Podcasts about svf

Dr. Larisa Likver is a pain management physician who shares secrets to help you overcome pain and injuries without surgery. New episodes of Welcome to Wellness released every Friday! Not listening on Spotify? Show notes at: https://www.ashleydeeley.com/w2w/larisalikver Episode brought to you by: ⁠⁠Dry Farm Wines⁠⁠ Episode brought to you by: ⁠⁠Thyroid Fixxr⁠⁠ (Code: WELCOMEWELLNESS) Episode brought to you by: ⁠⁠VieLight⁠⁠ (Code: DEELEY10) 4:49: Prolotherapy defined 9:41: Difference between Prolotherapy and Cortizone shots 13:25: How many injections do you need? 15:29: How long do results last? 18:52: Common injuries Dr Likver treats 20:03: Can Prolotherapy be combined with other therapies? 21:52: Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP Injection) 21:57: Ozone therapy 22:06:  Perineural Injection Treatments (PIT) 23:32: The best advice on nutrition (no, really!) 26:26: Stem cell injections 26:33: Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) 27:33: Prolotherapy for sport injuries and sport trauma 31:43: Success metrics 34:18: History of Prolotherapy 37:57: Dr. Likver's personal story into Prolotherapy 42:20: Dr Likver is a Prolotherapy patient herself! 48:33: Advice for someone consider surgery 50:54: Is it covered by insurance? 54:56: An enlightening joke Where to find Dr Larisa Likver: ⁠⁠Website⁠⁠ Call:  212-922-9030 Where to find Ashley Deeley: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ hello@ashleydeeley.com

Winter Warbirds RC event held at SVF in Phoenix,AZ. Lots of great pilots and fantastic aircraft were in attendance.

Entreprenörsskap, KRITIKSTORM PÅ VÅR YOUTUBE, produktutveckling och lansering. Allt detta och lite till i vårt avsnitt med Osman Ulusoy, country manager NexBlue. En ny utvecklare av laddboxar på den svenska marknaden. Hur tar man sig in i en ny bransch och vilka strategier funkar inte…???God lyssning ! Gäst: Osman Ulusoy, Country Manager NexBluehttps://www.linkedin.com/in/osman-ulusoy-57b80ba6/?originalSubdomain=seTill Youtube-avsnittet när vi installerar laddbox:https://youtu.be/6WHZQKSLCeQ?si=_9OuXfLVPZvDfgHjhttps://nexblue.com/svFölj oss på Youtube

Live from Nevada! Lots of oddness at the GSR! Legs, weight, and pains. Yep, there's a "dingy section' today. Disappointing kid updates. Kitchenaid NOT a baby gift. And California vs. Nevada. A SVF test! --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/gen-x-talks1/support

Prinášame Vám ďalší diel podcastu Na Bezblok! V prvej časti sme si zanalyzovali zápasy Slovenského pohára o trofej Štefana Pipu, ktoré nás čakajú už 11.2. V druhej časti prijal naše pozvanie bývalý reprezentačný blokár a kapitán Tomáš Kmeť! Od Tomáša sme sa okrem iného dozvedeli: ako sa dostal k angažmánom v Hachingu a Berlíne, o jeho pôsobení v Správnej rade SVF, koho favorizuje na zisk titulu a Slovenského pohára. Nezabudnite nás sledovať na Instagrame a Facebooku: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nabezblok/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100090629876704

With over 719 million people across the world living below the international poverty line and the current data indicating the world will miss its target of eliminating poverty by 2030, we dive into the issues facing these efforts, what international organizations are missing, and why it is so important to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) #1 as soon as possible. It is not by chance that the first SDG is the elimination of poverty in all its forms. Through a wide array of studies, conversations, observations, and engagements, the world recognizes that many different issues stem from poverty including crime, malnourishment, migration, and more. This is not only a problem for the Global South, but for the entire world, as poverty remains endemic in all countries (Iceland has the lowest poverty rate, at 4.5% of its population) and the SDG #1 promises to leave no one behind, while focusing on the most extreme forms of poverty first. However, since the start of the COVID-19 Pandemic, the world has seen the first rise in global poverty rates in over a generation. This issue is not going away soon, but local social entrepreneur, Marc Blumenthal, has a new approach that he believes will create sustainable systems designed to empower local communities to bring economic development to their own communities.In this episode we speak with Marc Blumenthal of Social Ventures Foundation and the EPIC program, and hear from him about how the top down approach of the global development agencies has failed those experiencing poverty and how his new social venture program will tackle the issue from the bottom up. By by-passing governments and working directly with the people, Marc believes his social ventures and social franchises can create economic drivers that are lead and run by the people in-need. Rather than funding the haves and expecting a trickle down effect, the Social Ventures Foundation looks to work with people on the bottom of the economic ladder, not only to build businesses, but to also provide social impact.  Marc Blumenthal has been involved in a variety of startups in the fields of Education, Medical Devices, Plasma Fusion, and Aerospace.  He founded SVF in 2017 and has been involved in the enterprise on a full-time basis. At the age of 19 he was involved in his first start-up, while attending the University of Pennsylvania. His second venture was designed around providing educational opportunities for millions of children across the Northeast, through The Learning Guild. After his time with the Learning Guild, he became Managing Director of a multi-million dollar limited investment partnership, which then led him to creating his own Venture Capital firm, Novations. He began the Social Ventures Foundation in response to a lack of sustainable resource allocation in the poverty reduction industry. Our mission is three-fold: to identify, promote, and invest in businesses of all sorts that have a product or service that lifts the livelihoods of the poor. Through this work, they engage directly with the people inthese communities to build sustainable paths to a better future, economically, socially, and communally. Contact Marc at: marc@socialventuresfoundation.org

I flew out to Chicago to interview Brett Harrison, who is the former President of FTX US President and founder of Architect.In his first longform interview since the fall of FTX, he speak in great detail about his entire tenure there and about SBF's dysfunctional leadership. He talks about how the inner circle of Gary Wang, Nishad Singh, and SBF mismanaged the company, controlled the codebase, got distracted by media, and even threatened him for his letter of resignation.In what was my favorite part of the interview, we also discuss his insights about the financial system from his decades of experience in the world's largest HFT firms.And we talk about Brett's new startup, Architect, as well as the general state of crypto post-FTX.After talking with Brett for 3 hours, I found him to be extremely intelligent, thoughtful, and ethical.Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.Similar episodesSide note: Paying the billsTo help pay the bills for my podcast, I've turned on paid subscriptions on Substack.No major content will be paywalled - please don't donate if you have to think twice before buying a cup of coffee.But if you have the means & have enjoyed my podcast, I would appreciate your support

Ryan Tomari, Erik Moulton and Ed Nunez deal with the hangover that was the UNM men's basketball, 77-76, last-second loss to Steve Alford and his Nevada Wolf Pack on Feb. 7.Alford moves to 8-0 against UNM since taking over the Nevada head coaching position.Kurt Roth from 505 Sports Venture Foundation joins The Pit Press to discuss NIL, its effects at UNM and the future of 505 SVF and UNM athletics.

In this episode, we talk about a paper in Austria titled, SVF-derived extracellular vesicles carry characteristic miRNAs in lipedema.

