks that I'm coaching and folks that I work with, you're not going to experience growth, if you're afraid of embracing the suck. And in order to experience that growth, it's it's worth knowing when it's too early, to move away from a situation. I'm a big believer, especially as a female executive, that there are different rules around when executives are departing, departing a company and a role. Ideally, you're never running away, when it's hard. Ideally, you, you stick to it, and you try to solve the problems that you're seeing in front of you and continue to add your value in terms. In times of turbulence, I think that's one of my main qualities. And the thing that helped me experience the most growth in my career, you're probably seen by looking at my profile that I like staying for a long period of time, especially in tech that rarely, a lot of people are staying for five, six years, I've experienced that at least once and experienced a couple of three years Steens in you, especially at a startup, you see a lot of changes. And those are great opportunities to learn and understand how a business is evolving and how you are evolving as a leader.    So that I would say that that's probably my my, my main superpower. And the second one that I care deeply about as a people leader and as a leader, as an as a leader in general is empathy is really trying to understand how others are feeling and what is their perspective, to be able to craft programs, Paulus's interventions that make sense, and they don't feel disconnected from the reality. The third one that I think it's a non negotiable, it's humility. It's it's humbleness, and humility. Knowing that you can do it all you it really takes a village to build something exceptional.    And you need to have the strength and self awareness to realize that you cannot be good at everything. And it's okay and highly recommended to hire and build teams around you with people who have the qualities that you don't or they're passionate about the things that you might be passionate but you might not have the superpowers to do them really, really well.    And that's what I've no Based on how I conduct myself and how I how I like to continue my path as a leader, thank you. To summarize, even though you did it so well yourself, out of the nine different ones, you have listed resilience, which the way you're describing it. And the way that I actually talked about in the book is a growth mindset. You know, how is this challenge for me? How is it a gift, what am I going to learn from it, and then empathy and humility and humility to your point is really about asking for support, you know, acknowledging your vulnerability that you don't know everything, and then asking people to come in and join you and, and help delegate those things that you don't know, so that you empower other people to step in and create this incredible culture. Thank you.   What about one that is an opportunity for growth, right now, I've thought about this for quite some time, and an opportunity for growth is carving out time, for my well being, there is a tendency to constantly prove the world that you can do more faster, better, smarter, but what I've learned on my own by experiencing, you know, sometimes challenging times is that if you don't recharge your batteries, you're not gonna go too far, I have a tendency to jump all in. And I had a tendency to really want to see results immediately prove value, as soon as possible. But what I've learned through hard lessons is that you can't control it all.    And even if you dedicate yourself 150%, to something, there are so many variables at play, there is no guarantee that just by working hard and doing all the right things, and being always on something that's gonna be successful. As we evolve and grow as human beings, our identity is becoming a well rounded identity, you're not only the professional who works in tech, you're the man who you know, educates and takes care of other human being and how they're going to behave in this world, you're a partner to someone you are a daughter, into someone, a member of the community, there are so many opportunities to give back and add value, the way you see yourself and define yourself should not come only from one angle.    So with that in mind, while I will always want to excel in what I do, I'm also becoming more and more aware of the multiple roles that I'm assuming in this world and how I'm showing up in all of them. Because it has to be a balance, it has to be a work life integration, it has to be moments when you give more on one side, and when you give more on the other side, depending on what's happening in life. And that's what I'm trying to transition into and feel good about the fact that you're not always going to be your best self or on your best foot on on your top game, depending on what's happening in life. And that's okay.   I hear you are nourishing the well. So that you have what you need to then bring your best is a growth opportunity. And so that actually goes into the next question that I was going to ask that I know you and I have talked about, you know, off the record, which is one of the bigger challenges I think that people like yourself in your role have been navigating with the current economy and future of work is there have been a lot of layoffs. And so, being that you're a leader that leads from love that has a lot of empathy.    How have you navigated in your career, how to really send people off with care and compassion, because I've talked to lots of folks and leaders and people that have been the ones that have, you know, delivered it and have been on the receiving end, and it's typically not done with a lot of consciousness, but I know that you do it differently. So share a little more on that. How are you taking care of yourself and then being able to take care of these people in the most graceful kind way that you can under the circumstances, right?    Yeah, no, and I'll start with the beginning. As a leader, you always join the company thinking about how the company is going to grow, how to build the businesses gonna succeed, how the great people you have on board are going to grow in their careers and grow as as professionals and as human beings and Then something happens. And it, especially in the last few months, or in the last few years, if we think about the pandemic, where things are not going, according to the plan, no matter how hard everyone is trying, the economy is turbulent there are headwinds in the market. And sometimes you need to make very hard decisions.    And some of those hard decisions involve cutting people cutting jobs. And throughout my career, and I've been doing HR for more than 15 years internationally. In Europe, in the US, I work with companies based in in Asia, I found that no matter how much exposure to situations like this, you have as a people leader, if you lead from a point of love, and care and empathy, it's going to be very hard to not be emotionally impacted by something like this. I remember the first layoff that I had to do in the US it's happening, at least in my career, it happened more often after I relocated to the US, and I started to be a people leader. And I remember thinking about how these people have houses, they need to pay for the houses, they have children, they have family members, they need to take care of, they need to put food on the food on the table, they need to pay their bills, and I was thinking, wow, losing your job is one of the most dramatic, traumatic experiences someone can have.    And the fact that the company is not growing fast enough, or it doesn't optimize stores profitability fast enough, or it needs to look better on paper for whatever is going to happen next, it doesn't make the impact of these decisions, less stressful for the people on the receiving end. So as a people leader, I've always thought about if I would be in these people's shoes, and by the way it can happen at any point in anyone's careers, what would be my preference in how I would like to be treated? What will mean to me that I'm being laid off with respect, where I still keep at least some of my self esteem, that I've built throughout the years in my career, in what will help me land in the best possible way on my feet, right?    And I thought about it. And I talked to people that was questions, who were let go senior professionals, folks in the beginning of their careers. And I looked at the data on how much savings people have in the US if something like this happens. And the reality is that not a lot of people have a lot of savings to count on. And I really try to think about a couple of things, one, from an economical perspective, what is a decent package that's going to help people land on their feet, given that it takes between three to five months to find a job.    Yet, it seems like in Dec is around three months, even now with distributed market, because a lot of new jobs are being created. So that's one variable that went into the model. The second one was one, the economical terms are being approved. And there is some, you know, safety net for at least two or three months, and there is health insurance on the table as well. Because unfortunately, America is a country that does not offer that by default, and you have to pay for it. And it's quite expensive. Then I went into how do we communicate? How do we communicate with care with empathy? How do we make sure that everyone feels that they're still respected on their way out, even though we need to share some pretty terrible news?    How can we make sure we partner with the employees who are being terminated to equip them with the skills that they need to apply for unemployment to revamp their resumes to prep for the interview, it's really hard to have your confidence that after being laid off, and we're talking in this market about multiple rounds of layoffs, I have friends and people who are very close to me and my family who got laid off multiple times, once in COVID, one or two times now, that takes a toll on self esteem, how you're showing up in the world. Let's not even go to negotiating an offer you're hoping to get over all you can even think about asking for more optimizing for the best possible result. Totally.    I'm always thinking about one, give them the package that it's going to provide a softer landing, landing to make sure they have health insurance. Three, make sure you communicate with empathy and care for prep them for what they need to do ideally in the first week or month after a layoff make sure people are equipped on how to get their benefits back on employment, how to claim Cobra and then really help rebuild that confidence by looking at the resumes the LinkedIn profile, practicing interviewing, introduced introducing people of two companies looking for great talent so that everyone can, as quickly as possible get back on their feet. It's a traumatic experience. And if as leaders, we don't do it with a lot of care, it's going to backfire. And it's not going to help one the company is not going to help the brand is not going to help help the leaders attract new team members, when when the market gets better, is not going to help the society in general,   To bring myself into the mix of this, I started interviewing and applying for internal director and VP roles and learning and development in 2020. And it is now 2023, there were two offers and 2020. They were rescinded because of layoffs. So for me being that I'm still in it, still interviewing, still applying some of what I've experienced is that there are 1000 people to the one role that I'm applying for, I had a job tell me an employer rather tell me that they had 4000 plus 4000 people applied to the role that I applied for.    And so, you know, depending on your industry, because there's not a lot of learning and development people even though they are so we need to equip leaders with the right tools to lead the organization. But it, it's trying, so I, you know, I can definitely relate, and I think some of your tips are really helpful. So let's move into our negotiation conversation. Let's pretend that you are getting ready to have a conversation because you've been given an offer. And I'm going to wear the hat of coach and this is a framework that you can apply to any negotiation that you're having. But I'm just gonna tee it up. So Samina, it's so great to see you. I'm so excited for you that you have this new offer that you're considering. And tell me a little bit about the context, what is the offer? What do you feel excited about? And then we'll go from there.   I'm very excited about the offer that I just received, because it's for a company that solves hard problems. I see the signs of really healthy culture. It seems that a company is financially stable, especially in this market, and they have enough runway. And it feels like there is product market fit and the company can continue to grow.    If if they execute according to the plan. So that excites me quite a bit because that means we can create more jobs, we can really scale or what we're offering to the market here in the US, potentially internationally. It's really creating the foundation for building something that is intentional, and it can scale intentionally, and really create that force multiplier in delivering business results. So that's what excites me. I'm also excited about the terms of the offer.   Let me let me just paraphrase quickly what I heard you say. So I hear that you're very excited about this offer for a few reasons. One, it's a company that is solving hard problems. And I hear that that is really motivating for you you want to work for a purpose driven organization, I also hear that there is a healthy culture on the inside. So the leaders that are leading it are conscious, and you want to work with that type of leadership, and be able to really contribute. I also hear that they have a runway that allows them to be able to be secure, you know, financially stable in this economy in this market. And therefore you can scale intentionally did I miss anything you did not spot on.   And you were about to elaborate a little bit more something else you feel excited about tell me and I feel excited about the economics of the offer because I find them being fair. And I'm saying fair for a reason. I care deeply about fair. Of course I care about optimizing a really good offer and really good terms but as a people leader, I'm also keeping an eye on internal equity among peers, making sure that you know while is the right type of offer for the valid right I bring it also that doesn't, you know break the stability internally because that's that's another problem then that can be created and It's pretty painful to solve for once it's there.    So I'm looking at a lot of the things and while you know the monetary aspect is important, and don't get me wrong is very important. And life is expensive right now, there are other elements of an offer that make it an absolute no brainer.  What I'm hearing is there's tangible needs, and there's intangible needs that would make this a yes. Like an absolute Yes. So what do you need that's tangible? And what do you need? It's intangible.   I think from a tangible perspective, you need to make sure that you're fairly compensated, you're compensated at the market. And now here, hopefully, it's going to be an easier conversation in the next few years, because of the pay Transparency Act. Really good progress, really good momentum is not a black box anymore. When you start applying and interviewing with companies, you kind of know, you know, where they are, what are the bands, so you know, is it for me, or if it's, or it's not, for me, for example, if you're in California, and you interview for a leadership role, and they pay you 100k, you're probably going to say this is not for me, I cannot afford to leave here, right? So that that simplifies the conversation quite a bit.    Now, every company is different, every company has a different philosophy in terms of pay, some companies are going to pay your 50th percentile, others are going to pay your 75th percentile, others are going to be more aggressive on the variable, others on the on the base, it different flavors, right. But at the end of the day, if it's fair, if it's market for the role, how much funding they have, if they're a private company, how much ARR they have done all of that, you kind of know where you are, and what ballpark.    Now the non tangible things are very important when it comes to the new reality after COVID. What kind of life do we want to have as people and as professionals? What is more valuable to me? Or what is the environment that really works for my life? And how I want to craft my life? Am I an in person, type of professional or I'm a remote type of professional? Do I value to have flexibility? Or do I value routine and being in the office every single day? Because that's the environment that that I'm thriving in? And that's how I build connections, and there is no right or wrong answer. I don't believe in one size fits all, I don't believe that only remote is the way to go. And I also don't believe that only in office is the way to go. I think there are different situations, different businesses, and particularities that are helping leaders make the decision if it's in office, or if it's hybrid, or if it's remote, right. But a lot of candidates have preferences.    And they've done it both ways. And people feel strongly about it still did seems like the opportunities are not as many as they used to be for the remote roles. And a lot of the companies are starting to bring people back to in office five days a week or hybrid. But if you ask in your negotiation come conversation about remote like how would you ask that very openly?   What is the what is the culture at Company X? What is the expectation right now? Do we have what is the policy? Right?   Do we think the policy is gonna change if it's going to change? Is there a framework in which the leadership is going to make the decision for example, I remember when we started COVID, at one of my previous companies, and I told people and I promise, I'm not going to promise the model is not going to change, I can't promise that I don't know how the world is going to evolve. I don't know what's going to be needed from a business perspective. But what I can promise is that I'm not going to surprise people with two weeks notice that up starting two weeks from now, we're going to be back in the office.    And I promised all the invoices that we're going to give them and each other a six month heads up to be able to adjust and change our lives accordingly to either adjust to the new reality that we are trying to create or to vote with our feet and say, this is probably not the right fit for me and where I am in life today. Therefore, it's probably better for me to depart the business.   Yeah, totally. I'm going to ask you two more coaching questions. And I know that this is probably going to be something we'll continue to talk about and something that I'd love for you to even journal about. But we're getting clear on what are the tangible what are the intangible needs? And then I want to ask, what is your concern? What What concerns do you have about this role? And then lastly, like what would make this an absolute yes for you? Should I start with the concerns? Yeah, let's go there.   Ah, Mmm hmm. That's such an interesting question. It really depends on the company and the stage of the company. So it's really hard to, to answer it without having a clear example in front of me, right? Talking about hypothetical businesses. But the examples are mostly around the opportunity in front of you, as a leader in front of me as a leader, in what skills are needed to nail that stage of growth, or turbulences, or whatever is happening in the company, I would be very interested in what is the next stage of growth after the current one? And do I have the potential to grow and scale with the company because I have a clear idea in my mind that I'm open to be challenged by other leaders in the industry that executives are a great fit for a particular stage of growth.    And after that, it needs to, you know, a little bit of a self assessment needs to happen to really ask yourself, am I the right leader for the next stage of growth in this company or not? And that takes a lot of courage and self awareness, to be able to, and humility to be able to have that conversation with yourself. But every time I'm looking at an opportunity I'm looking at, can I get can I grow and scale with the business? What if they grow really fast? Why did they grow Not so fast, and they experienced a lot of turbulence is how much resilience? Do I need to show? And at what point and right like, How much am I willing to be in that turbulent time? How long is it going to be right? I think that goes back to the psychological and physical well being the balance of it all. What are you saying? Yes, yes, exactly.   Exactly. And that's a good, that's a good internal conversation to have with yourself as a candidate, to really run towards something and not to run away from something. Yeah, I'm a big believer in when someone starts a new role, when you're looking at the non tangibles, and obviously, the tangibles as well. At the end of the day, to feel really good about the opportunity and to know deep down inside your soul that you're running towards something. Because if you're running towards something, no matter how hard it is, no matter how many turbulences you're going to experience, no matter how good of a fit, you are for the next three stages of growth, and maybe you're great for one or two, and you need to fire yourself before stage three, because the company needs a different type of leadership, you're going to do it with a lot more passion, if you don't find those connections.    And at the end of the day, being passionate about something, it's probably one of the strongest predictors. I've seen in my in my entire career journey. Now what can break a decision or what will make a decision a no brainer in someone in my role in my shoes, or in your shoes, it comes back to the chemistry between the leadership team or between you and your manager. There are so many flavors of the ice cream at this level, especially when it comes to leadership roles in everybody. All a lot of people got to leadership roles, because they've done great work in their careers. They accomplished a lot. They worked hard, they worked hard. I don't think at this level, it comes a lot to do you have the skills to do it. It's about how you do it. How do you how do you invite the other partners to your table so that you can make progress together? Influence and collaborate? I hear?    Yeah, I think it comes down to that. And it comes down to that chemistry between the people working together. So it sounds like you're getting really clear on the tangible and the intangible. And then also what I'm hearing is, what would make this a total? Yes, is the chemistry of the other leaders. So they're dating. Both ways. And in order to be ready to marry someone, both sides need to do their due date a few years.   Yes, but both sides need to do their due diligence and to make sure that why the moral compass of the other party to how they operate best when they are best on or when they are not at best. And you know, what kind of master sometimes shows up if they're stressed or under resource or you know, all sorts of things that can happen in organizations. Probably that's the most important factor that I'm taking into into consideration when saying yes, and going to the altar with with a new company.   Yeah, yeah. Thank you for sharing all of that. So in the last couple of minutes and I'll I'll share this framework of some of these questions that I asked semina at the end. So you want to listen all the way to the end. So you get those questions you can actually ask yourself, or you can ask another person that is also negotiating something important in their life. But what are some tips that you might give to anyone listening but especially to female executives? What can they start to negotiate in the initial interview stages?  And what can they negotiate that you would recommend? You know, during the offer,  and the early interview stages, I would clarify the tangibles. I would make sure I get as much clarity as I as I can around those aspects in the late stage of an interview the offer stage, I think it's time the industry to normalize the fact that executives meaning VPs and above should have some protection in place, right. We've seen rounds and rounds of layoffs. We've seen consolidations, we've seen a lot of headwinds, and turbulence is happening in the market. And it's still not common to see severance clauses as part of the all of the executive contracts.   Well, I live in California. And I don't know if this applies to executives, but California is an at will state. So they can they can let you go for any reason, even if you didn't do anything wrong. So that doesn't create a lot of security in me as someone that really wants to get married. If you want to be a prenup, yes. And also, if you want to be the executive who's gonna mention the unmentionable in the room who's gonna have the crucial conversation? So it's gonna challenge the status quo. You can't really have those if you're thinking well, do I have money to put food on the table for my kids? Do I have money to pay my mortgage or my rent, when I'm thinking about getting married with someone meaning in this case, starting a new job as a leader, there is a lot of risk on both sides, right?    The companies want to get it right. You want your leadership team, ideally, to encompass your core values to model the right behaviors to really drive the business forward. As a leader, you want to make sure that you're not going to be micromanage, you're gonna be respected for your opinion, and the expertise that you're bringing to the table, you also want to be able to challenge the status quo nicely, you're gonna require psychological safety, it's not just a check in the box, that's one of the very first things that I assess, and you got to build at the beginning. Totally.   So when you want to have psychological safety, but also move the needle forward, challenge the status quo, I find it hard to be able to address it and addressable. When you're thinking about, well, do I have money to provide food for my family to pay for the house to take care of the kids are other people you need to take care of as a as a as a human being, when that variable is taken care of.    And you know that no matter what happens, you're going to have a little bit of a softer landing, because it takes about six months on average to find your net next executive gig, the psychological safety that that relationship, and that pre negotiated contract creates for VPS. And above. It really benefits really beneficial for both parties involved in this, of course, the company is going to protect itself in a similar way. You you know you're going to assess performance, you're going to have OKRs, you're going to measure it if people are not hitting the goals, obviously, you're going to make the hard choices, and you're going to let people go but a found that it's easier to build that psychological safety. If there is clarity around if this doesn't work out. What are what are both parties getting out.   Right? What's Yeah, totally. What is our agreement? What is our agreement, having those hard conversations up front are so important. So that's what I'm hearing is a really big takeaway. That's what you can start to have in the interview process, like you're assessing for that. You know, what happens when things get messy? is psychological safety a check in the box or not? Can we have these hard conversations and people still want to be kind and collaborate? And then what are our agreements when things get messy, you know, which isn't doubtedly going to happen because we can't control so that's kind of what I'm hearing. Go ahead.    There's there's one good example of this work is the negotiation phase before you decide if it's a yes or if it's a no, that's providing a lot of insight into how the future relationship is going to be. How can you work together to solve a challenge and you're coming from On slightly different angles here, you're trying to meet somewhere in between. And are you approaching this? How are you having those crucial conversations without breaking the relationship by a fair fairness is a key value for you.    Yeah. Samina this was so helpful. I imagine it's going to be helpful for so many people not only just talking about how do we support people in layoffs kindly, but also how do we negotiate in a way that is really empowering ourselves and making sure that we're setting ourselves up for success? Thank you so much. And if there's anything else you want to leave our listeners Feel free, we will be linking your contact in the show notes. And if there's anything else you want me to send out, please let me know or share it with folks right now.   The only message I have for for people listening to the podcast is knowing their value and not being afraid to ask for what is fair. And what's their worth. It's doesn't come natural, it doesn't come naturally for if you're a woman in tech, if you're a female executive, if you're a minority, but it's the absolute right thing to do. And there are mentors out there. And I love mentoring people on how to do it gracefully, and change some of the practices in the industry. So thank you so much for having me, I love this conversation. And I hope we can meet again and continue our chat.   I love it, we will. I am loving this conversation.    And as we prepare for this podcast interview to come to a close, I'm going to leave you with three things that will really help you to embody the confidence to ask for what you desire, and what you deserve. And if we don't ask for it, we have no opportunity to receive it to receive it. So I'm going to break this down into three parts.    One, I'm going to lead by example, and make a bold request so that I can receive what I desire and what I'm deserving. And hopefully that will be an inspiration to you.    Number two, I'm going to share the coaching framework that I used with Samina to help her discern what was her negotiating power and and what were her concerns and what did she really want. This is something you can journal about for yourself, or you can utilize it with others to help them in their negotiations. And this can be applied to anything that you're negotiating for.    And then number three, I'm going to share what you can actually negotiate for in the new opportunity and professional path that you are seeking. Alright, you ready? Here we go. So I have had the great privilege and opportunity to serve some wonderful companies, leaders and teams in my business in the last decade. LinkedIn, Pixar, Clif Bar, Asana, capital, one Bank of the West, and then tech adventhealth, I am so grateful. And since 2020, I have known I wanted to join in an internal capacity in directing learning leadership team and org development. And it's been a crazy couple of years in the job market and in the world at large. And I am having some incredible conversations with folks right now exploring the right opportunity. But at the end of the day, it's all about the right fit.    And you might be asking, Why do I want this, I want this because I know that this path is where I can create the most influence and have the deepest positive impact with the internal people in the company and therefore, what the company is actually doing in the world. And I'm here to influence business to be a force for good in the world. So if you're an executive search or in the C suite, or you're working for a company where you just think Carly needs to be here we need Carly we need her wisdom and her passion and her skills. Then reach out to me I would love to know your challenges so I can help you can reach out to me on LinkedIn or you know just ping my website there's there's lots of links in the show notes and how to get in touch. If you also are aware of a role that is coming up that hasn't been posted, and you think you know I could help in a full time or fractional capacity reach out. I would love to help and love to have that conversation.    Number two, let's go over the negotiate Shin coaching framework that I use with Samina. Now, these are things that you can ask yourself, you can journal about, or you can actually roleplay this with another person. So first you want to share the context, what is the role? Or what is the thing that you are negotiating for? And then if you're doing this with another person, you want to summarize what you heard them say, summarizing what you heard them say, not what you think you heard them say, right? This allows people to feel heard and to feel seen. And we all want that. And then after you summarize that, you also want to say, Did I miss anything? And that gives them an A chance to elaborate or clarify, then you want to actually follow up with another question and you ask them, What do you need? What are the tangible and intangible needs?    And it might even be helpful to ask them, what would this look like if you had these needs met? Right? Because then, then the person might even recognize that they didn't need that, or they want something different? And then you would ask them, What are your concerns and asking for more, this is where the fear might come in. Or they recognize that there are parts of this role or parts of this opportunity, that aren't quite aligned. And then you would ask them, okay, so now that you've gotten clear, what's the next step? And as a coach, you always want to hold that person accountable to the next step. So you might say, how do we check in about this next step? Right?    Okay. So that's the coaching framework. And again, this can be applied to yourself, or to someone in your life. And then the next thing that is really going to be helpful for you, if you're exploring a new role is to understand what you can negotiate for in the interview. Ultimately, your satisfaction hinges less on getting the negotiation right and more on getting the job, right. So you want to really understand for who are your teammates? Who's your boss? What's the work life balance look like? How is this going to be a full guest for you?    So here's some things that you can negotiate for. So you want to ask about the remote policy in this company. And you heard Samina and I talked about that, you want to ask about whether there's bonus pay and equity. You want to know if there's matching money. So for example, maybe you've worked in other roles where you are accustomed to a 12% match, what is the match in this iteration? You want to know what the vacation policy is? Is it three to four weeks? Can it be reevaluated after the first week of service? Do you have the option to do any side work? If that's a passion, like maybe you have a podcast that you want to have outside of this scope and responsibility? You might want to ask for that. If you need to be in an office or in the same time zone?    Do they offer relocation pay? If professional development is important to you probably is especially if you're listening to this podcast, then how do they support you in your personal and professional development? What is the stipend for that? Is there a certification that you want or a conference that you'd really love to go to every year? Ask for all of us upfront? What's the health insurance coverage? Ask about travel, if you have to travel for work, whether it's domestically or internationally. We all know travel takes a toll on the body, mind and soul. So perhaps there's a negotiation upfront where you can say if I'm traveling to a different timezone or internationally, Can I tag on a couple of days where I can actually enjoy the city before I have to rush right back? Right?    Find out if there are any partial clauses for times of separation, where it is not your fault for the reason that they're having to let people go as mean and I were talking about earlier in the interview. And then you might also want to ask if there might be a retention bonus after the first year. And one of the questions I also really love to ask is how will I know that I'm being successful in this role, and that's not necessarily negotiation, but it is in a certain sense of what is expected of me in the first month in the first 60 days, 90 days, like really getting clear on that with the hiring manager with the senior people leaders.    The other thing that's a negotiation, qualifier for me is how much sponsorship are you getting from the senior people leaders because that's going to allow you to actually have more influence and be more successful.    Okay, those are some of the things that I think will be really helpful for you in navigating, asking for more. So how are you going to ask for more whether it's at work, or it's at home?  If you enjoyed this episode, please give me a five star review, share it with friends, family or colleagues on LinkedIn. We're all in this together and sharing is caring. I have some incredible interviews coming on in the podcast in 2023. So make sure you subscribe. And thank you so much for tuning in.