Huge day for the SVF fam! Excited to announce our NEW assistant coach Kimberly Rose Ciano!!! Our community just keeps on getting bigger and better, stoked to have Kim join us and help our clients reach their true potential!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tune in for the full episode... --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/sal-vittorio-jr/message

Podcast: The Lunar Society (LS 37 · TOP 2.5% )Episode: [Best] Bethany McLean - Enron, FTX, 2008, Musk, Frauds, & VisionariesRelease date: 2022-12-21This was one of my favorite episodes ever.Bethany McLean was the first reporter to question Enron's earnings, and she has written some of the best finance books out there. We discuss:* The astounding similarities between Enron & FTX,* How visionaries are just frauds who succeed (and which category describes Elon Musk),* What caused 2008, and whether we are headed for a new crisis,* Why there's too many venture capitalists and not enough short sellers,* And why history keeps repeating itself.McLean is a contributing editor at Vanity Fair (see her articles here) and the author of The Smartest Guys in the Room, All the Devils Are Here, Saudi America, and Shaky Ground.Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform.Follow McLean on Twitter. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes. If you enjoyed this episode, please share. Helps out a ton.Timestamps(0:04:37) - Is Fraud Over? (0:11:22) - Shortage of Shortsellers(0:19:03) - Elon Musk - Fraud or Visionary?(0:23:00) - Intelligence, Fake Deals, & Culture(0:33:40) - Rewarding Leaders for Long Term Thinking(0:37:00) - FTX Mafia?(0:40:17) - Is Finance Too Big?(0:44:09) - 2008 Collapse, Fannie & Freddie(0:49:25) - The Big Picture(1:00:12) - Frackers Vindicated?(1:03:40) - Rating Agencies(1:07:05) - Lawyers Getting Rich Off Fraud(1:15:09) - Are Some People Fundamentally Deceptive?(1:19:25) - Advice for Big Picture ThinkersTranscriptThis transcript was autogenerated and thus may contain errors.Dwarkesh Patel: the rapid implosion of a company worth tens of billions of dollars. Insider dealing and romantic entanglements between sister companies, a politically generous c e o, who is well connected in Washington, the use of a company's own stock as its collateral, the attempt, the short-lived attempt to get bought out by a previous competitor, and the fraudulent abuse of mark to market account.[00:01:00] We are not talking about ftx, we are talking about Enron, which my guest today, Bethany McClean, uh, first broke the story of and has written an amazing and detailed book about, uh, called The Smartest Guys in the Room. And she has also written, uh, a book about the housing crisis. All the devils are here, a book about Fannie and Freddy Shaky Ground, and a book about fracking Saudi America, all of which we'll get into.She's, in my opinion, the best finance nonfiction writer out there, and I'm really, really excited to have this conversation now. So, Bethany, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. Bethany McLean: Thank you so much for the, for the probably Undeserved Conference, for having me on the show. Dwarkesh Patel: My first question, what are the odds that Sbf read the smartest guys in the room and just followed it as a playbook, given the similarities there?Bethany McLean: You, you know, I, I love that idea. I have to, I have to admit, I guess I love that idea. I don't know. That would make me responsible for what, for what happened, . So maybe I don't love that idea. L let me take that back . [00:02:00] Anyway, but I, I, I actually think that, that, that even if he had read the book, it would never have occurred to him that, that there was a similarity because self-delusion is such a, Strong component of all of these stories of business gone wrong.It's very rare that you have one of the characters at the heart of this who actually understands what they're doing and understands that they're moving over into the dark side and thinks about the potential repercussions of this and chooses this path. Anyway, that's usually not the way these stories go.So it's entirely possible that Sbf studied Enron, knew all about it, and never envisioned that there were any similarities between that and what he was doing. Dwarkesh Patel: Oh, that's a fascinating, um, which I guess raises the question of what are we doing when we're documenting and trying to learn from books like yours?If somebody who is a, about to commit the same exact kind of thing can read that book and not realize that he's doing the same exact thing, is there something that just [00:03:00] prevents us from learning the lessons of history that we, we can never just, uh, get the analogy right, and we're just guided by our own delusions.Bethany McLean: Wasn't there a great quote that history rhymes, but it doesn't repeat. I'm Yeah. Relying on who it is who said that, but I think that's, that's absolutely true. Oh, I think it's important for all of us, those of us who are not gonna find ourselves at the center of, uh, giant fraud or, so, I hope, I think my time for that has passed.Maybe not you, but, um, I think it's important for all of us to understand what went wrong. And I, I do think these, I do think just there, there's a great value and greater understanding of the world without necessarily a practical payoff for it. So I think when something goes wrong on a massive societal level, it's really important to try to, to try to explain it.Human beings have needed narrative since the dawn of time, and we need narrative all, all, all the more now we need, we need to make sense of the world. So I like to believe. Process of making, trying to make sense of the world. , um, [00:04:00] has a value in, in and of itself. Maybe there is small, some small deterrence aspect to it in that I often think that if people understand more the process by which things go go wrong, that it isn't deliberate, that it's not bad people setting out to do bad things.It's human beings, um, at first convincing themselves even that they're doing the right thing and then ending up in a situation that they, they never meant to be in. And maybe on the margin that does, maybe on the margin that does, that does help because maybe it has deterred some people who, who would've started down that path, but for the fact that they now see that that's the, that's the usual path.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. That actually raises the next question I wanted to ask you. Bern Hobart, uh, he's a finance writer as well. He wrote a blog post, um, about, uh, I mean this was before FTX obviously, and he was talking about Enron and he said in the end, it actually looks like we fixed the precise problem. Enron represented.Nobody I know solely looks at gap [00:05:00] financials. Everybody ultimately models based on free cash flow, we're much more averse to companies that set up a deliberate conflict of interest between management and shareholders. And I guess there's a way in which you can read that and say, oh, it doesn't FTX prove I'm wrong.But, you know, there's another way you can look at it is that FTX deliberately set up outside the us. So there's a story to be told that actually we learned the lessons of Enron and, you know, uh, so remains obviously worked. Uh, that's why, you know, they were in The Bahamas and we haven't seen the scale fraud of that scale in, you know, the continental United States.Um, do, do you think that the FTX saga and I guess the absence of other frauds of that scale in America shows that. The regulations and this changed business and investment practices in the aftermath of Enron have actually. Bethany McLean: Well, I think they've probably worked in narrowly, written in, in the way in which the writer you quoted articulated, I think it would be very hard for the cfo, F O of a publicly traded company to set up other private [00:06:00] equity firms that he ran, that did all their business with his company.Because everybody would say That's Enron and it would be completely. On the nose. And so, and Sarbanes Oxley in the sense of, in the sense of helping to reign in corporate fraud of the sort that was practiced by Enron, which was this abuse of very specific accounting rules. Um, I think I, I, I think that worked.But you know, you say there hasn't been fraud on a scale like Enron up until perhaps f ftx, but you're forgetting the global financial crisis. Yeah. And then the end, the line between what happened at Enron. and, and what happened in the global financial crisis. It's not a matter of black and white. It's not a matter of, one thing was clear cut fraud and one thing great.We love these practices. Isn't this fantastic? This is the way we want business to operate. They're both somewhere in the murky middle. You know, a lot of what happened at Enron wasn't actually outright fraud. I've coined this phrase, legal fraud to describe, um, to describe what it is that, that, that, that happened at Enron.And a lot of what [00:07:00] happened in the global financial crisis was legal, hence the lack of prosecutions. But it's also not behavior that that leads to a healthy market or mm-hmm. , for that matter, a a a a healthy society. And so there's a reason that you had Sarbanes Oxley and what was it, eight short, short years later you had Dodd-Frank and so Riri broadly.I'm not sure Sarbanes actually did that much good. And what I mean by that is when President George Bush signed it into law in the Rose Garden, he gave this speech about how investors were now protected and everything was great and your, your ordinary investors could take comfort that the laws were meant to protect them from wrongdoing.And you compare that to the speech that President Barack Obama gave eight years later when he signed Don Frank into law in the Rose Garden. And it's remarkably similar that now ordinary investors can count on the rules and regulations keeping themself from people who are prey on their financial wellbeing.[00:08:00] And I don't think it was, it's, it's true in either case because our markets, particularly modern markets move and evolve so quickly that the thing that's coming out of left field to get you is never gonna be the thing you are protecting against. Mm. . Dwarkesh Patel: , but given the fact that Enron, as you say, was committing legal fraud, is it possible that the government, um, when they prosecuted skilling and Fastow and lay, they in fact, We're not, uh, they, they prosecuted them to a greater extent than the law as written at the time would have warranted.In other words, were, uh, was there something legally invalid in the, in this, in the quantity of sentence that they got? Is it possible? Bethany McLean: So that's a really, it, it's, it's a, I I get what you're asking. I think it's a really tricky question because I think in absolute terms, um, Enron needed to be prosecuted and needed to be prosecuted aggressively.And while I say it was legal fraud, that is for the most part, there was actually real fraud around, around, uh, but it's on the margin. It doesn't [00:09:00] entire, it doesn't explain the entirety of Enron's collapse. Much of what they did was using and abusing the accounting rules in order to create an appearance of economic reality.Nothing to do with actual, with actual reality. But then there was actual fraud in the sense that Andy Fasta was stealing money from these partnerships to benefit himself. And they were, if you believe, the core tenant of the prosecution, which was their, this agreement called Global Galactic that was signed by, that was between Andy fau and Jeff Skilling, where Jeff agreed that Andy's partnerships would never lose money.Then that invalidated all of the, all of the accounting, and that's the chief reason that that. That skilling was, was, was convicted, um, was that the jury believed the existence of this, of this, of this agreement that in, um, one set of insider stock sales, which, which we can talk about, which was also a really key moment relative to the, so in absolute terms, I don't know, it's, it's hard for me to, to say there was [00:10:00] such, Enron was such a, to a degree that is still surprising to me, such a, a watershed moment in our, in our country, far beyond business itself.it, it, it caused so much insecurity that about our retirements, our retirement assets safe. Can you trust the company where you work? That I think the government did, did have to prosecute aggressively, but relative to the financial crisis where a lot of people made off with a lot of money and never had to give any of it back, does it seem fair that, that, that Jeff Skilling went to jail for over a decade and no one involved in a major way in the financial crisis paid any price whatsoever?People didn't even really have to give up that much of the money they made then. Then it seems a little bit unfair. Yes, so I think it's, it's an absolute versus a relative Dwarkesh Patel: question. Yeah. Yeah. By the way, who do you think made more money? Um, the investment banks, uh, like, uh, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, um, from doing, [00:11:00] providing their services to Enron as the stock was going up, or Jim Chanos from shorting the stock?In absolute terms, who made more money? Bethany McLean: Oh, I think the investment banks for sure. I mean, they made, they made so much money in investment banking fees from, from, from Enron. But, you know, it's a good question. . , it's a good question actually, because I think Jim made a lot of money too, so, Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I, I, you've spoken about, I guess the usefulness and the shortage of short sellers des a sort of, uh, corrective on irrational exuberance.And I'm curious why you think that shortage exists in the first place. Like, if you believe in the efficient market hypothesis, you should think that, you know, if some company has terrible financials and implausible numbers, then people would be lining up to short it. And then you would never have a phenomenon like Enron.And so it's, it's, you know, it's so odd that you can. , you know, reporters who are basically ahead of the market in terms of predicting what's gonna happen. Uh, well, uh, how do you square that with like the efficient [00:12:00] market hypothesis? Well, do you Bethany McLean: believe in the efficient market hypothesis, ? Dwarkesh Patel: I, I, I'd like to, but I'm like trying to , trying to wrap my head around Enron.Bethany McLean: I, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm not sure how you. Can, unless you, unless you adopt Warren Buffett's point of view, and I'm gonna mangle the quote because, uh, but, but it's that the market in the short term is a voting machine in the long term. It's a weighing machine, right? Mm-hmm. , or is it the other way around? . Anyway, but the idea is that the market may be very efficient for a long, very inefficient, for a long period of time.But, but it does actually, rationality does actually work in, in, in the end. And I think I might believe that, but isn't it John Maynard Cas who said the market can remain irrational for a lot longer than you can remain solvent. And so I think that's true too. I think believing that the market is efficient and rational in the short term is just obviously wrongUm, but back to your question about short sellers, which is, which is interesting, you know, I think part of it is that there is still this, um, there certainly was a couple of [00:13:00] decades ago, and I think it still exists, this idea that. Owning stocks is Mom, American, and apple pie in shorting stocks somehow is bad and evil and rooting, rooting against America.And I remember going back to the Enron days, someone, people criticizing me, even other people in the press saying, but you took a tip from a short seller. They're biased. And I. , I would say. But, but, but wait, the analysts who have buy ratings on stocks and the portfolio managers who own those stocks, they're biased too.They want the stocks to go up. Everybody's biased. So the trick as a journalist is getting information from all sides and figuring out who you think is right and what makes sense. But it's not avoiding anybody with any bias. But it was really interesting that people saw the bias on the part of short sellers and did not see it on the part of, of, of Longs.And I think there is that preconception that exists broadly, that somehow you are doing something wrong and you're somehow rooting for a company's failure. And that this is, I don't know, anti-American if you, if, if you [00:14:00] short a stock. And so I think that's part of why there's, there's, there's a shortage of shortage of, of, of short sellers.Um, I think also, I mean, we've had. Incredible, unprecedented bull market for the last four decades as a result of falling interest rates, and especially in the decade before the pandemic hit, it was very, very difficult to make money shorting anything because everything went to the moon. Didn't matter if its numbers were good, if it was eventually unmasked to be somewhat fraudulent, , it stocks just went to the moon anyway.The riskier the better. And so it is only diehard short sellers that have managed to stick it out . Yeah, and I think, I think lastly, Jim Chano said this to me once, and I, I think it's true that he could find, dozens of people who were skilled enough to come, smart enough to come work for him.There's no shortage of that. People who are technically skilled and really smart, but being able to be contrarian for a long period of time, especially when the market is going against you, is a different sort [00:15:00] of person. It that it requires a completely different mindset to have everybody in the world saying, you're wrong to be losing money because the stock is continuing to go up and to be able to hold fast to your conviction.And I think that's another, uh, part of the explanation for why there are fewer short sellers. Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah, and that raised an interesting question about. Uh, venture capital, for example, where, or private markets in general? Um, at least in the public markets, there's shorting maybe in shortage, but it, it is a possible mechanism, whereas, uh, I'm a programmer.So, you know, if, if like a one guy thinks the company's worth a hundred million dollars and everybody else thinks it's not, you know, the company will still be, uh, the price will still be said by the, you know, the person who's a believer. Um, does that increase the risk of some sort of bubble in venture capital and in technology?Um, and I guess in private markets generally, if they're, they're not public, is that something you worry about that they're, they will be incredible bubbles built up if there's a lot of money that's floating around in these Bethany McLean: circles. . Well, I think we're seeing that now, [00:16:00] right? And I don't think it's a coincidence that FTX and Theranos were not publicly traded companies, right?Mm-hmm. . Um, there's a certain sort of, uh, black box quality to these companies because people aren't charting them and aren't, aren't, and aren't, you know, whispering to journalists about that. That there's something wrong here and there aren't publicly available financials for people to dig through and look, look, and look at the numbers.So now I don't think that's a coincidence. And I do think this gigantic move into private assets has been, um, probably not great for the, for the, for the, for the. for the, for the safety of the system. And you'd say, well, it's just institutional investors who can afford to lose money who are losing money.But it's really not because institutional investors are just pension fund money. Mm-hmm. and in some cases now mutual fund money. So that distinction that the people who are investing in this stuff can afford to lose it is not really true. Um, so I don't, I don't like that rationalization. I think we're gonna see how that plays out.There was [00:17:00] just a really good piece in the Economist about private equity marks on their portfolio companies and how they are still looked to be much higher than what you would think they should be given the carnage in the market. And so all of what, what actually things are really worth in private markets, both for venture capital firms and for private equity firms, Is absent another, another bubble starting, starting in the markets.I think we're gonna see how that plays out over, over the next year. And it might be a wake up call for, for a lot of people. Um, you know, all that, all that said, it's an interesting thing because investors have been very complicit in this, right? In the sense that a lot of investors are absolutely delighted to have prep, to have their, their private, um, their private investments marked at a high level.They don't have to go to the committee overseeing the investments and say, look, I lost 20% of your money the way they might, um, if, if the numbers were public. And so that the ability of these of private investors to smooth as they call it, the, the, the returns is, is it's [00:18:00] been, it's been part of the appeal.It hasn't been a negative, it's been a positive. And so I would say that investors who wanted this moving are. Art might be getting what they deserve except for the pointing made earlier that it isn't, it isn't their money. It's, it's the money of, of teachers and firefighters and individual investors a around the country, and that's, that's problematic.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. Being in the world of technology and being around people in it has. made me, somewhat shocked when I read about these numbers from the past. For example, when I'm reading your books and they're detailing things that happened in the nineties or the two thousands, and then you realize that the salary that Hank Paulson made a c e o of Goldman, or that skilling made as, you know, um, c e o of Enron, you know, I, it's like I have friends who are my age, like 22 year olds who are raising seed rounds, , that are as big as like these people's salaries.And so it just feels like the, these books were, you have $50 billion frauds or, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars of collapse and the individuals there, um, it just feels like they, it's missing a few zeros, uh, [00:19:00] because of the delusion of the private markets. But, um, but speaking of short sellers and speaking of private equity, um, I think it'd be interesting to talk about sbf.So, you know, your 2018 Vanity Fair article I thought was really interesting about, you know, sbf factory in Buffalo H How, how do you think back on Tesla and sbf now, given the fact that. The stock did continue to rise afterwards, and the factory, I believe, was completed and it's, I hired the 1500 or so people that had promised New York State, uh, is sbf just a fraud?Who can pull it off? And so he's a visionary. How, how do you think about sbf in the aftermath? Bethany McLean: So I don't think that's right about Buffalo and I have to look, but I don't think they ended up, I mean, the Solar City business that Tesla has pretty much collapsed. I don't think people haven't gotten their roofs.There was just a piece about how they're canceling some of their roof installations. So sbf has repeatedly made grand visions about that business that haven't played out. And I will check this for you post the podcast, but I don't think [00:20:00] if there is employment at that factory in, in Buffalo, it's not because they're churn out solar, solar, solar products that are, that are, that are doing.What was originally promised. So I guess I, I think about that story in a, in a couple of ways. It definitely, um, it was not meant to be a piece about Tesla. It was meant to be a piece that shown a little bit of light on how sbf operates and his willingness to flout the rules and his reliance on government subsidies, despite the fact that he, um, presents himself as this libertarian free, free, free market free marketeer, and his willingness to lie to, to, to, on some level enrich himself, which also runs counter to the Elon sbf narrative that he doesn't care about making money for, for himself.Because the main reason for Teslas to by Solar City was that Solar City had the main reason, was it Tes, that was, that Solar City had, that, that sbf and his, and his and his relatives had extended the these loans to Solar City that were gonna go. [00:21:00] There were gonna be lo all the money was gonna be lost at Solar City when bankrupt.And by having Tesla buy it, sbf was able to bail himself out, um, as, as as well. And I also think a good reason for the, for the, for, and it brings us to the present time, but a reason for the acquisition was that sbf knows that this image of himself as the invincible and vulnerable who can always raise money and whose companies always work out in the end, was really important.And if Solar City had gone bankrupt, it would've cast a big question mark over over sbf, over over the sbf narrative. And so I think he literally couldn't afford to let Solar City go bankrupt. Um, all of that said, I have, I have been, and was I, I was quite skeptical of Tesla and I thought about it in, in, in, in.And I always believed that the product was great. I just, mm-hmm. wasn't sure about the company's money making potential. And I think that, that, it's something I started thinking about, um, background, the Solar City time, maybe earlier, but this line, something I've talked about [00:22:00] before. But this line between a visionary and a fraudster.You know, you think that they're on two opposite ends of the spectrum, but in reality they're where the ends of the circle meet. Characteristics of one. One has that many of the characteristics of the other. And sometimes I think the only thing that really separates the two is that the fraudster is able to keep getting mo raising money in order to get through the really difficult time where he or she isn't telling the truth.And then they, that person goes down in history as a visionary. Um, but because no one ever looks back to the moment in time when they were lying, the fraudster gets caught in the middle. Um, so Enron's Lo lost access to to the capital markets lost AC access to funding as the market collapsed after the.com boom.And people began to wonder whether skilling was telling the truth about Enron's broadband business. And then there were all the disclosures about Andy fasa partnerships if Enron had been able to continue raising money, Business of Enron's called Enron Broadband might well have been Netflix. It was Netflix ahead of its time.So Enron just got caught in the middle and all [00:23:00] the fraud, all the fraud got exposed . Um, but that's not because Jeff Skilling wasn't a visionary who had really grand plans for, for, for, for the future. So I think sbf falls somewhere in that spectrum of, of, of fraudster and visionary. And what's gonna be really interesting why I said that this, we bring it to the present time about what happens to the mu narrative.If something fails is what happens. Yeah. Is as the world watch watches Twitter implode, um, what does that mean then for the Elon sbf narrative overall? Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. Um, going back to the Smartest Guys is the Room, the title obviously suggests something about. The, I guess in general, the ability and the likelihood of very smart people committing fraud or things of that sort.Um, but you know, Begar Jones has this book called Hi Mind, where he talks about how the smarter people are more likely to cooperate in prisoners dilemma type situations. They have longer time preference. And one of the things you've written about is the problem in corporate America is people having shorter, [00:24:00] um, uh, you know, doing two too big time discounting.So, uh, given that trend we see in general of greater Cooperativeness, um, and other kinds of traits of more intelligent people, do you think the reason we often find people like S B F and skilling running big frauds just by being very intelligent, is it just that on, on average smarter people, maybe less likely to commit fraud, but when they do commit fraud, they do it at such garat scales and they're able to do it at such gar scales that it just brings down entire empires?How, how, how do you think about the relationship between intelligence and fraud? . Bethany McLean: That's interesting. Um, I'm not sure I know a coherent answer to that. Um, smartest guys in the room as a title was a little bit tongue in cheek. It wasn't meant to say, these guys actually are the smartest guys in the room. It was, it, it was a little bit, it was a little bit ironic, but that doesn't take away from the really good question