Steen Molzen har lavet stand up i over tyve år, men alligevel er han aldrig gået fuldtid på komikken, og det er helt bevidst. Hvorfor Steen har taget det valg, kan du høre i dagens afsnit, hvor du også får en masse røverhistorier fra Steens liv og karriere. Du kan blandt andet glæde dig til at høre om en aften, hvor Steen var lige ved at få tæsk, men endte med at få et godt råd af Kim Larsen i stedet.Go' lytter!Husk at du stadig kan se Kronisk Sjov på YouTube: https://youtu.be/lUtZ_0RKAScVært: Oliver StanescuKlip: Martin Riise Nielsen Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dagens Program:I dag har vi den enorme fornøjelse at dele vores sofa-smørhul med TV-vært og komiker, Lasse Rimmer! Lasse er kendt for et utal af programmer såsom sketch programmet Mandrilaftalen, quizshowet Jeopardy, og så selvfølgelig Stormester, som lige nu er aktuel med en helt ny sæson, på TV2 Play!Dagens Gæst:Lasse Rimmerhttps://www.instagram.com/lasserimmer/Værter:Daniel Møgelhøj & Asgar BuggeProduceret af DNA LYD I/SGIVEAWAY:https://gleam.io/wdlRb/toptier-gamer-giveawayLinktree:https://linktr.ee/GameBoys24syv

Forhjulslir præsenteres i samarbejde med Continental Dæk Danmark. Gør som Tadej Pogačar og Filippo Ganna. Kør på Continental - fordi sikkerhed starter med dækket. Steen Michael Petersen. Måske har du hørt om ham før i de tidligere portrætter eller fra Brian Holms røverhistorier fra Frankrig og Belgien. Ikke desto mindre var han en af dansk cykelsports hårdeste væddeløbere i 1970-1980'erne. Han blev blandt andet kåret som årets cykelrytter i Danmark, da han blev nordisk mester i juniorklassen i 1977.  I dette portræt får vi hele Steens fortælling i cykelsporten - en ærlig, hård og underholdende historie. Fra starten i Hvidovre Cykel Klub, til de succesfulde juniorår, til amatørårene under John Struve, kampen og krigen om den professionelle kontrakt - først i Nordfrankrig med Brian Holm og senere i Italien og Toscana. Steen tager os med tilbage til livet og tilværelsen som professionel cykelrytter - først Italien og senere i Belgien - om de uforglemmelige oplevelser på landevejen, sejrene og nederlagene, og alt derimellem. Det er ikke kun et portræt af en tidligere stor dansk cykelrytter, det er også et portræt af at hårdtarbejdende, flittigt og inspirerende menneske, som aldrig gav eller giver op.  Navn: Steen Michael Petersen Født: 29. oktober 1959 Hold: Børne-, ungdoms- og amatørårene: - Hvidovre Cykel Klub og Ordrup Cycle Club  - 1974-1982 - La Redoute (Frankrig) - 1983 Den professionelle karriere: - Fanini - Wührer - Sibicar - Alan (Italien) - 1984 - Fanini - Wührer (Italien) - 31.07.1985 - Santini - Krups - Conti - Galli (Italien) - 01.09.1985 - Santini - Cierre (Italien) - 1986 - Lucas - Orbea (Belgien) - 1987 Vært: Anders Mielke Kunne du tænke dig at at være hjælperytter på Forhjulslir? Så kan du donere et friviligt beløb på 10er.dk  og støtte arbejdet bag podcasten. 

Thanks to COVID-19, the summer of 2020 was fraught with event cancellations, furloughs and social distancing. But not all was lost. People still also used this time to get away and get outside. Roadtrips were a common way to do this. On this week's episode of Peak Northwest podcast, we hear from The Oregonian/Oregon Live's transportation and housing reporter, Jayati Ramakrishnan, for the latest installment of My Epic Adventure, a sub-series of the podcast. Jayati spent six days traveling by car far and wide throughout Southern Oregon. Here are some highlights from this week's show: Jayati and her friend drove from Portland to the Alvord Desert in one day. This roadtrip was Jayati's first camping experience. Alvord Hot Springs can surprisingly get pretty crowded. Steens Mountain was a favorite sight of the trip. Jayati knows the best Thai spot in Brookings and perhaps even the state. Subscribe to Peak Northwest anywhere you listen to podcasts. -- Vickie Connor and Jamie Hale Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Per har gemt det bedste til sidst, som han siger. Og det vil sige, at han har inviteret Steen Bitsch, administrerende direktør i VA, med i studiet. I denne uge hører vi den personlige fortælling om Steens vej til VA. Undervejs kommer vi også forbi nogle af de emner, der fokus på i landbruget i øjeblikket. Steen bliver siddende i stolen til næste uge, hvor vi bl.a. vil tale om ESG. Der skal nørdes gris, så Anders og Mads har allieret sig med Per Runge fra Vestjyllands Andel. Stemningen er god og fagligheden er i fokus hver eneste uge i Grisen!

The Steens, Elijah and Isaiah, are two brothers from Orange County, CA, who formed their band in 2021. Growing up in the music and TV production industry, the brothers had a lot of influence from early on in their lives. Tune in to hear the brothers and Rain talk about growing up with music and how they used it to evolve into the duo they are now.  -----------------  LAUNCHLEFT OFFICIAL WEBSITEhttps://www.launchleft.com  LAUNCHLEFT PATREON https://www.patreon.com/LaunchLeft  TWITTER https://twitter.com/LaunchLeft  INSTAGRAM https://www.instagram.com/launchleft/  FACEBOOK https://www.facebook.com/LaunchLeft  --------------------- LaunchLeft Podcast hosted by Rain Phoenix is an intentional space for Art and Activism where famed creatives launch new artists. LaunchLeft is an alliance of left-of-center artists, a curated ecosystem that includes a podcast, label and NFT gallery. --------------------- IN THIS EPISODE: [02:32] The Steens talk about their goals for the future of their duo.  [06:30] The brothers talk about their top favorite books and records.  [09:00] Advice the brothers would give to anyone in the teen demographic about working towards their goals. KEY TAKEAWAYS:  Things that happen in your life can shape your perspective.  Influences can be gathered starting at a young age.  Work with what you have and don't be afraid to be weird and go big. BIO: The Steens are two brothers from Orange County, CA. They formed their band in 2021 using their surname.  Naming the band was an easy decision with the duo's sound and vision being firmly planted in their roots. At an early age their father was actively working in the music industry as an A&R/ artist manager while their mother was pursuing a promising career as a stylist. This all changed when their dad was arrested and went on to serve a 10 year prison sentence. The Steen's “future rock n' roll” sound picks up where their fate dropped them off. Feeding back and buzzing like gleaming gold through a distorted lens, the brother's have woven a sound very much in tune with their childhood. Blown out 808s clip your speakers while fuzz injected guitars and vocals invite ancestors like Little Richard to perhaps take some more uppers. Someone suggested their band was like “the Black Strokes or something.” The Steens weren't offended by the comparison but later stated, “The Strokes are great, but they're a little polite, no? If we were gonna be the “black anything” and not “the Black Beatles” can't we at least be “the Black Iggy Pops.” RESOURCE LINKS The Steens on IG The Steen's on FB  The Steen's on Sound CloudSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Efter at have været freaking queens på Steens salsafloor og drukket comfortzonen op i cubansk rom, er Freia og Martin tilbage med tømmermænd og søvnmangel. Og så skal vi ellers lige love for, at Benny smider den vildeste bombe i det ellers uskyldige HTH køkken. Kan psykolog-Nina redde det benbrud eller har vi en et-benet kylling resten af sæsonen? I øvrigt; Tanja bravo. Bravo for at bevare roen da Benny gik ned for fuld dødsmetal. Bravo. Far/Barn-rytmikken ser ud også til at kuldsejle. Det bliver ikke bedre af, at Anders forfatter et langt brev med for mange spørgsmål. Og så skal vi til veganerfrokost i Gilleleje. Er Steen oprigtig ked af den hund? Og er det en god ide at låne andres hunde, når man har mistet sin egen? Sidst men ikke mindst, så skal vi på "læg så din kontrol"-mission hjemme hos Melissa, når Michael har købt ind til fullbody massage på fruen, men ender med selv at få smækket en glimmermaske i fjæset mens hans fødder bliver æltet. Godt scoret. Og speaking of scoret.. Patrick.. du er en fucking pro. Hasselbagte kartowler og veltilberedte ligdele i ovnen.. Vi gjorde det! Alle lydbidder fra Gift ved første blik, som er brugt i denne episode, er produceret af Snowman for DR.Vil du blande dig i programmet? Så skriv endelig til os på instagram: @giftitv_podcast. Vi vil megagerne høre fra dig!