that you asked, which is what, what, what is that relationship?I, I mean, I think if you look at the history of corporate fraud, you are not going to find unintelligent people having [00:25:00] been the masterminds behind this. You're gonna find really, really, really smart, even brilliant people having, having, having been, been behind it, maybe some at part of that is this linkage between the visionary and the fraud star that so many of these, of these corporate frauds are people who have qualities of the visionary and to.The qualities of, of a visionary, you have to have a pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty high intelligence. Um, and I do think so many of these stories are, are about then self delusion. So I don't think smart people are any less likely to suffer from self delusion than dumb people. And they're probably more likely to, because you can rationalize, you know, the smart person's ability to rationalize just about anything they wanna rational rationalize is pretty profound.Whereas perhaps someone who doesn't have quite the same, the same brain power isn't gonna be able to create a narrative under which their actions are blameless and they're doing the right thing. So I think sometimes, so maybe there is some sort of relationship [00:26:00] there that somebody more qualified than I am would have to study between smart people's ability to, to, to rationalize just about anything as a way of, as part of the path to self delusion and part of the path by which these things happen.Yeah, that's completely, that's completely , that's Bethany theory. There's absolutely nothing to back that . I'm just Dwarkesh Patel: well clear. Let's do some more speculation. So, um, one of the things, uh, John Ray talked about in his testimony, um, was it two days ago where he said that, you know, FTX had done $5 billion of investments and deals in the last year, and most of those investments were worth a fraction of the value that FTX paid for them.And we see this also in, obviously in Enron, right? With, uh, broadband and with, um, ul, or is that how pronounce it, but basically their international department. Yeah. Um, what is this, uh, this obsession with deal making for its own sake? Is that to appease investors and make them think a lot's going on, is that because of [00:27:00] the hubris of the founder, of just wanting to set up a big empire as fast as possible, even if you're getting a bad sticker price?What, why do we see this pattern of just, you know, excessive deal making for its own sake? Bethany McLean: That's an interesting question too. I'm not sure that that's, um, limited to companies that go splat dramatically. There's a lot of, a lot of deal making in, in corporate America has that same frenzied quality. Um, I haven't seen an updated study on, on this in a, in a long time, but, you know, I began my career working as an analyst in an m and a department at at at Goldman Sachs.And. Definitely deals are done for the sake of doing deals. And I once joked that synergies are kind of like UFOs. A lot of people claim to have seen them, but there's no proof that they actually exist. , and again, I haven't seen an updated study on, on, on this, but there was one years back that showed that most m and a transactions don't result in increased value for shareholders.And most synergies, most promised synergies never materialize. [00:28:00] Just getting bigger for the sake of getting bigger and doing deals for the short term value of showing Wall Street a projection. That earnings are gonna be so much higher even after the cost of the debt that you've taken on. And that they're these great synergies that are gonna come about from, from combining businesses.So I don't know that either the frenzy deal doing or deal doing deals gone wrong is, um, solely limited to people who are committing fraud. , I think it's kinda across the spectrum. , . Dwarkesh Patel: Um, um, well one, one thing I find interesting about your books is how you detail that. And correct me if this is the wrong way to read them, but that, uh, incentives are not the only thing that matter.You know, there there's this perception that, you know, we've set up bad incentives for these actors and that's why they did bad things. But also, um, the power of one individual to shape a co co company's culture and the power of that culture to enable bad behavior, whether scaling at Enron or with Clarkson Right at Moody's.Yeah. Um, is that a good, good way of reading your books or how, how do you think [00:29:00] about the relative importance of culture and incentive? Bethany McLean: I think that's really fair. But incentives are part of culture, right? If, if you've set up a culture where, where how you're valued is what you get paid, I think it's a little, it's a little difficult to separate those two things out because, because the, the incentives do help make the culture, but for sure culture is incredibly, um, incredibly compelling.I've often thought and said that if I had, when I was leaving my short lived career in investment banking, if I had, if I had gotten in some of the head hunters I was talking to, if one of them had said, there's this great, really energetic, interesting energy company down in Houston, , why don't interview there?If I had gone there, would I have been a whistleblower or would I have been a believer? And I'd like to believe I would've been a whistleblower, but I think it's equally likely that I would've been a believer. Culture is so strong. It creates this. What's maybe a miasma that you can't see outside?I remember a guy I talked to who's a trader at Enron, really smart guy, and he [00:30:00] was like, after the, after the bankruptcy, he said, of course, if we're all getting paid based on creating reported earnings and there's all this cash going out the door in order to do these deals that are creating reported earnings, and that's the culture of the entire firm, of course it's not gonna work economically.He said, I never thought about it. . It just didn't, it didn't, it didn't occur to me. And I think the more compelling the CEO o the more likely you are to have that kind of mass delusion. I mean, there's a reason cult exist, right? . We, we are as human beings, remarkably susceptible to.Visionary leaders. It's just, it's the way the human brain is wired. We, we wanna believe, and especially if somebody has the ability to put a vision forward, like Jeff Gilling did at Enron, like Elizabeth Holmes did it Theranos like SPF F did, where you feel like you are in the service of something greater by helping this, vision, , actualize then, then you're, particularly susceptible.And I think that is the place where [00:31:00] incentives don't quite explain things. That is, there is this very human desire to matter, to do something important. Mm-hmm to be doing something that's gonna change the world. And when somebody can tap into that desire in people that feeling that what you're doing isn't just work in a paycheck and the incentives you have, but I mean, I guess it is part of the incentive, but that you're part of some greater good.That's incredibly powerful. Yeah. Dwarkesh Patel: It's what we all speaking of. We all wanna matter. . Yeah. Speaking of peoples psychology, uh, crime and punishment, underrated or overrated as a way to analyze the psychology of people like scaling and S B F or maybe SBF specifically because of the utilitarian nature of SB F'S crime?Um, Bethany McLean: I think it's, I think it's underrated, overrated. I'm not sure anybody. , I'm not sure anybody has ever proven that jail sentences for white collar criminals do anything to deter subsequent white collar crime. Mm-hmm. , and I think one part of this is the self delusion that I've, that I talked about. Nobody thinks, [00:32:00] oh, I'm doing the same thing as Jeff Skilling did at Enron, and if I, and if I do this, then I too might end up in jail.Therefore, I don't wanna do this. I just don't think that's the way the, the, the, the, the thought process works. I think Elizabeth Holmes at Theranos, probably for the most part, convinced herself that this was going to work, and that if you just push forward and push hard enough and keep telling people what they wanna hear and keep being able to raise money, it's gonna work.You know, if. . If, if you pause to think, well, what if it doesn't work and I've lied and I go to jail, then, then you'd stop right, right then and there. So I think that, I think that, that I'm, I'm not, I'm not sure it's much of a deterrent. I remember, and partly I'm, I'm biased because I remember a piece, my co-author Peter Alkin, and I wrote out right after Jess Gilling and Kenley were, were convicted and can lay, we're we're convicted.And we wrote a piece for Fortune in which we said that the entire world has changed. Now that corporate executives are, um, are, are put on high alert that behavior in the gray area will no longer be tolerated and that it will be aggressively prosecuted. And this was spring of [00:33:00] 2006 and the events that caused the global financial crisis were pretty well underway.It didn't. Do much to prevent the global financial crisis. Mm-hmm. , Enron's, Enron's jail time, didn't do anything to present, prevent, Elizabeth Holmes doesn't seem to have done anything to change what Sbf was doing. So I just, I, I just, I'm, I'm, I'm not sure, I'm sure a psychologist or somebody who specializes in studying white color crime could probably make a argument that refutes everything I said and that shows that has had a deterring effect.But I just, I just don't think that people who get themselves into this situation, con, con, consciously think, this is what I'm doing. Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. Um, speaking of other incentives, stock options, uh, you've spoken about how that creates short-term incentives for the executives who are making decisions. If you wanted to set up an instrument that aligned an executive or a leader's compensation with the long-term performance of a company, what would that look like?W would you have the options of less than 10 years instead of a [00:34:00] year? H how would you design it? How do you usually design a compensation scheme to award long-term thinking? Bethany McLean: If I could do that, I should ru rule the world . I think that very sweet. I think that is one of the really tough, um, problems confronting boards or anybody who is determining anybody who's determining stock options and that almost anybody who's determining compensation and that most compensation schemes seem to have really terrible unintended consequences.They look really good on paper. And then as they're implemented, it turns out that there was a way in which they accomplished exactly the opposite of, uh, thing the people who designing them wanted, wanted them to accomplish. I mean, if you think back to the advent of stock options, what could sound better?Right. Giving management a share of the company such that if, if, if shareholders did well, that they'd do well, nobody envisioned the ways in which stock options could be repriced. The ways in which meeting earnings targets could lead to gaming the ways in which the incentive of stock-based [00:35:00] compensation could lead to people trying to get anything they could in order to get the stock price higher and cash out when they're, as soon as their stock options vested.So, and even there was, there was, the whole valiant saga was fascinating on this front because the people who designed Mike Pearson's compensation package as ceo e o Valiant, they were convinced that this was absolutely the way to do it. And he got bigger and bigger, um, stock option incentives for hitting certain, for having the stock achieve certain levels.But of course, that creates this incredible bias to just get the stock to go up no matter, no matter what else you do. Um, it does seem to me that vesting over the long term is. is, is a much better way to go about things. But then do you create incentives for people to play games in order to get the stock lower at, at various points where there's about to be a stock optional board so they have a better chance of having directions be, be worth, be worth something over the long term.And do you, particularly on Wall Street there is this, or in firms where this sort of stuff matters the most? There [00:36:00] is this, there was this clearing out of dead wood that happened where people got paid and they got outta the way and made way for younger people. And I don't know, it was a harsh culture, but maybe it made sense on some level.And now at least I've been told with much longer vesting periods, you have people who don't wanna let go. And so you have more of a problem with people who should have retired, stick sticking around instead of in, in, instead of clearing out. And then it also becomes a question, How much money is, is enough.So if somebody is getting millions of dollars in short-term compensation and then they have a whole bunch more money tied up in long-term compensation, do the long-term numbers matter? At what point do they, do they, do they really matter? I mean, if you gave me $5 million today, I'm not so sure I'd really care if I were getting another $5 million in 10 years.Right. ? Yeah. So, so I think all of that is, is it, it's, I'm not, I'm not sure there's a perfect compensation system. All things considered though, I think longer term is, is probably better, [00:37:00] but. Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah, I didn't think about that downside of the long investing period. That's so interesting there. I guess there is no free lunch.Uh, so with Enron, um, it, it was clear that there was a lot of talent at the firm and that you had these companies and these trading firms launch at the aftermath by people who left Enron, kinder Morgan and John Arnold's, um, uh, Sintas, uh, that were wildly profitable and did well. Do you think we'll see the same thing with FTX, that while Sbf himself and maybe the, his close cadre were frauds, there actually was a lot of great trading and engineering talent there that are gonna start these very successful firms in the aftermath.Bethany McLean: That's, that's interesting. And just, just for the sake of clarification, kinder Morgan was actually started years before Enron's collapsed, when Rich Kinder, who was vying with Jeffs skilling in a sense, to become Chief Operating Officer. Um, Ken Lay, picked Jeffs skilling and Kinder left. Mm-hmm. and took a few assets and went to create Kinder, kinder Morgan.But your overall point, I'm just clarifying your overall point holds, there were a lot of people who [00:38:00] left Enron and went on to do, to have pretty, pretty remarkable careers. I think the answer with ftx, I bet there will be some for sure. But whether they will be in the crypto space, I guess depends on your views on the long-term viability of, of, of the crypto space.And I have never , it's funny is crypto exploded over the last couple of years. I was, I've been working on this book about the pandemic and it's been busy and difficult enough that I have not lifted my head to, to think about much else. And I always thought, I don't get it. I don't understand , I mean, I understand the whole argument about the blockchain being valuable for lots of transactions and I, I get that, but I never understood crypto itself and I thought, well, I just need to, as soon as this book is done, I just need to put a month into understanding this because it's obviously an important, important enough part of our world that I need to figure it out.So now I think, oh, Okay, maybe I didn't understand it for a reason and maybe, um, maybe there isn't anything to understand and I've just saved myself a whole life of crime because it's all gone. And you have [00:39:00] people like Larry Fink at BlackRock saying, whole industry is gonna implode. It's done. And certainly with the news today, this morning of finances auditor basically saying We're out.Um, I, I don't, I don't know how much of it was, how much of it was, is, was a Ponzi scheme. You might know better than I do. And so I don't know what's left after this whole thing implodes. It's a little bit like, there is an analogy here that when Enron imploded, yes, a lot of people went on to start other successful businesses, but the whole energy trading business is practiced by kind of under capitalized, um, um, energy firms went away and that never came back.Yeah. And so I, I, I don't, I don't know, I'm, it'll be, I, I don't know. What do you. The Dwarkesh Patel: time to be worried will be when Bethany McLean writes an article titled Is Bitcoin Overvalued for the Audience. My Moments on That ? Yeah, for the audience that, that was, I believe the first skeptical article about Enron's, um, stock price.Yeah. Uh, and it was titled [00:40:00] Is Enron Overvalued. In aftermath understated, , title. But , Bethany McLean: , I joked that that story should have won, won, won awards for the NICU title and business journalism history. , given that the company was bankrupt six months later was overpricedDwarkesh Patel: Um, uh, well, let me ask a bigger question about finance in general. So finance is 9% of gdp, I believe. How much of that is the productive use and thinking and allocation of the, uh, the capital towards their most productive ends? And how much of that is just zero sum or negative sum games? Um, if, if you had to break that down, like, is 9% too high, do you think, or is it just.I think it's Bethany McLean: too high. I have no idea how to think about breaking it down to what the proper level should be. But I think there are other ways to think about how you can see that in past decades it hasn't been at the right level when you've had all sorts of smart kids. Um, Leaving, leaving business school and leaving college and heading into [00:41:00] finance and hedge funds and private equity is their career of choice.I think that's a sign that that finance is too big when it's sucking up too much of, of, of the talent of the country. Um, and when the rewards for doing it are so disproportionate relative to the rewards of of, of doing other things. Um, the counter to that is that there've also been a lot of rewards for starting businesses.And that's probably, I think, how you want it to be in a, in a product. In a productive economy. So I think the number is, is too high. I don't know how to think about what it should be other than what a, actually, a former Goldman Sachs partner said this to me when I was working on all the devils are here, and she said that finance is supposed to be like the, the substrata of our world.It's supposed to be the thing that enables other things to happen. It's not supposed to be the world itself. So the, the role of a financial system is to enable businesses to get started, to provide capital. That's what it's supposed to be. It's the lubricant that enables business, but it's not supposed to be the thing itself.Right. And it's become the thing itself. [00:42:00] You've, you've, you've, you've, you've got a problem. Um, um, and I think the other, Dwarkesh Patel: there's your article about crypto , that paragraph right there. . Bethany McLean: There you go. That's, that's a good, um, and I think, I think the other way, you, you, you can see, and perhaps this is way too simplistic, but the other way I've thought about it is that how can it be if you can run a hedge fund and make billions of dollars from, and have five people, 10 people, whatever it is, versus starting a company that employs people mm-hmm.and changes a neighborhood and provides jobs and, you know, provides a product that, that, that, that, that improves people's lives. It, it is a shame that too much of the talent and such a huge share of the financial rewards are going to the former rather than the latter. And that just can't mean good things for the future.