Afsnit 427. Steen Langeberg! Steen er TV-vært og journalist - Du kender ham sikkert fra Go Morgen Danmark eller Jo Færre Jo Bedre. Hvilket er to ting vi bl.a. snakker om i dagens afsnit; De akavede overgange fra personlige beretninger om at være blevet kidnappet over til TV-køkkenet. Men derudover snakker vi om Steens uindfriede drøm at blive skuespiller, hans enorme interesse for fremmede og meget, meget mere. Jeg håber i nyder at lytte til afsnittet, lige så meget som vi nød at lave det. Rigtig gå fornøjelse, Christian.

This is a slightly different episode from our usual format. We take you on a Do It Yourself sage grouse hunt on Steens Mountain after stopping in Hines to talk to District Wildlife Biologist Lee Foster about hunting the legendary mountain landscape and about sage grouse behavior. If you've ever wondered what it's like to hunt Steens Mountain or about hunting sage grouse, this episode might be for you. 

Gæstevært i dag er chefredaktør på netavisen, Olfi, Peter Ernstved Rasmussen.  Fødevareministeren går i kamp for dyrevelfærden. Logik for Rasmus Prehn - men også for burhøns? Hør også status på krigen i Ukraine fra Steen som bor i Moskva.  Tidskoder:  [00:00]:  Henrik Pihl Winterø, ægproducent ved Aalundgaard i Aarup med 36.000 skrabehøner [12:00]: Jesper Larsen, blogger og dokumentarist, der kalder sig selv for pro-Krim-separatist og har rejst på Krim. [31:00]: Peter Sandøe, professor i bioetik og tidligere formand for Dyreetisk Råd. [40:00]: Storm Baldursson, tidligere ukrainekriger [45:00]: Jon Stephensen, folketingskandidat for Moderaterne [01:01:00]: Peter Viggo Jakobsen, lektor i Institut for Strategi ved Forsvarsakademiet og professor ved Center for War Studies ved Syddansk Universitet [01:17:00]: Steen Sørensen, dansker bosat i Moskva [01:36:00]: Anders Kronborg, dyrevelfærdsordfører og fødevarerordfører for Soc.dem. [01:54:00]: Lars Løcke, journalist ved det Nordjyske Mediehus

Okay wait wait wait. What?! Fortsætter det her hell? Alle er jo ved at skride fra hinanden. Selv Tenny hvis Benny ikke lige basser lidt ned. Hans teologiske rant er jo fabelous, men det går ik. Og hvorfor bliver Patrick konstant sendt uden for døren hver gang folk ikke kan lide ham? Heldigvis har han et sværd, så han kan forsvare sig i Malagas hårde gademiljø. Og hvornår er det nogensinde okay at bede folk om at lade være med at spise makrel i tomat? Vi er faktisk nogen der spiser det på daglig basis. Og den der gondol i Hamborg.. altså det ser faktisk okay hyggeligt ud, Melissa. Vi skal også forbi Steens salsalærer, Heino Knudsen fra Regionsrådsvalget (God knows why) og dengang Nicola fra 4.sæson fik barberet halvdelen af sit hoved af i håbet om at det hårløse look kunne tænde hans partner. Alle lydbidder fra Gift ved første blik, som er brugt i denne episode, er produceret af Snowman for DR.Vil du blande dig i programmet? Så skriv endelig til os på instagram: @giftitv_podcast Vi vil megagerne høre fra dig!

Få de tre vigtigste pointer fra morgenudsendelsen leveret på mail - bliv medlem på duah.dk, de første 14 dage er gratis. I weekenden lykkedes det Ukraine at tilbageerobre en række byer fra russerne efter en modoffensiv i Kharkiv-regionen. Ifølge Rusland var de i gang med en omgruppering af styrkerne - men Ukraine fortæller, at de har drevet russerne på flugt efter at have lokket dem i en fælde. Hør Claus Matthiesen, Kasper Sand Kjær, Rasmus Paludan og meget andet i En Uafhængig Morgen. Din vært er Asger Juhl. Tidskoder: [05:00] : Jesper Lindholm, lektor i asylret på Aalborg Universitet // Om et modtagecenter i Rwanda er realistisk. [12:00] : Claus Matthiesen, lektor ved Forsvarsakademiet // Om krigen er ved at vende efter ukrainsk modoffensiv. [19:00] : Jesper Zølck, Nordisk korrespondent for TV2 // Om hvordan valget i Sverige i går endte. [32:00] : Lars Koch, Generalsekretær Oxfam IBIS // Om danske pensionsselskaber bidrager til krænkelser af menneskerettighederne. [43:00] : Thomas Vesth, tidl. politimand igennem 30 år, ekspert i Scandinavian Star-tragedien med i Den Uafhængiges podcast “Vesth: Mysteriet om Scandinavian Star” // Om hvorfor Søfartsstyrelsen sørgede for, at dens ansatte ikke måtte afhøres i sagen om Scandinavian Star. [53:00] : Rasmus Paludan, partileder opstillet i sverige, Stram Kurs & advokat // Om hvor længe Stram Kurs bliver ved med at stille op til valg. [59:00] : Kasper Sand Kjær, udlændingeordfører for Socialdemokratiet // Om det er realistisk, at flygtninge bliver sendt til Rwanda. [01:15:00] : Steen S. Sørensen, dansker bosat i Moskva i de seneste 15 år // Om hvad der sker i Rusland lige nu. [01:32:00] : Kristian Henriksen, Politisk redaktør på Den Uafhængige // Om det er lykkedes os at få svar fra Danmarksdemokraterne. [01:42:00] : Christina Ehrenskjöld, Journalist på EB- netop kommet hjem fra den Dominikanske Republik // Om sagen med Josue Medina Vasquez, Søren Pape Poulsens ægtemand.

There's no place quite like Steens Mountain, a 50-mile fault block mountain that rises almost to almost 10,000 feet above the Alvord Desert in southeastern Oregon. It's a place where you can backpack into deep gorges, explore a stunning alpine lake in a basin a vertical mile above the desert and camp at numerous sites along Oregon's highest roadway. In this episode, Zach talks with Anne White with the Oregon Natural Desert Association about all the wonders and styles of outdoor recreation at Steens.

Link til høringsportal: KLIK HERLink til video: KLIK HER

Hvad er der sket i Ukraine i løbet af natten? Hvorfor er der for fjerde år i træk rod i statens regnskaber? Kan man blive rig på krig? Din vært er Camilla Boraghi   Tidskoder: 02:00-08:00 : Kjeld Hybel, reporter på Politiken // Om hvad der er hændt i løbet af natten i Ukraine. 09:00-14:00 : Steen S. Sørensen, dansker bosat i Moskva i de seneste 15 år // Om hvordan situationen er i Rusland lige nu. 16:00-23:00 : Claus Mathiesen, Lektor i russisk ved forsvarsakademiet // Om situationen i Ukraine. 24:00-30:00 : Jakob Illeborg, B.T.s internationale korrespondent // Om hvordan situationen er i Ukraine lige nu. 30:00-35:00 : Peter Viggo Jakobsen, lektor ved Forsvarsakademiet // Om hvad status er på den militære situation i Ukraine. 36:00-43:00 : Lars Christensen, uafhængig økonom, tidligere embedsmand og bankøkonom // Om hvilke økonomiske konsekvenser krigen i Ukraine får for den almindelige dansker. 45:00-52:00 : Jonathan Schacht Halling Nielsen, Belarus-kender - har studeret og rejst i Belarus og følger situationen i landet tæt // Om hvilken rolle Hviderusland spiller i invasionen af Ukraine. 53:00-58:00 : Rasmus Tantholdt, korrespondent for TV2 // Om der er kampe i gaderne i Østukraine. 01:06:00-01:16:00 : Danylo Lubivsky, tidligere viceudenrigsminister i Ukraine // Om hvordan han har det i dag. 01:17:00-01:30:00 : Frederik Bentler, offer for IT-kriminalitet, direktør i virksomheden Hippomini // Om politiet svigter ofre for IT-kriminalitet. 01:31:00-01:39:00 : Klaus Frandsen (RV), statsrevisor og næstformand for statsrevisorerne // Om hvorfor der for fjerde år i træk er rod i statens regnskaber. 01:41:00-01:50:00 : Lars Tvede, forfatter, iværksætter, finansmand, aktiespekulant // Om man kan blive rig på krig. 01:52:00-02:00:00 : Matilde Kimer, udenrigskorrespondent for DR // Om situationen i Ukraine, hvor hun befinder sig.

Putin angriber nu, vi rydder fladen. Falder Ukraine hurtigt? Dine værter er Asger Juhl & Nikolaj Juel. Tidskoder:  00:00:00-00:10:00: Anders Puck Nielsen, militærforsker ved Forsvarsakademiet // Om krigen i Rusland-Ukraine 00:15:00-00:20:00: Kjeld Hybel, Europa-korrespondent for Politiken // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 00:25:00-00:35:00: Per Stig Møller, Forhenværende Udenrigsminister (K) // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 00:35:00-00:45:00: Matilde Kimer, udenrigskorrespondent for DR //  Om den nuværende situationen i Ukraine 00:45:00-00:52:00: Johannes Wamberg Andersen, dansker har været bosat i Ukraine i 18 år. Medstifter af fødevarevirksomheden Farø Foods. Er nu i Danmark efter at Udenrigsministeriet tidligere på måneden kaldte alle danskere hjem fra Ukraine. // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 00:53:00-00:58:00: Jonathan Schacht Halling Nielsen, Belarus-kender - har studeret og rejst i Belarus og følger situationen i landet tæt //  Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:00:00-01:10:00: Jakob Illeborg, BT's internationale korrespondent // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:10:00-01:15:00: Steen S. Sørensen, Dansker bosat i Moskva // Om den nuværende situation i Rusland 01:15:00-01:22:00: Peter Viggo Jakobsen, lektor, Forsvarsakademiet // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:24:00-01:30:00: Andrii Kuzmyn, formand for Sammenslutning af Ukrainerne i Danmark // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:30:00-01:40:00: Rasmus Tantholdt, korrespondent for TV2 // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:43:00-01:45:00: Irina Bjørnø, forfatter, russer og bestyrelsesmedlem i Dansk-Russisk forening, formand i Russisk-Kultur-Mission i Danmark. Og forkvinde for Alternativet i Høje Taastrup. (oprindeligt fra Rusland, Moskva) //  Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:46:00-01:50:00: Karsten Marrup, chef for Center for Luftoperationer // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:48:00-01:55:00: Mogens Lykketoft, tidligere udenrigsminister // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine 01:57:00-02:00:00: Natalie Popovych, medstifter, Ukrainian Crisis Media Center // Om den nuværende situation i Ukraine

August er rejst til Aarhus for at snakke med både spillere, dommere, trænere, og arrangørerne bag dette års FINAL4. Kim derimod skal selv spille til netop FINAL4 og holder derfor fokus på det. Spillerne udfordres af både spørgsmål omkring de kampe de skal eller har spillet, samt sjove spørgsmål omkring dem selv og deres hold. Trænerne udspørges om forberedelsesprocesser frem mod vigtige kampe og om hvilke otte ting de vil tage med på en øde ø fra volleyverdenen. Også dommere og arrangører bliver interviewet, og der gives et indblik i hvad "the real MVPs" laver til et stort arrangement. (00:00) Natascha Winther Olsen og Michael Svend Bendix som er arrangører. (08:53) Kim Buchwald og Rasmus Bech som er spillere fra VK Vestsjælland. (21:44) Sven Brix som er træner for Team Køge Volley (28:52) Laura Thomsen og Mette Breuning som er spillere fra Brøndby VK. (36:45) Ibrahim Alievski som er træner for Gentofte Volley (47:18) Nanna Kaarde Hansen og Emma Brix som er spillere fra Team Køge Volley (56:55) Morten Klein og Sten Storgaard som er Ligadommere og dommere ved FINAL4. (01:06:38) Elisabet Einarsdottir og Sara Osk Stefansdottir som er spillere fra DHV Odense (01:15:02) Steen Sørensen og Bertram Rygaard-Rasmussen som er spillere fra Gentofte Volley  

So. Wi hebbt 'n niede Regeerung. Hmm. In't Parlament is den nieden Bunneskanzler je oarti gratuleert worrn. Un ook de Medien hebbt sachli över den Wessel in Berlin bericht‘. Overs wohre Begeisterung – dücht mi – süht anners ut. Na jo, Olaf Scholz un Begeisterung wasst ook ni op't sülbige Holt. Overs anners as Gerhard Schröder ward Scholz wiss keeneen verklogen, de över em seggt, dat sien poor Hoor, de he noch hett, farvt sünd. Natüürli sünd keen‘ twee Sekunnen no Scholz sien Wohl to'n Kanzler weller allerhand Experten, Spezialisten un Szene-Kinner ünner allerhand Steens vörkroopen, üm to vertelln, wat nu allns kümmt. De nieden Herrn un Fruun Ministers sünd ook fuurts analüseert worn, dat dat man blots so röökelt hett. In Tokunft ward uns Land je vun Annalena Baerbock, de so gern „ääh“ seggt, as Butenministerin op de internatschonale Bühne vertreden. Un de leeve, knuddelige Robert Habeck dörft sick vun nu an as Bunnesminister för Wirtschop „un“ Klimaschutz mit de Konzernbosse rümargern, de he vertelln schall, dat se ehr Geschäft twor wieder in Düütschland, overs klimafründli moken schüllt. Veel Spooß. Intwüschen mutt Habek denn jümmers weller bi den Ünnernehmer-Fründ Chrischan Lindner „bidde, bidde“ seggen, denn de hett vun Scholz as Finanzminister den Geldbüddel üm‘ Hals hungen kreegen. Mol seh'n, wat Lindner de dicke Knipp böhr'n kann. Un denn is dor je ook noch Kalle Lauterbach, de nu för Corona – äh – Gesundheit tostänni is. Al richti gespannt bün ick ook op den ersten Besöök vun Landwirtschopsminister Cem Özdemir in Dithmarschen. 16 niede Fruun un Herrn Ministers mutt Scholz nu in Schach holn. So hett sick dat no de Wohl entwickelt. Dorbi fallt mi je mol weller in, wat George Bernard Shaw al vör bummeli hunnert Johr schreeven hett: „Demokratie is 'n Verfohrn, dat garanteert, dat wi ni beter regeert ward, as wi dat verdeent.“ Na denn man to. Denn wüllt wi in de nästen veer Johr mol seh'n, wat wi verdeent hebbt... In düssen Sinn

Eli Dourado on how the sausage of technology policy is made, the relationship between total factor productivity and technological progress, airships, and more. Eli is an economist, regulatory hacker, and a senior research fellow at the Center for Growth and Opportunity at Utah State University. In the past, he was the head of global policy at Boom Supersonic where he navigated the thicket of regulations on supersonic flight. Before that, he directed the technology policy program at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.. Eli's Website Eli on Twitter Transcript audio_only [00:00:00] In this conversation, Eli Durado. And I talk about how the sausage of technology policy has made the relationship between total factor productivity and technological progress, airships, and more Eli is an economist regulatory, hacker, and senior research fellow at the center for growth and opportunity at Utah state university. In the past, he was the head of global policy at boom supersonic, [00:01:00] where he navigated the thicket of regulations on superstar. Before that he directed the technology policy program at the Mercatus center at George Mason university. I wanted to talk to Eli because it feels like there's a gap between the people who understand how technology works and the people who understand how the government works. And Isla is one of those rare folks who understands both. So without further ado my conversation with Eli Dorado.  So just jump directly into it.  When you were on a policy team, what do you actually do?  Well that depends on which policy team you're on. Right. So, so in my career you mean, do you mean the, in sort of like the, the public policy or like the research center think tanks kind of space or in, in, in a company because I've done both. Yeah, exactly. Oh, I didn't even realize that you do like that. It's like different things. So so like, I guess, like, let's start with [00:02:00] Boom. You're you're on a policy team at a technology company and. Yeah. Yeah. So when I, when I started at boom so we had a problem. Right. Which was like, we needed to know what landing and takeoff noise standard we could design too. Right. Like, so, so we needed to know like how loud the airplane could be.  And how, how quiet it had to be. Right. And, and as a big trade off on, on aircraft performance depending on that. And so when I joined up with boom, like FAA had a, what's called a policy statement. Right. Which is, you know, some degree of binding, but not really right. Like that they had published back in 2008 that said, you know, we don't have standards for supersonic airplanes, but you know, like when we do create them they, you know, they're during the subsonic portion of flight, we anticipate the subsidy Arctic standards. Right. So, so for, [00:03:00] for, for landing and takeoff, which is like the big thing that we are concerned about, like that's all subsonic. So we, you know, so that sort of the FAA is like going in position was like, well, the subsonic standards apply to, to boom. And so I kind of like joined up in early 2017 and sort of my job was like, let's figure out a way for that, not to be the case. Right. And so it was, it was basically, you know, look at all the different look at the space of actors and try to figure out a way for that, not to be true. And so, and so that's like kind of what I did. I started, you know, started talking with Congress with FAA. I started figuring out what levers we could push, what, what what angles we could Work work with to ensure that that, that we have we've got to a different place, different answer in the end. And, and so the, like, so basically it's just like this completely bespoke process of [00:04:00] totally like, even trying to figure out like what the constraints you're under are. Exactly. Right. So, so yeah, so it was, there's like a bunch of different, different aspects of that question, right? So there will you know, there's, there is statute, you know, congressional laws passed by Congress that had a bearing on the answer to that question that I went back to like the 1970s. And before there w you know, there was the FAA policy statement. There was, of course the FAA team, which you had to develop, you know you know, relationships with and, and, and, and sort of work with you have the industry association, right. That we remember of that Had different companies, you know, in addition, you know, in addition to boom, there, there were a bunch of other companies Ariane, which is no longer operating. We had Gulf stream, which no longer has a supersonic program. Or actually they didn't Edward admitted to having it announced really dead. They, you know, there was, you know, GE and rolls Royce. And so you had all these companies like coming together, you know, sort of under the, [00:05:00] under the watchful eye of Boeing, of course also. And, and so like the industry association had to have a position on things, and then you had like the international aspect of it. So you had a, there's a UN agency called Oko that sort of coordinates aviation standards among all the different countries you had the European regulators who did not like this idea that there were American startups doing Supersonics because, because the European companies weren't going to do it. And so they wanted to squash everything and they were like, no, no subsonic standards totally applied. Right. And so so that was, that's really the. The environment that, you know, sort of, I came into and I was like, okay, I've got to figure out, you know, I've got to figure out, build a team and, and, and figure out an approach here. And and, and try to try to make it not be the case that the subsonic centers apply. So we, so, you know, basically we tried a bunch of things at first, right. Like we tried to like, get our industry association, like all geared up for like, okay, well, we've gotta, we gotta fight this and they didn't want to do that. Right. So like, like [00:06:00] the other people didn't want to do that. Right. We tried a bunch of different angles in terms of, you know, we, we, what we ended up doing w w we got Congress to get excited about it and sort of, they, they started to, you know, there was a.  Sort of a draft bill that had some, some very forward-leaning supersonic language that we, we you know, worked with Congress on it never passed in exactly that form, but it passed later in the 2018 FAA reauthorization. And then the thing that actually kind of ended up working was I had this idea in late 2017 was, well, you know, what. The, the sub the subsonic standard changes at the end of this year. Right. So, so so the end of 2017, so I was like, well, let's apply for type certification this year. Right. So we applied, like, we are nowhere close to an airplane. Right. And know we're close. Right. Right. And I was like, well, let's just, let's just, let's just like, screw it. We're going to apply like, like in 2017. And I had to like, get the execs to sign off on that. Right. We're going to do it, but we did. [00:07:00] So by the end of, I think December, 2017, we applied, I of course, you know, talk to my FFA colleagues and told them like, Hey, we're going to apply. Just so you know, they're like, well, that raises a whole bunch of questions. And, and that sort of got it, got them working down this path where they were like, well, you only have under part 36 of the FAA rules. You only have five years to to keep that noise standard. If, if you apply today and you're probably not gonna be done in five years. And I was like, that's true. We're probably not going to be done in five years, but we think that part 36 doesn't apply to us at all right. The way it's written. And then they went back and then they looked at it and they were like, oh, Part 36 doesn't apply to them like they're right. Like, you know, Eli's the first person in the history of Supersonics three per 36 and very closely. Right. And so and so then they went back and they like talked to their lawyers and, you know, they, I think came up with a new position in a new legal interpretation [00:08:00] w basically a memo that, that was, that was published that was like, okay, the subsonic standards don't apply and we don't have standards. We can start making some standards. And if we don't have one at any time for any particular applicant, we can make one for that applicant. We can, it's called the rule of particular applicability. So that kind of, once we got that, then in early 2018, like that kind of solved their problem. Like, and I think in in at least th th the domestic part didn't solve the international part, like from, from from Europe and so on. So. I mean, I, so, so if you think about like, what do you do on a policy team? Like you figure out like how, you know, how, how do you solve the problem that you have, that, that you were, that you were hired hard to fix and you just try things, try things until something works. It's part of the answer. Yeah. That's I mean, that's, I really appreciate you going into that level of detail because it's like the sort of like affordances of these things seem incredibly opaque. And just [00:09:00] for, for context, the subsonic standards are the standards that do not a lot, like that set a very like low noise bar. It's very stringent. I mean, the modern, the modern standards are pretty stringent. Like it used to be like, you couldn't, you couldn't basically like stand on a runway and have a conversation while plane's taken off these days. Like, I mean, it's, it's, it's gotten very, very impressive, but they, you know, the, the modern planes have gotten that way because they have high bypass ratios and the engines like big, big fans that move a lot of air around the engine core, not through it. Right. And so so that is, you know, that's just not workable when you're kind of trying to push that big fan through, you know, through the air at mock you know, 2.2 is what we were doing now. Now it's 1.7 that boom. But but but anyway, that's that, you know, that, that just doesn't work as a solution. So that's why, you know, it had to be different. Right. Right. And then did you say it's 30 S w w was it articles 36 [00:10:00] or 36? And volume, volume, volume, 14 of the code of federal regulations, part 36. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. And that's that, that's the part that specifies all the takeoff and landing noise certification rules for bar, all, all kinds of aircraft. Got it. And, and you re and there's like, like particular wording in that part that does not apply to  that didn't apply as it was in, in 2018. I think they've now rechanged some of the definitions. They went through a rulemaking To, to cover some supersonic planes, although interestingly, still not Boone's plane. It covers the plane up to Mach basically between Mach 1.4 Mach 1.8 and below a certain weight limit. So basically biz jets, right. Business jets, small sort of low Mach business jets, but it would be covered under, under the new role, but as part of that, they might have incorporated. [00:11:00] I, I forget the details, but they, they might've changed the definition so that so that boom was at least you know, would, would apply the five-year time limit and stuff like that might apply. Got it. Okay. And so that's so, so sort of like they, at a company, the policy team is like really going after a specific problem that the company has figured out anyway, to, to address that I mean, that, that was, that was how that one was. I mean, I think that there are different, there are different companies, right. And the companies that are playing more in defense rather than offense. Right. So you could imagine oh, I'm thinking of like a company like Facebook, right? Where like the first amendment applies for 30 applies. Like they have like the legal, like they have all the legal permission to operate as much. As as they need to. And they're mostly just like putting out fires right. Of like, like people wanting to like regulate them as utility and things like that. So, so it's, it's, it's more of a defensive mode in those companies, I think. But, but yeah, it's going to [00:12:00] vary from company to company, depending on what it is you need to do. And you just have to kind of be aware of all the different tools in terms of, well, you can go to Congress and get them to do something, and you might be able to get the executive branch to do an executive order, or you might be able to you know, get a new rulemaking or a new guidance or, you know there's, there's just a whole host of different tools in the, in the toolkit. And you've gotta be able to think about them in the different ways that you can use them to solve your problems. And actually so this perhaps getting a little ahead of ourselves, but speaking of those tools, like what in your mind is the theory of change behind writing policy papers? I think that sort of among many people, like you see. Policy papers being written and then, and like policy happens, but like, there's this like big question Mark Black box in between those two things. I think there's, there's, there's definitely different theories, right? I think so before I started at boom, when I was at the Mercatus center, Sam Hammerman and I [00:13:00] wrote a paper on Supersonics and that was, you know, that one I think actually was really influential. Right. So we, we published it a month before the 2016 election, when we thought Donald Trump was going to lose and we titled it sort of as a joke make America boom again you know, so it was like, the slogan was perfect. And and then lo and behold Trump gets elected and that paper like circulated in the, the sorta like when, when his administration got constituted in, in January, 2017 you know, a DLT like that paper circulator and people are like, okay, this makes sense. We need to be very forward-leaning on Supersonics. And, and so, so that, you know, like we still haven't changed the law that we said was most important in that paper. Right. That what we said is that we need to re repeal the Overland ban and replace it with some kind of permissive noise standard that lets the industry got going on Overland, Overland flight. But I think it was  influential in the sense of, it was some reference material [00:14:00] that a lot of different policymakers could look at quickly and say like, okay there, you know, there's some good ideas behind this and we need to support this broadly. And, and, and it's, you know, it's a reputable sort of outlet that, that came up with this and it's, and it's got all the sort of info that we need to, to be able to operate independently and moving this idea forward. Got it. So, so really is like a lot of just sort of like tossing, tossing things out there and hoping like they get to the person who can make, make a decision. Well, I think  you know, ideally you're not just hoping, right? Like ideally like you're, you're reaching out to those people establishing relationships with the right people and and, and sort of getting, getting your ideas taken, taken seriously by everybody that, that matters in your field. And another, so, so this is, again, just coming from [00:15:00] someone who's completely naive to the world is like, how do you figure out who the right person is? Well, I think it depends on what you need to do, right? So like, if you need to repeal an act of Congress, you know, you've got to go to Congress. Right. So, so that's that's an example. So I, so I don't know. I think a lot of times the right person is, is not just one right. Person. I think that there's like a, there's also a move where you're really just trying to go after elites in society. Right. Like if you can get, if you can get sort of like elites, however you define, I don't know what the right, right definition of that term is. But but, but you know, if you can get sort of a consensus among elites that you know, that, that supersonic flight should be allowed over land or that you know that, that we should invest, you know, like the con the government should invest deeply in, in like geothermal energy or that you know, Wait, we need to like have a a Papa program for ornithopter whatever it is. You know, if you convince, like it leads across the board in society that we should do this, [00:16:00] like, it it's pretty likely to happen. Right. It leads still, still sort of control the stuff that at least at least the stuff that nobody else cares about. If it leads care about it, then, then they'll, they'll get their way. One. What sort of pushback to that then I actually wanted to ask you about would be that there's there's this view that in a lot of cases, regulations sort of a codes, a trade-off into a very like a calcified bureaucracy and then sort of like seals it off specifically like an example being you could make this argument that. Nuclear regulation, as opposed to sort of being about health and wellbeing or the environment is actually encoding a trade off that like in order to absolutely prevent any sort of nuclear proliferation at all we basically just make it so that you can't build new nuclear things. What do you w what do you think about that? Do you have technology [00:17:00] regulations? I mean, I think like nuclear is, would be like, I would think that that would be like one of the hardest regulations change, right? The, the, the sort of you're taking an entire agency, like the national the nuclear regulatory commission. Right. And you're saying like, we have to completely change the way, like, like if I were, if I were at one of these efficient startups, right. It'd be like, All right. My job here as the policy lead or whatever, is to completely change the way this entire agency operates. Right? Like that seems really hard, right? That is that's, that's, that's really challenging. And, you know, I don't, I'm not optimistic frankly, about, about their success. And so, you know, so in, in sort of the more like the research-y like nonprofit side of policy that I do now, you know, like a lot of what I'm looking for is areas where it isn't, that it isn't hopeless, right? Where there, where you can work and where you only need like small change and it makes a big difference. Right. And so you're trying to find those [00:18:00] leveraged policy issues where, where you can make a big difference. So that's, that's, that's how I think about it. And it's issue selection. Like when you're, when you're in the nonprofit world and you have the luxury of that, right. Which you don't necessarily in the for-profit world Like that's really, I think that's really important. And that's what separates like good policy entrepreneurs from bad policy entrepreneurs is, is that sort of like awareness of issue selection, and, you know, small changes that make a big difference. And, and so let's dig into that. How did, how do you sort of like, look for that leverage? Like what, what yells to you like that, that you could actually make a big difference by changing a small thing? So I mean like, like Supersonics is a, is a great example, right? That's one that I chose to work on for several years. And that's like, if you could get rid of the Overland band, right. One, one line in the code of federal regulations, the bands over land and flight over land, right. You [00:19:00] would unlock. Massive amounts of aerospace engineering development in a completely you know, new regime of flight that no one else has, no one else is doing. Right. You'd get rapid learning. Then that curve you get like engines being developed specifically for that use case, you'd get, you know, variable, geometry, everything being developed.  For, for airliners and so on and, and you'd make a big difference you know, in, in the future of the industry and, and in the, in sort of this state of the art for, for flight. So I think if you could change that one line, even if you could, even if you couldn't change it international, right. If you could change it just in the U S right, you would get, I think the U S is big enough that, you know, sort of LA to New York and, you know, other plus all the over plus all the transoceanic markets that, you know, sort of the, you know, like a boom is going for now, right. If you got, if you got the combined, combining those two markets, you're at like, you know, DUP say doubling the market size for those planes. And and you'd get a lot more investment. And so, you know, it would be [00:20:00] a, it would be a huge A huge improvement. Right. And so, so I think that's, that's a highly leveraged one, one that I'm working on, you know, a lot more lately, I'm sure you've seen is geothermal, right. Where sort of like, I think there's no like real policy blocker, but the sort of the thing that I've been focused on is permitting, right? So if you want to, if you want a permit you know, there's a huge overlap between like the prime geothermal locations and federal lands. And so, so a lot of it's on, you know, so you need to get the federal government to give you a lease and, and you need to get their approval for it to drill the well. Right. And so that, that approval brings in, you know, environmental review and so on and conveniently the oil and gas industry has gotten themselves exempted from a lot of those environmental review requests. And my argument is like geothermal Wells are like the same as oil and gas Wells. So if they're exempted, like geothermal should be two, and that would speed up the approval time from something like two years to something like two weeks. [00:21:00] Right. So you'd go, you massively speed it up. Right. And so, and so, so just that sort of speed up on federal lands that wouldn't even change anything on, on private lands or on, on state lands necessarily. W w that, that sort of acceleration, I think, would, would, you know, could bring forward sort of the timetable for sort of the geothermal industry as a whole, by a few years. Right. So, so one small change. And so that's, that's, if you think about that, like socially, like, what is the value of that? It's many billions of dollars, right? So if I spend a year of my time working on that and, and get that changed You know, like my ROI for society for that one year is, is many billions of dollars, which is pretty good. It's pretty good. Pretty good. Pretty good way to spend my time. Right. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, there's, I mean, other things you know, like like I'm really interested in, in enhanced weathering, right? So olivine you're using olivine to, to to capture CO2.  And I think it's like, it was the neglected thing and I think policymakers just don't know about it and if I could [00:22:00] educate them and sort of, you know, get them, get them get buy-in for like some sort of, you know, pilot program or, or whatever, whatever would be, whatever the right answer is for for that. And I'm not sure what it is exactly. But if, you know, if you can get them going on that, it's like, oh, we, we, you know, potentially. Capture, you know, many gigatons of CO2 for, you know, 10 to $20 a ton. Yeah. That's, that's pretty cheap and we'd solve a lot of other climate problems. Right. And, and, and it would be maybe the cost of dealing with climate change would go down by something like an order of magnitude. Right. That would be that's, you know, like again, like pretty highly leveraged.  So that's like, those are some examples of like, why I've chosen to work on certain areas. But I think, I think I'm not saying those are the only ones by any means, and it just, just what makes a good policy entrepreneur is figuring out what those are. And, and I guess, like the thing that to put a little bit more is like, how, like, is there something that people could do to [00:23:00] find more of those leverage points? Like it was, it, is it, I guess there's like two, maybe two purchase. One would be just like take an area of interest and like, just like comb through the laws. Like basically like point changes that way to unlock things. Or is, is there a way to like actually sort of like look for potential point changes agnostic of the actual no, it's a great question. So, so, so I've been, so I've been, you know, trying to talk to people about like, what is the way to systematize this. Right, right. So I think that's the question you're asking and, and, and I've been, so I've been thinking about like, what, what is my, you know, what is my system, if I have such as I, such as it exists. And I think that the right answer is to come at, I mean, one is to come at it from the perspective of the entrepreneur. Right? So, so if you, if you think about it from the perspective of, you know, this is a company that is trying to do this thing, or I wish there was a company that was trying to do this thing, like, what would, what would, what [00:24:00] would they run into, right? What is that? What is the actual obstacle? What is the actual policy obstacle that they face? I think that that is the most construct. Way to do it. And, and, and to give you an example of a different approach, right? You can think about some, you know, a bunch of our friends, you know, we're working on this endless frontier, Zack, right. Which is like complete rethinking of the entire like science funding and technology funding thing. Like that is a different approach. And maybe that maybe, you know, we probably need some people working on that and that modality as well. But I, I think it's released for me, it's more effective to do this sort of more bottom up You know, think about it from, from the perspective of here's this thing I want to exist in the world. Like here's the specific narrow problem that they would face if they tried to do it, like, let me work on that as much as possible. Yeah. I think, I think another thing that's really important is you know, the, the policy analyst or whatever should try to learn as much [00:25:00] as possible on from on a technical level about, about the technology and how it works and like the physics of it or the chemistry of it, whatever it is. And I think a lot of, a lot of policy folks don't right. I think that they they're like, well, I'm going to deal with this like legal stuff. And I'm just, you know, I'll go to the engineers if I have a question, but I don't really want to learn it. And I think that that's, that's that's not helpful. I think you want to get in the weeds as much as possible. I mean, Boom. Like I sat people down all the time. It was like, I need you to explain this to me cause I don't understand it. And, and, and I just had tons and tons of conversations with the engineering team and, and, you know, people who weren't on the engineering team, but who understood things better than me and over time, you know, so it got to the point where like, okay, I understand, you know, these airplane design trade-offs pretty well. Right. And, and then, and then, and then when I'm talking to a congressional staffer or, you know [00:26:00] someone at, at a federal agency or something like that, that I can explain it to them. Right. And in sort of in a way that they can understand. So, so I think that you know, thinking from the bottom up you know, try and trying to put yourself in the position of the bottom of the entrepreneur working on it, looking at it from looking at it from you're not being afraid to dig into the technical weeds. I think those are. Those are the things that I would encourage sort of other people working in policy to, to experiment with and to try. And I think that would make them, you know, more, more successful. Yeah. And actually on that note another thing I wanted to ask you about is if you have any opinions about sort of how to get more technical people in to government and policy and like vice versa, help more government policy people like actually understand technical constraints. Cause I just find like very often, like it's like I had this instinct too, where I'm like, I don't understand policy, so I'm just going to like try to avoid [00:27:00] anything that touches government. And, and like that seems suboptimal. Yeah. So it's something that I think about a lot. We're thinking about a lot at the CGO actually is, is, you know, how can we. How can we, you know, either when we train people up, you know, in terms of, you know, young policy analyst, how do we get them to like, engage, you know, like maybe so we're exploring ideas right. Of how we would do this. Right. How could we, could we bring in young policy analysts and like kind of mentor them or like teach them how to, how to sort of, how to self-teach some of the technical stuff, right? Like, like like work through this stuff, or conversely, as you say, like we can take some technical people and, and sort of teach them the road. So policy, if that's what they want to do. Right. And, and, and give them that, that toolkit as well. And cause I think that the overlap is, is really, is really effective. If you can get it, if you can get someone that's interested in playing in both spaces, I think that that is really effective. [00:28:00] And, and the question is like, who are these people that want to do it? You know, there's not, it's not really like a career track. Exactly. Right. It's. And so, you know, if we, if we found a bunch of people that wanted to be that, that you know, in, in that sort of Venn diagram overlap, like we would, we would definitely be interested in training them up. Yeah. W w one thought there is actually sort of what we're doing right now, which is making the, the policy process more legible. In that, like, I, I think it's, it's very silicone valley has done a very good job of like, making people see, like, this is how you change the world by like starting a tech company, whether that's true or not. But it's, it's like very unclear, fuzzy how one changes the world by like helping with policy. So like just making that legible seems very important, you know, I think, I think the other thing about it is that you know, Silicon valley, you know, I think investors and entrepreneurs are too afraid of. You know, what they would call [00:29:00] policy risk, right. Or something like that, you know, like, like, you know, I think it's you know, I think it varies case by case how much of a risk it actually is. But I think it, you know, sort of my view when I was at boom was like, look, there's no way that FAA is not going to let us certify plane. Like, there's no, like, like w we will, they will run us through the ringer. It'll be expensive. Like we'll have to like, spend, you know, new, all kinds of tests and stuff like that, but they are not going to get, we're not going to get to a point where, like, we have a plane ready to ready to fly. And like, yeah, it's not certifiable because of like, something like, like noise. Right. And so, and so like, like there was, or there, you know, there is not like that much policy risk and, and a lot of things you know, I wouldn't feel that same way about like a nuclear startup, right. Like like efficient startup, but but, but sort of being, you know, I think that I wish that The investors were a little bit more savvy about like, what is a smart policy risk to take [00:30:00] and, you know, what, what can be, what can be worked and what can't in terms of policy risks. Yeah. And again, I think it's, it's one of those things where it's like, we need more ways of people actually understanding that of like, like how do you, how do you grok those things? And then I guess, I guess the last thing on, on sort of the regulation front is like, are there historical examples of like sort of like very broad deregulation that enabled technology, like actual, like, it feels like regulation is very much this like bracket where like we keep regulating more and more things. And every once in a while you get like a little bit better, like in the FAA case, but like, is there ever a situation. There's a really big opening up.  Yeah, there, there are a few cases.  