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. And I, you know, when people criticize technology, for example, for the idea that, you know, these people who would've been, I don't know, otherwise teachers or something, they're, you know, making half a million dollars at Google. [00:43:00] Um, and I think like when I was in India, people were using Google Maps to get through the streets in Mumbai, which is, which is unimaginable to me before going there that, you know, you would be able to do that with, um, a service built out of Silicon Valley.And so, Yeah, I think that actually is a good allocation of capital and talent. I, I'm not, I'm not sure about finance. Um, yeah, Bethany McLean: I think I, I, I agree with you. I think there are other problems with Google and with the, the social media giants, but, but they are real businesses that employ people, that make products that have had, uh, huge.Um, impact on on, on people's, on people's lives. So in, in that sense, it's very different than a private equity firm, for instance, and especially private equity, even more so than hedge funds draws my ire. Mm-hmm. , because I think one of the reasons they, that it, they've been able to make part of the financialization of our economy has been due to super, super low interest rates and low interest rates that have enabled so many people to make so much money in finance are not, they're just a gift.It wasn't because these people were uniquely smart, they just [00:44:00] found themselves in a great moment in time. And the fact that they now think they're really smart because money makes me crazy. Dwarkesh Patel: Um, are Fanny and Freddy America special purpose entities? Are they our Alameda? It's just the way we hide our debt and uh, that's interesting.Yeah. Bethany McLean: Well, I guess we, you know what? I don't know anymore because, so I last wrote about them when was it in 2016 and I don't know now. No, you're right. Their, their debt is still off, off, off balance sheet. So Yeah, in a lot of ways they, they were. . I would argue though that the old Fanny and Freddy were structured more honestly than, than the new Fanny and Freddy, that it really is conservatorship that have made them, um, that have made them America's off balance sheet entities, because at least when they were their own independent entities.Yes, there was this odd thing known as the implicit guarantee, which is when you think about, back to your point about efficient markets, how can you possibly believe there's an as such a thing as an efficient market when their [00:45:00] Fanny and Freddy had an implicit guarantee, meaning it wasn't real. There was no place where it was written down that the US government would bail Fanny and Freddie out in a crisis, and everybody denied that it existed and yet it did exist.Yeah. Dwarkesh Patel: No, but we, I feel like that confirms the official market hypothesis, right? The, the market correctly, they thought that mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddy would have governments. Uh, okay, okay. You might be father Bethany McLean: and they did . You might be right. I, I, I think what I was getting at you, you might be right.I think what I was getting at is that it is such a screwed up concept. I mean, how can you possibly, when I first, when people were first explaining this to me, when I first read about Fanny and Freddie, I was like, no, no, wait. This is American capitalism . This is, no, wait. What? I don't, I don't understand . Um, um, so yeah, but I, I, I, I think that Fanny and Freddie, at least with shareholders that were forced to bear some level of, of the risks were actually a more honest way of going about this whole screwed up American way of financing mortgages than, than the current setup is.Dwarkesh Patel: What [00:46:00] is the future of these firms? Or are they just gonna say in conservatorship forever? Or is there any developments there? Well, what's gonna happen to them? Bethany McLean: The lawsuit, the latest lawsuit that could have answered that in some ways ended in a mistrial. Um, I don't think, I don't, I don't think unfortunately anybody in government sees any currency in, and I mean, currency in the broad sense, not in the literal sense of money in, in taking this on.And unfortunately, what someone once said to me about it, I think remains true and it's really depressing, but is that various lawmakers get interested in Fannie and Freddy. They engage with it only to figure out it's really, really goddamn complicated. Mm-hmm. and that, and that any kind of solution is gonna involve angering people on one side of the aisle or another and potentially angering their constituent constituents.And they slowly back away, um, from doing anything that could, that, that could affect change. So I think we have a really unhealthy situation. I don't think it's great for these two [00:47:00] entities to be in conservatorship, but at this point, I'm not sure it's gonna change. Dwarkesh Patel: Yep. Speaking of debt and mortgages, um, so total household debt in the United States has been, uh, climbing recently after it's, it's like slightly d decline after 2008, but I think in quarter three alone it increased 350 billion and now it's at 16.5 trillion.Uh, the total US household debt, should we worried about this? Are, are, are we gonna see another sort of collapse because of this? Or what, what should we think about this? Bethany McLean: I don't know. I don't know how to think about that because it's too tied up in other things that no one knows. Are we going to have a recession?How severe is the recession going to be? What is the max unemployment rate that we're gonna hit if we do, if we do have a recession? And all of those things dictate how to, how to think about that number. I. Think consumer debt is embedded in the bowels of the financial system in the same way mortgages were.And in the end, the, the, the [00:48:00] problem with the financial crisis of 2008, it wasn't the losses on the mortgages themselves. It was the way in which they were embedded in the plumbing of the financial system. Mm-hmm. and ways that nobody understood. And then the resulting loss of confidence from the fact that nobody had understood that slash lies had been told about, about that.And that's what caused, that's what caused everything to, to collapse. Consumer debt is a little more visible and seeable and I, I don't think that it has that same, um, that same opaque quality to it that, that mortgage backed securities did. I could be, I could be wrong. I haven't, I haven't, I haven't dug into it enough, enough to understand enough to understand that.But you can see the delinquencies starting to climb. Um, I mean, I guess you could on, on, on mortgages as well, but there was this, there was this profound belief with mortgages that since home prices would never decline, there would never be losses on these instruments because you could always sell the underlying property for more than you had [00:49:00] paid for it, and therefore everything would be fine.And that's what led to a lot of the bad practices in the industry is that lenders didn't think they had to care if they were screwing the home buyer because they always thought they could take the home back and, and, and, and, and make more money on it. And consumer debt is, is unsecured. And so it's, it's, it's different.I think people think about it differently, but I'd have. I'd have to, I'd have to do some more homework to understand where consumer debt sits in the overall architecture of the financial industry. Dwarkesh Patel: I, I, I'm really glad you brought up this theme about what does the overall big picture look like? I feel like this is the theme of all your books that people will be, So obsessed with their subsection of their job or, or that ar area that they won't notice that, um, broader trends like the ones you're talking about.And in Enron it's like, why, why, why do we have all these special purpose entities? What is the total debt load of Enron? Um, or with the, you know, mortgage back securities a similar kind of thing, right? What, what, uh, maybe they weren't correlated in the past, [00:50:00] but what's that? Do we really think that there's really no correlation, um, uh, between, uh, delinquencies across the country?Um, so that, that kind of big picture, think. Whose job is that today? Is it journalists? Is it short sellers? Is it people writing on ck? Who's doing that? Is it anybody's job? Is, is it just like, uh, an important role with nobody assigned to it? Bethany McLean: I think it's the latter. I think it's an important role with nobody, with nobody assigned to it, and there there is a limit.I mean, , I hate to say this, it is not, uh, um, it is not an accident that many of my books have been written. That's probably not fair. It's not true of my book un fracking, but that some of