Aviation is a perfect example, actually. So, so if you're, I don't know if you've read the book hard landing, but but it's an excellent recommended it if you're, if you're interested in this at [00:31:00] all, but it's basically a history of sort of the aviation industry up through what they call deregulation. Right. Which is there's happened in the I guess the late 1970s. Because up until that point from I don't remember when it started, but there was this thing called the civil aeronautics board that basically regulated routes and affairs. So if you were an airline, you got to fly the routes that the government told you, you could fly and the fares that they, and you, you, you got to charge the fairs that they Told you, you could charge. Right. And you couldn't give discounts or anything like that. Right. Like you had to charge like that fair. Right. And so, so like, what did you have to compete on? Like, like, not very much, right? Like you, you competed actually like on in-flight service and stuff like that. So So, I mean, you had sort of before that deregulatory era, you had a very lavish in-flight meals and stuff like that. And, and super expensive, super expensive, super expensive tickets and not a lot of [00:32:00] convenient route choice and so on. And then And then sort of in the late 1970s under Jimmy Carter, I think I think Ted Kennedy was was the, one of the big proponents of it. So was like getting rid of the civil aeronautics board. They got rid of it, right. Like they got rid of an agency. And so and, and so that sort of deregulated the, the routes and, and the city, you know, city pairs and, and times, and, and the fairs that they could charge. So now, like you can buy like, you know, a ticket to Orlando or Charlotte, or, you know, whatever for like 200 bucks or less. Right. And, and it's and you know, that's all thanks to deregulation. Oh, that's not really exactly an enabling technology, I think, which was your initial question, but it just allowed the industry to move forward and and, and become a whole lot more efficient. And so one could imagine something similar for. Like technology regulations. Yeah. I think in getting rid of an entire agency is pretty rare. But [00:33:00] but, but, but yeah, I think that but yeah, it's, it's not, it's not like a lot of people think like regulations a one way ratchet. That's not totally true. Like there have been, has been times in the past where we got rid of a whole lot of regulation. Yeah. And actually related to that, do you have any good arguments against the position of like, we need regulation to like keep us safe besides sort of well, we also need to like, like there is too much safety. Like I, I find, I wish there was like a more satisfying thing besides like, well, you know, it's like sometimes we'll have to take risks. Right. So I think, I think, I mean, it's, it's true that Like, there's not, there's not like from an economics perspective, like there's not really a good argument for regulating safety, because you would think that the customer could, could make their own choice about how risky they want to live their life. Right. And so so, so it is a little bit awkward from that point of view, I think we're never going to get a situation where the government [00:34:00] doesn't regulate safety and a lot of things, right. They just it's just reality is that you know, the peop the public like sort of wants the government to regulate safety. And so therefore it will. But I think that there is still a difference in the kinds of kinds of safety regulation that we could have. Right. So, so I think one example that I think about a lot is The way planes are regulated versus the way cars are regulated. So if you, if you think so with, with planes FAA sort of type certifies, every plane that is produced or that is registered  model of plane that is produced and you have to get that yeah, it has to get an airworthiness certificate and stuff when you register it. And so that's, that's an example of what's called pre-market approval. Before you go on the market, you have to be certified, right? Drugs are work that work the same way with cars. It's a little different, right? You have car safety standards that, that NITSA promulgates and enforces. But The way that that is [00:35:00] enforced or the way that that is, is dealt with is that the car companies, you know, know that they have to design to these standards NITSA monitors, the market, all right, the marketplace, they sample sample cars that, that and, and test them and stuff like that. And or if they observe a lot of accidents or whatever, they can go back and they can tell the, the car company. Okay. You have to do a recall on this car. And, and make sure, you know, fix all these things that we found that, that aren't up to snuff. Right. Right. And so, so, so that's, that's an example of post-market surveillance, right? So those are both safety regulations, but they have huge structural differences in how they operate in terms of, you know, how, how much of a barrier is there to like getting to market, right. The pre-market approval cases. It means you're, front-loading all of the costs. You're delaying you're, you're making it hard for your investors to recoup any, any returns, just see if the whole thing is going to work, et cetera. So there's like all kinds of effects of that. Whereas in the post-market surveillance model, like you're incentivizing good behavior, but we're not going to [00:36:00] necessarily like verify it upfront. We're going to, which is costly. We're gonna, we're gonna let it play out in the marketplace for awhile. And if we detect like a certain degree of unsafeness, we're going to make you fix it. Right. And so I think of that, I think of that structural difference is really important. And I would, I would like to see. It's more of that that post-market surveillance model. I mean, you could think about it even for drugs too. Instead of, you know, instead of upfront clinical trials, we could say, okay, like you have this technical here. Like we see that it makes sense as a potential treatment for this thing. Like, you know, you would have to test it on people one way or the other. Right. In terms of you know, w whether it's clinical trial subjects or patients who have had the condition we will allow you to use it on this, but we're gonna, we're gonna monitor like, carefully what the side effects are in those early applications of the drug. And if it turns out to be unsafe, we're gonna pull it. Right. And so that that's, that would be a different way of doing it. You know, you can imagine we could do that. Right. But that's, [00:37:00] that's just not where we are. And so I think it is hard for people with You know, sort of bought into the current system to, to think about like how we would get there or how that would be, you know, why we would ever do that. Right. It, it, it does seem much more attractable to just say like, okay, we're still going to regulate, but we're going to do it in a different way though. Like, I, I really liked that and I, I hadn't thought about that very much. I'm going to completely change gears here. And let's talk about GDP, total factor productivity. Your, your stated goal is for GDP per capita to reach 200 a thousand dollars by 2050. And just for the listener context, I looked up some numbers. The current global GDP is $11,000. So we're talking about more than an order of magnitude increase. The highest right now is Monaco at 190 K. So they're not even so I, so I'm, I'm, I'm thinking like S specifically I want to get to 200,000. I want to get everybody there [00:38:00] eventually, but by 2050, I think we, I think we could get the U S so the U S has 63 K right now. Which so, so like we've got a triple it, yeah, we've got it from the blood. And so the interesting thing that I think is like, so the U S looks like it's both low places like Ireland and Switzerland. And like, so, so, so my, the thing that I'd like you to justify is like why high GDP is the thing we should be shooting for, because I would argue that like, sort of on a, like, things that are going on there's like, I would rather be in the U S than Ireland or Switzerland. And so, but like they have higher GDP. Yeah. So like Ireland, is this a special case where like, they have a bunch of tax laws that are favorable and so a lot of like profits and stuff get booked there. So, so I, so I think that that's, I think that's what's going on there. So I would say so GDP is Is it not a perfect metric. [00:39:00] I think that the degree to which it's imperfect, it's often overstated by, by people. So it's, it's pretty good. Even, so I would say I like TFP better as a like, so I, I, I use GDP per capita because I think people are more familiar with it and stuff like that. But I, what I actually think about is in terms of TFP and so total factor productivity is just like, how much can you get more output? From a given amount of inputs. Right? So like, if, you know, if I have in my society, a certain number of plumbers and a certain amount of you know, lumber and a certain amount of, you know, any, all the inputs that you have, right. What can I make out of them? Right. Like how much, how much, how much was the value, total value of all the goods that I can produce out of all the, all the resources I have going in. Right. And you want that number to be as high as possible. Right. You want to be able to produce as much as possible given your inputs. Right. And so that's, that's the, that's the idea of TSP. [00:40:00] And just to like, dig into that, how do, how do you measure inputs? So like, like outputs is just like all, all like basically everybody's receipts, right. So I'll put, so, so in this, there's a very simple model yeah. That people use, right. It's called the, the sort of the solo model. Right. And the idea there is you have you have GDP, which is just a number, right? It's a, it's a dollar value  real GDP is what you're concerned about. And then you have how much, how much labor do you have and how much capital do you have. And then, and then you you take logs actually of it, and then you do a linear aggression. And then the residual, the residual term in that regression is your, is your number for a total factor productivity or log total factor productivity. And so that's, that's how you would do it. Is it, that's a very, very rough estimate right. Of, of how you do it. Sometimes people add in things like human capital levels. Right. So if we if we brought in like a bunch of an educated [00:41:00] immigrants and and brought them in, so, okay. Like labor productivity would go down. If it's measured naively, but if you include in that regression, like a human capital term to, to to reflect education levels, like then, then it wouldn't right. Ideally it wouldn't. So, so anyway, so that's, so that's how you do it is you, you, you, you take labor, capital and output and you figure out the relationship between them and you see that you're getting more output than you used to from ideally hopefully from the given amount of, of labor and capital that that went into it. That's not true in every country. Right. You know, actually our countries where you go down in an output over time. So Brazil, where I. Peaked in total factor productivity in the year of my birth in 1980. And so, so, so it takes about 50% more resources today to produce the same amount of output that they produce that in real terms. Right. And, and, you know, Venezuela is like a basket case, right. They produce way less. So, so so it's, it's, I think it's a [00:42:00] good it's a good concept for thinking about two things bound up together. One is technology and the other is the quality of institutions, and those are the two things that if you improve them, then, then your output, given a certain basket of inputs is going to is going to be higher. Yeah. That's, that's compelling. I buy into the school of thought that institutions are like kind of a social technology that like, should we just actually talk about it that way? And like, to sort of sort of like prime my intuition and like other people's intuition about TFP are there examples. In history of like technologies that like very clearly increased TFP. Like you can like, see like thing invented TFP, like brand of TFP increased shoots up. Yeah. So, so the the guy who's written the most about this is this guy, Robert Gordon. And what he actually would argue is the thing it's like thing invented like a few decades pass [00:43:00] while things like integrating it and figuring it out, then big increase in, in, in, in TFP and GDP. Right, right. And so, and so he, he had this paper and then eventually a book on the five grade inventions. Right. And I, and so things like the internal combustion combustion engine, the idea of. Like sanitation plumbing, et cetera. The idea of pharmaceuticals, chemistry, and pharmaceuticals electricity was probably one and I think that's four, right? And I, and the fifth escapes me right now, but he, he basically argued that we had these sort of five great inventions in the late 18 hundreds. It took a few decades for them to get rolling. And then from 1920 to 1970, you had this like big spasm of growth TFE grew 2% a year. And he basically would argue today that's unrepeatable because we don't have those great inventions. And all, all we really have, according to him is, is progress in it. Right. Like we have, so we have one great invention [00:44:00] and, and that's, you know, it really still hasn't shown up in the productivity statistics. It may still be coming, but he would argue. Yeah. There's just, you know, we've, we've eaten all the low hanging fruit, like there's no more great inventions to be had. And when we just got to settle for a, you know, half a percent a year or TSP crows from here on out, but as I understand you disagreed like I, I certainly share your biases. And so recently you posted a great article about like possible technologies stack that could come down the pike. Do you have a sense, like, and so like through the framing of TFP do you have like, of, of all the things that you're excited about, like which ones do you think would have the biggest impact on TFP and like, what is the mechanism by which that would happen? I mean, so, so, so I think probably the closest, the thing that's like closest to us, where we are now is it's probably like big energy [00:45:00] price reductions. Right? So I've, I'm really bullish on geothermal, I think like 10 years from now. It's totally possible that we would have you know, sort of a geothermal boom, the way we had like a shell boom, right. In energy, in the, in the last 10 years. And then we'll be talking about like, oh man, like energy is getting so cheap. And so energy is something that sort of like infuses every production process in the entire country. And, and so it's difficult to really explain like how exactly it moves iffy. It just moves everything. Right. It just makes everything. You know, if we get, if we get energy costs, you know, down by, by half or something like that, then it makes a lot of things twice as, as productive or, or some, or some maybe not exactly twice, but a lot more productive. So that's, that's one example, but then like other things like longevity, right? Like, let's say we, we we, we fix a fix, you know, extending lifespan and say compress morbidity. Right? Like we make it so that people [00:46:00] don't get sick as much. Right. Well, that manifests as lower real demand for healthcare services. Right. So, so it's like, you don't even go see a doctor until like you're 90. Right. And like, and you don't need to learn because like you're still healthy. Then show up in GDP. They do. Right. But they, but what would happen. See here's where you have to distinguish between real and nominal GDP. Right. So in real, in real GDP, like we would, we would get the same, like with, with proper accounting, right. We would get the same or better. We'd get better at levels of health with fewer dollars spent on it. Right. So we'd be more productive in that, in that sense. Right. And so so we would so we might spend less on health services. But we would also have, we would employ fewer people in those sectors. Right, right. The employ those people would, you know, smart people right now who work in the healthcare sector, those people would all get to do other things like, and they would, they would all become researchers or, [00:47:00] you know, other, other kinds of technicians or, you know, whatever. And, and, and those people would produce things in their new role. So it's like, if, if, if all of a sudden we did not need. As many x-ray tacks or something like that. Right. And all those x-ray techs are out doing new things. That's like getting the x-ray texts for free. Right. It's another way of saying it is like we're getting all that for free, that same output that we used to get, we're getting it for free. And now we are we're taking those same people and, and getting the produce even more on top of it. So, so, so when you think about real GDP, like jobs are costs, right? Like you don't want jobs and you actually, you actually want to reduce as much as possible, like the spending on the need to spend money on things even. Right. And so that's how you actually increase productivity and ultimately real living standards and real GDP. And, and do we actually measure real GDP? Is that like hospital or is it like, sort of like a theoretical concept? No, [00:48:00] we, we, again, it's, it's kind of like the FP, right. We infer it. So we, we sort of And we estimate nominal GDP based on just how we, how we spend, how people are spending their money and how quickly they're spending it and so on. But even that, it's not like we're counting every receipt in the economy and adding tabulating them. Right. It's it's still an estimate. So we're estimating nominal GDP, and then we're also estimating the price level changes. Right. And so you address the nominal GDP estimate by the price level change and that's your real GDP number. Got it. Okay, cool. This is, I really appreciate this because I see all these terms being thrown around and I'm like, what is actually the difference here? Like what's, what's going on. And last question on TFE, can you imagine something that would be like really amazing for the world that would not show up in TFP? Is it like as just like a thought. I think, I think stuff that improves the quality of your leisure [00:49:00] time is unpaid, right? Like, like or that, or that you almost get for free. So like you know, if let's say, let's say open a designer, like an open source video game or something like that. And like, everybody loves it and it gets super high quality leisure time out of it. Right? Like there's no money changing hands. There are utilities going up. Right. So, so like you would, you would think that that would improve living standards without, without showing up in measured GDP at all. Right. So that's, that's the kind of stuff that it's like, yeah, he's got, you got to have that in the back of your mind that, that that's the kind of thing that could, you know, throw off your Your analysis. Okay. And so, and this is actually what some people claim is like, oh, the value of, of the internet, you know, the internet has, has, has increased welfare to something sentence. It's like, okay, yes. To some extent, but, but is it, you know, it's not like a whole like percent, 1% growth a year. It's not, it doesn't, it doesn't account for the reduction in, in TFP that we've seen. Yeah. [00:50:00] Yeah. That makes a lot of sense. Changing gears again make the case for airships air shifts. Yeah. So I think you know, you have. Cargo that is, there's basically two modes that you can take cargo on today. You can take them, put them on a 7 47 freighter, let's say, and, you know, get them to the destination the next day. And it costs a lot of money or you can put them on a container ship and it's basically free, but it takes, you know, a few weeks or even months to get to your destination. And, you know, what, if there was something in between, right? What if there was something that would take, you know, say four or five days anywhere in the world. But it's, you know, like a fifth of the cost of, of an airplane, right? That, that that's like a sweet spot for cargo you know, anywhere in the world. And. You know, so, and then, so with airships, there's an interesting thing about them is that they actually get more efficient, the bigger they get. [00:51:00] And so this is, I think the mistake that everybody's made when designing airships is, they're like, okay, we're going to design this cargo Airship to take like 10 tons to remote places. Well, no, you should be designing it to carry like 500 times, right. Because there's a square. Rule. Right. Right. If you, if you if you increase the length by a certain percentage, the, the volume increases by that factor to the cube, to the cubic power, through the third power and the the surface area and that the cross-sectional area increases by that power or that factor squared. Right. Right. And so your lift to drag ratio is getting better. Cause you, your, your lift is associated with the V with the volume and your drag is associated with the cross-sectional area. And so you're, you're getting more efficient, the bigger you get. And so I think if you designed say a, an Airship to go to carry about 500 tons a time at a time, so it's like four loads for 7 47 loads [00:52:00] at a time. And and, and, and sort of your target. Goods that had a value to weight ratio. That's sort of in the middle of the spectrum. So it's not, not computers or really high value items or, or electronics even, but more of the things like machinery or cars or part, you know, parts for factories and stuff like that. You could that be a nice little business and and you could. You know, provide a new, completely new mode of, of cargo transport. I think that would also be revolutionary for people in landlocked countries. You know, so, so, you know, I, I spent gosh, like a week in, in Rwanda about 10 years ago and, you know, just sort of like studying the country. And and one of the things that we noticed was to access a port on, in Tanzania, like, you know, you'd have to like, it's like 700 miles away or something like that, but you, you have to put the goods on like rail and the real [00:53:00] gauge changes several times between there and the port. And every time the rail gauge changes, like you would have to like pay a bribe to somebody to like move it and stuff like that, like just do their job. And and so that adds up to a lot of inefficiencies. So it's really cheap to get your container to the port on the coastline, but then to, to get it the last 700 miles, it's really expensive. Well, what if you could just get around that by, by taking something in the air ship, right. And so if you, if you designed the Airship for this, like transcontinental or, or Intercontinental. You know, ocean shipping market it would also work for that for that sort of landlord market pretty well. And you could, you know, you could, you could actually bring more than just machinery to a country like Rwanda from from, from that. And then I think there's also a high value remote services market, right. And this is, this is the one that people are going after and sort of like a standalone sense to some degree, like you know, smaller ships that carry 10 or 20, or maybe even 60 tons. It's like, okay, [00:54:00] yeah, you could serve that market, but even better if you design it for a 500 ton model. So, so anyway, that's, that's sort of, my view is like, this is a missing product that we should have. You know, it's over a hundred year old technology. We have way better materials today than we had in the last sort of the last Airship. Yeah. Think about like the, the rigid bot they ships of the past, they'll use aluminum for their internal trusses and you know, carbon fiber protrusions would have something like a six, six fold strength to weight ratio improvement. And let's say you double the, the safety factors. Okay. So your, your weight goes down by a factor of three for your, for your whole structure. You could do it autonomously today. You don't, you don't have to have labs and heads and, and galleys and all that stuff, and you don't have to have bunks. Like you could, you know, if you were on a a manned air ship, like you'd have to have multiple crews because, you know, it's like five day journey. So, or at least some of them would be so do it completely autonomously. [00:55:00] And then another question is like, could you use hydrogen as a lifting gas? Right. Because I mean, so there's a bunch of different arguments for why maybe you could, but if you were on yeah. You know, even, even, even the safety regulator would have to say, well, okay, like this might burn up, but like there's nobody on board. So so maybe it's okay. So, so anyway, I think that there's, I think there's definitely something really interesting there in terms of new, new vehicles that we could have that would enable, you know, a new mode of transportation for at least for Kartra and the so, and you've also written that it's less a technology question and more that sort of like a company that's willing to go all in on, on logistics question. And it seems like th th the way that I see it, it's like the problem is that there's not a like super lucrative niche market to go after. I think it could be super lucrative. And I think the, the, the big market is super lucrative, right? If you're, if you're let's say, you know, [00:56:00] you are. Yeah, let's say you can get 5% of the cargo of the container market, not the bulk cargo, like forget the bulk cargo. Don't don't do that. Like, don't go for the stuff that's already on air freight. Right. You might get some of that anyway, but, but just, just the, the stuff that's containerized today, right. If you could get 5% of that, I think that that would be 4,000 airships. And, you know, if you're, if you're the first one to market, like you have a monopoly right on that, or at least that, that segment of the market, and you could charge it like a decent markup. I think, I think it's like a, you know, you could in revenue, you could make like 150 to 200 billion a year, something like that. Right. And, and then, and then say you get you know, half of that in profit, right. An operating profit at least you know, like it's not a small market. So the culture problem that I see is like that it's, it's worth calling out is like, that is you need to like come out of the [00:57:00] gates at a certain scale.  That would make it very hard to sort of like ramp smoothly, I think is like, it doesn't, it doesn't work with a small airstrip. Like you can't do like a half size Airship and expect to be competitive or like a small company even. Right. Like you just come out of the gates with like a big fleet, right? Like you could say, you could maybe like, say like your first, your first five airships are targeting, like the remote market where they might have a higher willingness to pay. I think that that could be a thing you do, but yeah, you want to just, you want to rent production and just, just churn out you know, hundreds of, you know, hundreds of airships a year, right? Like that's what you want to do. It's hard to call out. It's not like that. There's like this gap here. It's like, there could be this amazing, this like amazing new thing, but it's just like the way that companies start now. Yep. It does exist. Cool. And so in this last part, I want to just do some sort of rapid questions take as [00:58:00] long or as little time as you want to, to answer them. Why is your love of vertical farming? Irrational?  I think it's, I like I am by no means a farming expert. Right. So like, so I, I see these th this sort of technology and I'm like, this is awesome, but I know next to nothing about it. So it's not like an informed like, well considered love it. It's sort of just like, I I think that this would be super cool if we moved to, into our farm. Right. And that's, that's about the extent I would say it's like potentially rational. It's potentially rational, but it's, it's, it's, it's not it's not well grounded. Okay. Why are there so few attempts at world dominance? Oh, man. I wrote a blog post on this a long time ago and I don't remember the answer.  Oh man. I don't know. I think it's, I think I think it's a, I think it's a puzzle, right? You, you see these people who become like globally famous and super influential and they and they just sort of they, they sort of Peter out and they become self satisfied with whatever they [00:59:00] accomplish. But like somebody like there, there are some really talented people out there that you would expect some of them to apply themselves to this problem that I feel like the power influence of like extremely like wealthy, powerful people is like shockingly small compared to what I would expect. Like, I dunno. It's like, I feel like Jeff Bezos actually has a lot of trouble like making the things that he wants to happen with the world happened. And I find that certainly certainly true with like blue origin. Yeah. Yeah. Or just like, sort of like any, anything, like, like you see, you see all of these people who like we think of as like rich and powerful and like, they want things to happen in the world. And like, those things don't seem to happen very often.  And that, that puzzles me. Like I have no, you know, I'd say that it does raise the question of like, whether there are people who actually are having a massive influence, which don't know who they are. Right. The, [01:00:00] the, the gray eminence. Yeah. The person behind the scenes who are, who's like really, really influential. Yeah. Yeah.  Sort of within your field defined broadly, or like, however you want who do you pay attention to that many people may not be aware of? Oh, thank you. Okay. But like in all seriousness  do I pay attention to, I mean, I think I don't know. I'm, I'm blessed to have have people who just like, you know, me out of the blue and like, like tell me things. And, and, and so so I, so I have a, I have a couple of friends, so like one that I worked with for many years who like still texts me, like interesting things all the time. And, and, you know, sort of like the, sort of the private conversations that that could, that could be public conversations. If there were like more public people, but they just like choose to choose to be like totally behind the Steens and choose to be gray. Eminences let's say. And, and like that, I think that that is a. [01:01:00] Like that's who I pay attention to. A lot of the time. Yeah. Yeah. That's that's fair. And I guess just like finally what are, what are some, we've talked about some of them, but like some unintuitive blockers for your favorite technologies, unintuitive Walker. So I think that that, like, I've written a lot about NEPA, right. This, so you may have heard me see me do a lot about this. This is the national environmental policy act. And, and, and so, you know, I think it's like sort of the theory behind it is like, okay, before we decide, we're going to like, Build this highway or whatever we're going to like study it and make sure that like the, what makes sure we understand what the environmental impacts are and that if, you know, if there are negative environmental impacts, we're gonna like study alternatives as well. Right. And, and so what got me sort of worked up about that was I was in a very high level meeting with FAA, got like, seen very senior, very senior people. [01:02:00] And, and, and sort of like the conversation like went to like, well, why can't we just change the, you know, the Overland bed? Like, why can't we do it? And so, and like one of the answers, and it's not the complete answer, one of the answers was like, well, we would have to do an environmental review if we were to change. If we were to change the. Of Berlanti rule and we don't have the data to justify, like, to even say what the impacts are like, what are the environmental impacts of, of Sonic booms on people? Because like, you know, and so this is why like NASA is doing a, a, a study to you know, they're, they're developing actually a many hundreds of millions of dollars.  Airplane T to be a low, low boom demo. And they're gonna fly it over you at the cities and like figure out what the response, the human response is, so that we can have that data so that we can do an environmental impact study. Right. So, so that's [01:03:00] so, so yes. And so, so under so last year there was a rule change in NEPA, sort of in the implementing regulations that said that if you don't have data, that is okay. You just have to say, you don't have the data in the environmental impact statement. That's supposed to be enough. That's supposed to be adequate, like NEPA is not a requirement to go and do science projects. Right. So I wonder if that conversation would go differently if we were having it today. But, but that was the answer at the time was like, we don't have the date. To do this environmental im

Steen S fra Østerbro drak for meget fra første færd for alkoholen gjorde alting sjovere og fik genertheden til at forsvinde. Han begyndte hurtigt at bruge alkoholen som hjælp hver gang han skulle over en ny grænse eller prøve noget nyt. Det udviklede sig hurtigt og Steen blev daglig drikker ganske hurtigt. Steen er 62-år og har været ædru siden 1991. Hans hjemmegrupper er i Hellerup mandag og i Ryesgade 107 torsdag aften. The post #52 Steen S fra Østerbro appeared first on Et Trin Dybere.

De Sportfilosofen sluiten het eerste seizoen af met een Steens' Sports Story over basketballer LeBron James. Op veler verzoek bespreken ze ook de (on)zin van gember-shots. Verder worden Seve en Tommie sentimenteel als ze terugblikken op het eerste seizoen van deze podcast. #fijnewedstrijd

Steens' Sports Story draait deze week om de meest succesvolle Olympiër aller tijden, Michael Phelps. Tommie en Seve staan stil bij de ongekende successen én de mentale worstelingen van deze Amerikaanse zwemmer. Ook blikken de Sportfilosofen terug op de slaap-challenge. Welke tips zijn blijven hangen? Daarnaast komt een nieuw gezondheidsthema aan bod, wat het nieuwe roken schijnt te zijn. #fijnewedstrijd

Det har været et hårdt år for børn og unge. De har i lange perioder været afskåret fra skole og fritidstilbud, og dermed de fysiske samværsaktiviteter, de normalt deltager i. Den primære måde at være sammen på, har derfor, for manges vedkommende, været forskellige digitale medier. Her mødes børn og unge ofte uden voksnes deltagelse og vejledning. Der er derfor en risiko for, at de unge går glip af den særlige pædagogiske støtte til samvær og konfliktløsning, som finder sted i fritidstilbuddene, og som traditionelt har været et vigtigt element i danske børns udvikling og dannelse. Men allerede inden corona valgte børn og unge ofte digitale samværsformer frem for fysiske samværsformer. Denne udvikling har vakt bekymring, bl.a. har medierne været med til at rejse debatten om risikoen for, at børn mobbes eller presses til adfærd i en virtuel verden, som de voksne ikke har adgang til, og derfor ofte alt for sent opdager omfanget af. Dagens tema handler om, hvordan fritidspædagogikken kan understøtte børn og unges udvikling og dannelse i en tid, hvor virtuelle samværsformer spiller en stadig stigende rolle. Til at hjælpe os med at blive klogere på det tema har vi inviteret lektor Sussie Kiilerich Bonde og lektor Steen Søndergaard, der begge underviser på Akademiuddannelsen i fritidspædagogik på Københavns Professionshøjskole. Vi taler også med Marla og Regitze fra Vesterbro Ungdomsgård, som giver konkrete eksempler og gode råd til de voksne.

Tommie deelt een Cruijffiaanse quote van Wayne 'The Great One' Gretzky, inclusief een bijpassende Steens' Sports Story. Seve blikt terug op zijn mindfulness challenge. Ook bespreken de Sportfilosofen enkele aandachtspunten voor bij een veganistisch dieet. #fijnewedstrijd

Det har været et hårdt år for børn og unge. De har i lange perioder været afskåret fra skole og fritidstilbud, og dermed de fysiske samværsaktiviteter, de normalt deltager i. Den primære måde at være sammen på, har derfor, for manges vedkommende, været forskellige digitale medier. Her mødes børn og unge ofte uden voksnes deltagelse og vejledning. Der er derfor en risiko for, at de unge går glip af den særlige pædagogiske støtte til samvær og konfliktløsning, som finder sted i fritidstilbuddene, og som traditionelt har været et vigtigt element i danske børns udvikling og dannelse. Men allerede inden corona valgte børn og unge ofte digitale samværsformer frem for fysiske samværsformer. Denne udvikling har vakt bekymring, bl.a. har medierne været med til at rejse debatten om risikoen for, at børn mobbes eller presses til adfærd i en virtuel verden, som de voksne ikke har adgang til, og derfor ofte alt for sent opdager omfanget af. Dagens tema handler om, hvordan fritidspædagogikken kan understøtte børn og unges udvikling og dannelse i en tid, hvor virtuelle samværsformer spiller en stadig stigende rolle. Til at hjælpe os med at blive klogere på det tema har vi inviteret lektor Sussie Kiilerich Bonde og lektor Steen Søndergaard, der begge underviser på Akademiuddannelsen i fritidspædagogik på Københavns Professionshøjskole. Vi taler også med Marla og Regitze fra Vesterbro Ungdomsgård, som giver konkrete eksempler og gode råd til de voksne.

Her bliver du klogere på alarm, sikring og sikkerhed, lyt til Kontrolrummet: Alarmpatrulje eller vægterkørsel, Steen Sørensen fra Securitas gør dig klogere på, hvad deres kørende vagter gør, når de ankommer til stedet., hvor alarmen er gået. Han fortæller dig hvorfor din alarm skal kobles op på en døgnbemandet vagtcentral, samt hvilke services de tilbyderGod fornøjelse med at lytte - del endelig denne podcast!Produktion: 360eyeworks ApS | Gorm Branderup & Christoffer Ransby | 360eyeworks.comGæster: Steen Sørensen | securitas.dk Jingles og underlægningsmusik: Henrik Pahlke Møller | henrikpahlke.dk | udkommer mandag hver 3. ugeDenne podcast er optaget og klippet ved podcaster.dk#podcastenkontrolrummet#podcasterdk

Myra heeft een bijzonder beroep, ze maakt als clown contact met bewoners van zorginstelligen. En hiervoor had ze al drie andere carrieres. Ze vertelt over haar omzwervingen, haar bijzondere dorp De Glind en haar boek. Haar site: www.neusvoorcontact.nl

Den sønderjyske Duo Riggelsen & Steen er ude med deres første single - en sang der udspringer af en personlig oplevelse og samtidig er det en støttesang for andre. Allan og Thomas fra duoen fortæller mere. Globus Guld's Michael Ehrhorn har talt med de 2.' Du kan høre sangen og se videoen på Riggelsen & Steens's facebookside.

Om det senaste kring nästa säsong, JVM-förutsättningarna samt Lundqvists och Steens respektive besked.

Om det senaste kring nästa säsong, JVM-förutsättningarna samt Lundqvists och Steens respektive besked.

Om det senaste kring nästa säsong, JVM-förutsättningarna samt Lundqvists och Steens respektive besked.

I veckans avsnitt har vi tre matcher med klart varierande resultat att gå igenom. Även transfers in och ut analyseras, lite om juniorsidans status, motståndarkoll, en del dåliga ordvitsar och veckan som stundar hinner vi också beta av. Trevlig lyssning!

Lauren Conrad Reveals Why She Distanced Herself From The Hills Cast (E! News) Haters be damned, 'Ellen' sees highest premiere ratings since 2016 (NY Post) Teddi Mellencamp confirms 'RHOBH' exit (Page Six) The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time (Rolling Stone) Christina Anstead and Husband Ant Split After Less Than 2 Years of Marriage (PEOPLE) Selling Sunset Recap Dear Toasters Advice Segment The Morning Toast with Claudia (@girlwithnojob) and Jackie Oshry (@jackieoproblems) Merch: https://shopmorningtoast.com/ The Morning Toast Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/themorningtoast

NW Raw encourages an outdoor lifestyle! A few years back, Raw sponsored Jeremiah on a bike race where he rode from Portland, to the Steens, back to Portland. Over 1000 miles! This type of outdoor activity is what we love to see our customers pushing themselves to do. Jeremiah was eating a Raw diet to prep for his race. Have a listen. Share with a friend. Leave a review on iTunes. ENJOY! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nwintheraw/message

Link to bioRxiv paper: http://biorxiv.org/cgi/content/short/2020.07.31.231399v1?rss=1 Authors: Zhou, Y., Bravo, J. P. K., Taylor, H. N., Steens, J., Jackson, R. N., Staals, R. H. J., Taylor, D. W. Abstract: We reveal the structure of a type IV-B CRISPR effector (Csf) complex at 3.9 a resolution using cryo-electron microscopy. The complex resembles the type III-A CRISPR Csm effector complex, but lacks subunits for RNA processing and target DNA cleavage, and is surprisingly assembled upon heterogeneous non-CRISPR RNA. These findings provide the first glimpse into the assembly and function of enigmatic type IV CRISPR systems. Copy rights belong to original authors. Visit the link for more info

Q&A med Steen Kræmer Rasmussen Dette er episode 2 fra mit interview med Steen. Vi har lavet en spændende Q&A session med spørgsmål fra dem som fulgte med live da vi lavede optagelsen. Så har du ikke lyttet til den første episode, så vil jeg anbefale at du gør det først. Du kan også lytte til episoden om Steens første bog Hit med jobbet, som vi har lavet tidligere.  Steen er forfatter til bøgerne ’Hit med jobbet’ og 'Scor jobbet til samtalen'. Steen er uddannet journalist og har tidligere arbejdet afdelingsleder på et uddannelsescenter og i den sammenhæng ansat mange mennesker og læst endnu flere ansøgninger. Du kan købe Steens bøger her: https://hitmedjobbet.dk/butik/ Hvor finder du Steen   Bogen hjemmeside https://scorjobbet.dk/ LinkedIn  Facebook Kraemer.dk   Go’ Jobjagt Diana  

Scor jobbet til samtalen med Steen Kræmer Rasmussen Steen er forfatter til bøgerne ’Hit med jobbet’ og 'Scor jobbet til samtalen'. I denne episode dykker vi ned i sidstnævnte, som er hans seneste bog. Vil du høre mere om hvordan du skriver ansøgningen som får dig inviteret til samtale - Så kan du finde en tidligere podcast episode om den også. Steen er uddannet journalist og har tidligere arbejdet afdelingsleder på et uddannelsescenter og i den sammenhæng ansat mange mennesker og læst endnu flere ansøgninger. Du kan købe Steens bøger her: https://hitmedjobbet.dk/butik/ Hvor finder du Steen   Bogen hjemmeside https://scorjobbet.dk/ LinkedIn  Facebook Kraemer.dk   Go’ Jobjagt Diana  

-"Alt kan overvåges, alt teknik, men vores største kundegruppe er tyverialarmer," siger Steen Sørensen fra Securitas.I dette afsnit har vi Securitas som gæst, hvor vi gør dig klogere på deres Døgnbemandede Kontrolcentral. Securitas overvåger din alarm, dine tekniske løsninger. Kontrolcentralen er døgnbemandet og de sidder altid klar til at hjælpe dig, vis din alarm bliver aktiveret, lige meget hvad klokken er og hvor du befinder dig i verden. Sammen med alarminstallatøren har du som kunde, lavet en liste over hvem, der skal kontaktes af Securitas. Hvis alarmen bliver aktiveret, så arbejder de systematisk ud fra denne forholdsordre, den beskriver de præcise reaktionsmønstre som er ønsket.God fornøjelse med at lytte!Produktion: 360eyeworks ApS | Gorm Branderup & Christoffer Ransby | www.360eyeworks.comGæst: Steen Sørensen | www.securitas.dkJingles og underlægningsmusik: Henrik Pahlke Møller | www.henrikpahlke.dk

The Steens Mazama 1000 (steensmazama1000.com) was my first experience competing in a self-supported ultra-endurance cycling race. In part one of this episode I discuss how I physically, mentally, and logistically prepared for the 1000 mile race through the Cascade Range, the high desert, and the remote landscapes found within Oregon.

Vind je verkopen ook nog moeilijk?Of zie je het anders?Hoe je over verkopen denkt zal je realiteit bepalen.In dit interview met José Steens van Het Motivatiemagazijn hebben we het over hoe zij verkopen is gaan omdenken, zodat het leuk werd én beter ging werken.José Steens is blij lijf Motivator bij Het Motivatiemagazijn en helpt mensen met hun mindset rond afvallen.Toen José startte heeft ze zich een jaar lang "opgesloten" in haar kantoor om haar bedrijf te bouwen, hopende dat de klanten vanzelf gingen komen.Tijdens de I LOVE SOCIAL Week interviewde ik haar over de impact die Spark tot nu toe al heeft gehad op haar bedrijf.De geluidskwaliteit is niet optimaal, maar er zit zo veel waarde in dit gesprek dat ik het toch met jullie wilde delen.In deze aflevering:Wat José's techniek is om ervoor te zorgen dat ze 50 posts klaar heeft staan en ze toch elke dag beter maakt.Wat het belang van connectie en een band opbouwen met je publiekWaarom mensen niet reageren op je postsHoe je je onderscheidt van de massa, en wat je moet doen als je dit nog niet weetWat José doet om haar angsten te overkomenWat er nog belangrijk is dan een logoWaarom mensen voor een coach kiezenLinks & resources:De Facebookpagina van Het MotivatiemagazijnDe website van Het MotivatiemagazijnCarolien Van De KampSpark, onze ledensite die je helpt meer impact te maken op social mediaQuotes:"Hoe meer je geeft hoe mooier het wordt" ~José Steens"Ik ben m'n eigen coca cola" ~ José Steens"Ik kan lopen zeuren dat het eng is maar daar schiet ik niet mee op" ~ José SteensJe kan toch niets dan liefde hebben voor die Hollandse directheid ;)

The Steens Mazama 1000 (steensmazama1000.com) was my first experience competing in a self-supported ultra-endurance cycling race. In part two of this episode I discuss my experiences during the race, ranging from the brutal sleep deprivation to an unexpected bear encounter!

Hvor hører vi egentlig til i Universet? Sammen med astrofysiker Steen Hansen fra Niels Bohr Instituttet i København tegner Henrik Prætorius et kort over evigheden. Med udgangspunkt i Steens kontor på Lyngbyvej drager vi udad i universet, forbi galakser, galaksehobe og ud blandt de gigantiske strenge af stof, der kanter bobler af tomhed uendeligt til alle sider. Science Stories er støttet af Novo Nordisk Fonden

Hvor hører vi egentlig til i Universet? Sammen med astrofysiker Steen Hansen fra Niels Bohr Institutet i København tegner Henrik Prætorius et kort over evigheden. Med udgangspunkt i Steens kontor på Lyngbyvej drager vi udad i universet, forbi galakser, galaksehobe og ud blandt de gigantiske strenge af stof, der kanter bobler af tomhed uendeligt til alle sider. Photo credit: Henrik Prætorius

Hvor hører vi egentlig til i Universet? Sammen med astrofysiker Steen Hansen fra Niels Bohr Instituttet i København tegner Henrik Prætorius et kort over evigheden. Med udgangspunkt i Steens kontor på Lyngbyvej drager vi udad i universet, forbi galakser, galaksehobe og ud blandt de gigantiske strenge af stof, der kanter bobler af tomhed uendeligt til alle sider. Science Stories er støttet af Novo Nordisk Fonden

I går handlede det om døde dyr, og derfor tager vi i dag revanche og taler om dyr, der dræber mennesker. Islamisk Stats leder blev jagtet i døden af en amerikansk militærhund, som har fået stor ros af Donald Trump. Vi leder derfor efter andre dyr, der har klaret en opgave rigtig godt. Morten ringer ind og fortæller om en service, hvor man kan leje fx hans hund Buster til at finde ting, man har tabt. Nærmest gratis. Genialt! Vi har fået lov til at se et billede af militærhunden, men dens navn er fortsat hemmeligt. Det, synes vi, er en åndssvagt ting at holde skjult, og derfor leder vi efter andre, der også har holdt noget helt ligegyldigt hemmeligt. Clara har sat ild til sine forældres loft, men vælger at holde det hemmeligt. Alexander har skjult sin alder for en ven i årevis, og Jens har holdt hemmeligt, at han som teenager blev nr. 2 til DM i Pokemon. "Sjovt du sir' det" fortsætter i dag og inspireret af Steens historie om, da han fik sin mor til at trække en torn ud af ringmusklen på ham, fortsætter kæden i dag med Emilies vanvidshistorie om, da hendes lillebror gav deres mor klamydia. På en lovlig måde. Vi trækker en seddel og leder efter en, der har set to fugle flyve ind i hinanden. Australske Peter har set to selvmordsduer kollidere lige foran sin truck, hvilket kostede dem livet. Og Stine har set to griske måger gøre sig selv til grin med en frydefuldt pinlig kollision på molen i San Francisco. Vi isolationsfængsler folk meget i Danmark, og det kan have store konsekvenser for de indsatte. Derfor efterlyser vi nogen, der har været alene alt for længe, og Peter ringer ind og fortæller om konsekvenserne af at have siddet halvanden måned i isolationsfængsel som 19-årig. Forskere har fundet ud af, at menneskeheden nok stammer fra Botswana og ikke ikke Etiopien som hidtil troet. Derfor leder vi efter nogen, der har fundet ud af, at de kommer fra et helt andet sted, end de troede. Lean ringer og fortæller en vanvittig historie om sin komplicerede familiestruktur, der først afslørede sig for ham, da han som 37-årig fandt ud af, at han var adopteret. Værter: Andreas Kousholt og Jacob Weil.

En frygtelig hændelse er hændt i den jyske by Blåvand. En stakkels kænguru var sluppet fri fra zoo, men den nåede ikke langt, før den desværre blev kørt ned. Marie blev også ramt af noget overraskende. Hun blev nemlig ramt af Amors pil og blev forelsket i sin fætter, som hun også er gift med i dag. Emil var glad og frejdig på cyklen. Ja, altså lige indtil en selvmorderisk krage hoppede ind i cykelhjulet. Nogle børns vejbod har udviklet sig til et caféprojekt for hele familien. Det er en relativt kedelig historie, men vi mistænker, at der godt kunne være nogle sjove historier om forældre, der har lavet en god forretning ud af deres børn (Ja, ikke på dén måde). Det har Jesper, for han slog to fluer med ét smæk, da han imødekom sønnens ønske om en hund ved at gøre ham til hundepasser. Når det svier i underlivet, skal man oftest gå til lægen og blive testet. For Annes kæreste var det dog bare fordi, han havde haft chili på fingrene. "Sjovt du sir' det" tænkte Steen. Han er nemlig anlægsgartner og faldt engang ned i tjørnehæk. Utroligt uheldigt for Steen, for han fik en torn direkte op i numsehullet. Og endnu mere uheldigt for Steens mor, for det var hende, der fik tjansen med at trække den ud. Skæbnens gudinde, Bjørne Corydon, har velsignet os med en fremragende seddel. Vi leder efter den perfekte plan, der blev udført katastrofalt. Michelles chef havde lagt en skudsikker plan for arbejdet, men da det kom til stykket, endte det med en opgravet indkørsel og en chef med meget røde ører. Carsten havde også bryllupsplanerne i orden. Men måske skulle han have haft planlagt logistikken lidt bedre, for han endte med at komme for sent til sit eget bryllup. I politiet har man en formodning om, at der er et kæmpe mørketal af hadforbrydelser, der ikke bliver anmeldt. Det kan Anders nikke genkendende til. Han blev udsat for en hadforbrydelse til en pride parade, og selv om han selv studerer til politibetjent, valgte han alligevel ikke at anmelde det. Mathilde er overvægtig og oplevede en gruppe, der råbte skældsord efter hende, spyttede efter hende og andre ubehageligheder. Hun oplevede, at hun ikke havde lyst til at gå til politiet med det, da hun var bange for ikke at blive taget alvorligt. Ugens absolut værste tidspunkt nærmer sig med hastige skridt. Det måtte Alberte sande, da en kavalkade af irriterende ting gjorde at hun kom for sent i skole. I det mindste var den ikke lige så slem som hendes brors. Han er nemlig blevet opereret i øjnene, og proceduren lød rigtig ubehagelig. Værter: Andreas Kousholt og Jacob Weil.

Reiulf Steen delte en begeistring som Arbeiderpartiet mangler i dag. I underhuset skal det vedtas Brexit-lover og kanskje er Storbritannia nærmere en avtale enn noen gang, men vet de hva de vedtar? Med Hans Petter Sjøli, Hanne Skartveit, Tone Sofie Aglen og Yngve Kvistad. Produsent Magne Antonsen. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Vi er tilbake igjen med en ny episode av Sunnmørsball. Denne gangen fikk vi besøk av Ståle Steen Sæthre og Tarjei Omenås, som tar oss med inn i det indre livet i AaFK-garderoben. Her avsløres det hvem som ble utsatt for en spøk, som involverer ei regning på 30.000 kroner. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Hele Sunnmøre gynger etter maktdemonstrasjonen på Color Line Stadion onsdag kveld. Molde, Eliteseriens serieleder, er i skrivende stund på vei hjem til rosenes by. Det var Aalesund som blomstret i kveldsola på Color Line Stadion denne vakre junikvelden, og sikret avansement i cupen etter en knusende 4-0-seier.Vi har snakket med Holmbert Fridjonsson, Andreas Lie, Sondre Brunstad Fet, Ståle Steen Sæthre, Aron Elis Thrandarson og Lars Bohinen - samtlige i ekstase etter en av de deiligste triumfene sunnmørspublikummet noensinne har bevitnet.Heia Aa!

Dr. Jean-Marc Steens, Chief Medical Officer, Abivax reports on clinical results that continue to show advances in the chronic treatment and maintenance of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis using a new small molecule ABX464 in an oral treatment and potential applications for other inflammatory and neurological diseases.  Jean-Marc also explains how another molecule ABX196 is being tested to determine if it might increase the outcome of treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma, the most common liver cancer, in conjunction with Opdivo a checkpoint inhibitor that is being developed with Scripps Research, University of Chicago and BYU.  #ulcerativecolitis Abivax    

Dr. Jean-Marc Steens, Chief Medical Officer, Abivax reports on clinical results that continue to show advances in the chronic treatment and maintenance of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis using a new small molecule ABX464 in an oral treatment and potential applications for other inflammatory and neurological diseases.  Jean-Marc also explains how another molecule ABX196 is being tested to determine if it might increase the outcome of treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma, the most common liver cancer, in conjunction with Opdivo a checkpoint inhibitor that is being developed with Scripps Research, University of Chicago and BYU.  Read the transcript and listen to the podcast.

Der fortælles aprilsnar i studiet i dag. Niclas fortæller om VM 2002 og om hvordan han endte som venstre back. Steen afslører hvilken fodboldspiller, der gjorde en fantastisk gestus overfor Steens søn, da han kæmpede med en grim kræftsygdom, og så er det hele lige ved at blive til Fjelles Flæbefjol. 

Learn what opportunities are available to become a geologist. Hear what forces cause the landscape to be filled with peaks, valleys, and ridges. What forces created Western North America as we know it today? The massive lava flows that the created the Columbia River Basalts and Steens lava flows in Eastern Oregon may be related to Yellowstone. Earthquakes don’t cause volcanos, magma related to volcanos create earthquakes.

Jagtmagasinet "behind the scenes"Kom med bag kameraet og lær en af de mest kendte personligheder indenfor den danske jagtverden at kende. Hør Steens spændende historie om hvordan han kom sent igang med jagt, nærmest ved et tilfælde. Bliv inspireret af hans tilgang, oplevelser og passion.... og få ideer til hvordan du selv kommer videre.....Lyt med og hør om alt fra Grønland til Afrika....... podcast når det er bedst.......

Sponsoreret af Arbejdernes Landsbank. Dette er en særudgave af BrøndbyLyd med fokus på Masterclass og talentudviklingen i Brøndby. Hvad er der sket siden Masterclass blev præsenteret i 2014? Hvad har Alexander Zornigers ankomst betydet for projektet? Og hvor står Brøndby i forhold til konkurrenterne? Til at diskutere det er i panelet tidligere scout i Brøndby, Kenneth Santa, U/19-cheftræner i Brøndby, Frederik Birk, og skribent på 3point.dk, Steen Sørensen. Nanna Møller Karlsen er vært.

Kraig Pauli raced in and won the 2017 Steens Mazama 1000 (a 1000 mile endurance race through Oregon). He joins us in the studio to describe his journey through the event and what his tips, tricks and surprises were.  Learn more about the Steens Mazama 1000, and apply if you dare, at steensmazama1000.com Also, the … Continue reading E390 – Kraig Pauli wins the Steens Mazama 1000 →

Kosmologipodden möter denna gång Steen Landsy och Lasse Östnäs för ett samtal om Steens mångåriga verksamhet som arrangör av kursen och utbildningar inom olika områden av andlig vetenskap. Vi får ta del av Steens berättelse om hur hans andliga intresse tog fart i 18-åldern och hur han i 20-åldern skrev flera kurser i Martinus kosmologi, vilket ledde till det första mötet med Martinus. Vi få också höra Steen berätta om sitt samarbete med Per Bruus-Jensen på Radio Lotus, vilket resulterade i en 32 timmar lång radioutsändning om Martinus kosmologi. Steen bidrar frikostigt med minnen, reflektioner och tankar om sina möten med Martinus och sitt eget arbete som kursarrangör och inspiratör inom det andlig-vetenskapliga området. Vi får också höra Steen berätta om sitt eget författarskap, om hur det gick till när han beslutade sig för att publicera boken Nio liv, samt mycket mer! Moderator för samtalet är Lars Palerius.

Monopolet: Musiker Mads Langer, Tv-vært Sofie Linde og skuespiller Nicolaj Kopernikus. Dilemmaliste: 1. Signe har en gammel veninde, som kysser hendes mand på munden 2. Line er tæt på en familie, hvor faren for nylig døde, og moren vil gerne have hende som værge 3. Michaels gamle nabo kræver en donkraft tilbage, som har stået hos Michael i 23 år. 4. Sofie skal holde jul med sin ekskæreste og deres søn, men det er Sofies kæreste imod. 5. Mia var i byen i går og møder tre fyre, der inviterer hende med til LA. Mia siger ja og de køber en billet. 6. Ninas klassekammerat sidder i kørestol, og hvis de skal have ham med til studenterkørsel, koster det 15.000 kroner ekstra. 7. Andrea, Cecilie og Mille har en nabo, der belurer dem. 8. Steens kolleger vil ikke være venner med ham på Facebook. 9. Emma har veninder, som er blevet vegetarer, veganere og madallegikere og hun synes, det besværligt. 10. Gitte synes, det er forkert, at hendes nabo dagligt ryger hash og har et lille barn.

Stand-up komiker Steen Molzen debuterede i 2001, fordi han indgik et væddemål. Heldigivs gik det rigtig godt, og han har siden lavet et hav af ting! I denne episode dykker vi blandt andet ned i, hvordan det var pludselig at blive komiker som en ellers 31-årig far og institutionsleder. Vi taler også om, at Steens søn blev ramt af en kræftsygdom og oplevelserne med sygdommen og tiden på Riget blev bearbejdet og brugt som stand-up materiale, selvom det var svært. Så vender vi Steens mange optrædender for de danske tropper i bl.a. Afghanistan, opvarmertjansen for Christian Fuhlendorff og selvfølgelig Steens nye - og første - onemanshow Pædagog På Afveje.Husk at lave en anmeldelse af Flyverskjul i Itunes - og du er velkommen til at støtte igennem www.flyverskjul.10er.dk - tak :)Ses vi til Flyverskjul liveoptagelsen med Nikolaj Stokholm? Den kan finde din billet lige her: Flyverskjul 7. September på Huset

Hit med jobbet – Skriv dig til jobbet med Steen Kræmer Rasmussen Steen er forfatter til bogen ’Hit med jobbet’. Han er uddannet journalist og har tidligere arbejdet afdelingsleder på et uddannelsescenter og i den sammenhæng ansat mange mennesker og læst endnu flere ansøgninger. Med udgangspunkt i de ansøgninger har han kigget på hvad der fangede ved dem. Overraskende nok var det IKKE dem der beskrev sig selv og fortalte om hvad de har lavet før. Det var derimod dem, som turde at have nogle holdninger og brænde igennem med deres faglighed.      Kan man skrive den rigtige ansøgning? Man kan ikke sætte en formel op for den rigtige ansøgning. Der er forskel på virksomheder og personer, så den enkelte ansøgning skal målrettes måde virksomheden og modtageren så meget, som det er muligt.  Netop derfor er research vigtigt i ansøgningsprocessen; du kan bruge alle informationer, du finder, til at målrette din ansøgning. Den rigtige ansøgning er den, der får dig til samtale.   Genbrug gerne dele af din ansøgning Mange af de afsnit, en ansøgning består af, kan genbruges alt efter hvilken type virksomhed, du søger hos. Det er ikke alle afsnit, som nødvendigvis behøves at målrettes virksomheden. Det, som er vigtigst, er, at motivationen rammer plet hos den virksomhed, du søger hos.   De 4 overordnede steps til at skrive en god ansøgning Research – du skal lave god research på virksomheden og samtidig kende dig selv, så du kan bringe dig selv i spil i forhold til det, du finder ud af. Skriv godt – sproget skal være i skabet, fordi hvert eneste ord, du skriver, sender signaler om dig. Hvad får virksomheden ud af mig – formuler det i forhold til den konkrete virksomhed Redigering og visuel præsentation   Det er et stort stykke arbejde at skrive sådan en ansøgning, men som Steen siger: ´Den er det værd´. Research er vigtig, fordi du skal skrive en ansøgning, som gør, at virksomheden har lyst til at møde os. Når du gør det, skal du altid tage udgangspunkt i virksomheden. Det er den, der beslutter, om du skal til samtale. Derfor skal du kende dem så godt at du kan skrive målrettet den konkrete virksomhed. Hvad kan researchen bestå af: Opsøge og ringe til folk             Søg på nettet             Brug biblioteket og deres ressourcer   Med god research bliver ansøgningen også meget nemmere at skrive. Researchdelen kan også gøre at du finder ud af at du ikke har lyst til at arbejde for virksomheden, f.eks. fordi den har nogle værdier, som ikke passer til dig.   Den professionelle personlighed Det er der, hvor du viser hvad du leverer til virksomheden, og hvordan du løser dens opgaver. Det skal bygges op som en faglig påstand efterfulgt af en uddybning, som handler om dig selv. Påstanden handler ALDRIG om dig. Der skal gerne være 2-3 afsnit i en ansøgning som omhandler din professionelle personlighed og ingen afsnit må være over 5 linjer. Hvis du starter ansøgningen med et af disse afsnit har du sat dig selv i scene med det samme, hvilket Steen anbefaler at man gør.   Motivationen Motivationsafsnittet er vigtigt i ansøgningen. Det er noget af det, som virksomhederne efterspørger allermest. Det skal IKKE være ’Jeg synes, I er en spændende virksomhed, som jeg gerne vil arbejde for’. Det fortæller ikke virksomheden noget. Brug i stedet motivationsafsnittet på at rose virksomheden. Det skal være for noget som er relevant for det job du søger. Noget, du ved, de selv er stolte af. Bring så dig selv i spil i forhold til, hvad du kan byde ind med i den sammenhæng.   Læs ansøgningen højt for dig selv og andre Start altid med at læse din ansøgning højt for dig selv. Få derefter en anden til at læse den højt, hvis du har muligheden for det. Du kommer til af fange mange flere fejl på denne måde. Det kan være, du bruger det samme ord mange gange i et afsnit, eller nogle ord som minder meget om hinanden.   Ansøgningens opbygning Evt. en indledning, her kan du også bruge et af dine professionel personlighedsafsnit, og så skal der være en motivation for jobbet. Meget gerne 1-2 jeg afsnit, det skal være en god kombination, også afslutter man med en god afslutning. Der skal være en overskrift, som skal vække opmærksomheden, den skal give lyst til at læse ansøgningen  - også skal den være dækkende for indholdet. Sørg for at afveksle mellem de forskellige afsnit gennem ansøgningen.   Sammenhæng mellem ansøgning og CV Ansøgningen skal være fremadrettet, mens CV´et er bagudrettet. Sender du en ansøgning, som er en omskrivning af dit CV, fortæller du virksomheden hvad du har lavet før, men ikke hvordan du kan hjælpe den. CV´et er bare et faktatjek, hvor ansøgningen nemlig viser, hvad virksomheden får ud af at ansætte dig. Husk også at målrette dit CV til den enkelte virksomhed. Prioriter opgaverne i dine enkelte ansættelser, som passer til den type af job du søger.   Steens allerbedste jobsøgningsråd Gå all-in på researchdelen Kend dig selv, vid hvad du kan levere til virksomheden Tør have holdninger  Få det til at se godt ud – Det visuelle indtryk er vigtigt.   Hvor finder du Steen   Bogen hjemmeside hitmedjobbet.dk LinkedIn  Facebook Kraemer.dk   Go’ Jobjagt Diana  

Aleksander den store - var han en visjonær leder - eller var han en desillusjonert og forfylla mann? Vi gir ordet til elskerinnen hans, Phyllis.

Ingelise og Steen LandsyDenne lydfil skal du bare høre.Det er et interview med Ingelise og Steen Landsy. En optagelse jeg lavede på Kosmos Centeret i 2008. De er et fantastisk makkerpar der supplerer hinanden godt, og hvor de til fulde får det bedste ud af hinandens evner.Ingelise og Steen har undervist i åndsvidenskab, psykisk forståelse, personlig udvikling, clairvoyance og spiritualitet siden 1976. Flere tusinde kursister har nydt godt af deres ekspertise, hjertevarme og humor.De er folkene bag Kosmos-kurserne, og de arrangerer hvert år også en del spirituelle rejser. I 2010 kan du f.eks både komme med til Peru, Italien eller på retreat i Europa.Lydfilen er en spændende rejse gennem det spirituelle miljø fra 1968 og helt frem til i dag. Du får et indblik i deres historie og spirituelle vækst.Ingelise og Steen Landsy har undervist i Skandinavien, England og USA, og de er stifterne af Danmarks største new age magasin Nyt Aspekt som nu er udkommet i 41 år.De er pionerer indenfor det spirituelle miljø, og de er folkene der startede Sind, Krop og Ånd messen og løb den gang en kæmpe økonomisk risiko for at lave Danmarks første alternative messe som de stablede på benene i 1985. De lejede K.B. Hallen og 16.000 mennesker dukkede op den weekend, og folk stod i kø langt ud på gaden.Dette får du: Du hører i interviewet om personer der har været vigtige for Ingelises og Steens udvikling, samt for det spirituelle miljøs. Hør også om UFO-ugen, der trak 8000 mennesker til.Bladet UFO-Aspekt som senere skiftede navn til Nyt Aspekt.Deres personlige møde med den 88 år gamle Martinus.Om en sit down strejke i Aalborg, hvor kristne forsøgte at forhindre folk i at komme med på den alternative messe, som Ingelise og Steen stablede på benene der, efter den gigantiske succes i København.Huset ”Centret for Sind, Krop og Ånd” som de skabte i en baggård på Nørrebro.Historien om den spirituelle radiokanal Radio Lotus, som havde en 24 timers sendeflade om ugen, og hver morgen sendte ”den positive radioavis”.Med andre ord: Mød to entusiastiske ildsjæle der følger deres hjerte, stoler på og handler på de impulser de får, og på grund af dette har skabt og opnået alt det de står for i dag.Yderligere info. Deres hjemmeside: www.kosmoscenter.dk samt det holistiske magasin Nyt Aspekt www.nytaspekt.dkDu træffer dem også på telefon: (+45) 35821121Lydfilen varer 98 min og du kan høre den på harthimmer.dk/podcast Vælg lydfil / podcast nr. 75Interviewet er lavet af og tilhører Jette Harthimmer