my books have been written after the calamity happened. So they weren't so much foretelling the calamity as they were unpacking the calamity after it happened, which is a different role.And as I said at the start of our conversation, I think an important one to explain to people why this big, bad thing took, took place. But it's not prediction, I don't know, as people that were very good at, at prediction, um, they tried [00:51:00] to set up, what was it called? In the wake of the global financial crisis, they established this thing called fsoc, and now I'm forgetting what the acronym stands for.Financial Security Oversight Committee. And it's supposed to be this, this body that does think about these big picture. That thinks about the ways, the ways an exam, for example, in which mortgage backed securities were, um, were, were, were, were, were, were, were repopulating through the entire financial system and ways that would be cause a loss to be much more than a loss.That it wouldn't just be the loss of money and that security, it would echo and magnify. And so that there are people who are supposed to be thinking about it. But I think, I think it's, it's, it's really hard to see that and. In increasingly complex world, it's even, it's even harder than it was before, because the reverberations from things are really hard to map out in, in, in advance, and especially when some part of those reverberations are a loss of confidence, then all bets [00:52:00] are off because when confidence cracks, lots of things fall apart.But how do you possibly analyze in any quantitative way the the risk that that confidence will collapse? Mm-hmm. . So I think it's, I think, I think, I think it's difficult. That said, and of course I am talking my own book here, I don't think that the lack of the, the increased financial problems of journalism really help matters in that respect, because in an ideal world, you want a lot of people out there writing and thinking about various pieces of this, and then maybe somebody can come along and see the.Pieces and say, oh my God, there's this big picture thing here that we all need to be thinking about. But there's, there's a kind of serendipity in the ability to do that one, that one that the chances, I guess the best way to say that is the chances of that serendipity are dramatically increased by having a lot of people out there doing homework, um, on the various pieces of the puzzle.And so I think in a world, particularly where local news has been decimated mm-hmm. , um, the [00:53:00] chances of that sort of serendipity are, are definitely lower. And people may think, oh, it doesn't matter. We still got national news. We've got the Washington Post, we've got the Wall Street Journal, we've got the New York Times.Um, I would love to have somebody do a piece of analysis and go back through the New York Times stories and see how many were sparked by lp, a piece in the local paper that maybe you wouldn't even notice from reading the New York Times piece, because it'd be in like the sixth paragraph that, oh yeah, credit should go to this person at this local paper who started writing about this.But if you no longer have the person at the local paper who started writing about this, You know, it's, it's, it's, it's less likely that the big national piece gets written. And I think that's a part of the implosion of local news, that people, a part of the cost of the implosion of local news that people don't really understand the idea that the national press functions at, at the same level, um, without local news is just not true.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. And, but even if you have the local news, and I, that's a really important point, but even if you have that local news, there still has to be somebody whose job it is to synthesize it all together. And [00:54:00] I'm curious, what is the training that requires? So you, I mean, your training is, you know, math and English major and then working at working in investment banking.Um, is that the, uh, I mean, obviously the anecdotal experience then equals one, seems that that's great training for synthesizing all these pieces together. But what is the right sort of education for somebody who is thinking about the big picture? Bethany McLean: I, I don't, I don't know.And there may be, there may be, there are probably multiple answers to that question, right? There's probably no one, one right answer for me. In, in the end. My, my math major has proven to be pivotal. Even though , my mother dug up these, um, my, my parents were moving and so my mother was going through all her stuff and she dug up these, some my math work from, from college.Literally, if it weren't for the fact that I recognized my own handwriting, I would not recognize these pages on pages of math formula and proofs. And they're like, get gibberish to me now. So , but I, but I still think that math has, so I do not wanna exaggerate my mathematical ability at this stage of [00:55:00] the game.It's basically no. But I do think that doing math proofs any kind of formal, any kind of training and logic is really, really important because the more you've been formally trained in logic, the more you realize when there are piece is missing and when something isn't quite, isn't quite adding on, it just forces you to think in, in a way that is, that in a way that connects the dots.Um, because you know, if you're moving from A to B and B doesn't follow a, you, you understand that B doesn't follow a And I think that that, that, that kind of training is, is really, really important. It's what's given. , whatever kind of backbone I have as a journalist is not because I like to create controversy and like to make people mad.I actually don't. It's just because something doesn't make sense to me. And so maybe it doesn't make sense to me because I'm not getting it, or it doesn't make sense to me because B doesn't actually follow, follow away, and you're just being told that it does. And so I think that, I think that training is, is really, really important.Um, I also have, have often thought [00:56:00] that another part of training is realizing that basic rule that you learned in kindergarten, which is, um, you know, believe your imagination or you know, your imagine follow your imagination. Because the truth is anything can happen. And I think if you look at business history over the last couple of decades, it will be the improbable becoming probable.Truth over and over and over again. I mean, the idea that Enron could implode one of the biggest, supposedly most successful companies in corporate America could be bankrupt within six months. The, from its year, from its stock price high. The idea that the biggest, most successful, um, financial institutions on wall, on Wall Street could all be crumbling into bankruptcy without the aid of the US government.The idea that a young woman with no college degree and no real experience in engineering could create, uh, uh, um, could create a machine that was going to revolutionize blood testing and land on the cover of every business magazine, and that this [00:57:00] whole thing could turn out to be pretty much a fraud. The entire idea of ftx, I mean, over and over again, these things have happened.Forget Bernie Madoff if you had told people a year ago that FTX was gonna implode six months ago, three months ago, people would've been like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. And so I think just that, that, that, that knowledge that the improbable happens over and over again is also a really fundamental, fundamentally important.Dwarkesh Patel: If we're con continuing on the theme of ftx, I, I interviewed him about four or five months ago.Wow. And this is one of these interviews that I'm really, I'm, I don't know if embarrass is the right word, but I knew things then that I could have like asked, poked harder about. But it's also the kind of thing where you look back in retrospect and you're. If it had turned out well, it's, it's not obvious what the red flags are.Um, while you're in the moment, there's things you can look back at the story of Facebook and how, you know, Marcus Zuckerberg acted in the early days of Facebook and you could say, if the th

This was one of my favorite episodes ever.Bethany McLean was the first reporter to question Enron's earnings, and she has written some of the best finance books out there. We discuss:* The astounding similarities between Enron & FTX,* How visionaries are just frauds who succeed (and which category describes Elon Musk),* What caused 2008, and whether we are headed for a new crisis,* Why there's too many venture capitalists and not enough short sellers,* And why history keeps repeating itself.McLean is a contributing editor at Vanity Fair (see her articles here) and the author of The Smartest Guys in the Room, All the Devils Are Here, Saudi America, and Shaky Ground.Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform.Follow McLean on Twitter. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes. If you enjoyed this episode, please share. Helps out a ton.Timestamps(0:04:37) - Is Fraud Over? (0:11:22) - Shortage of Shortsellers(0:19:03) - Elon Musk - Fraud or Visionary?(0:23:00) - Intelligence, Fake Deals, & Culture(0:33:40) - Rewarding Leaders for Long Term Thinking(0:37:00) - FTX Mafia?(0:40:17) - Is Finance Too Big?(0:44:09) - 2008 Collapse, Fannie & Freddie(0:49:25) - The Big Picture(1:00:12) - Frackers Vindicated?(1:03:40) - Rating Agencies(1:07:05) - Lawyers Getting Rich Off Fraud(1:15:09) - Are Some People Fundamentally Deceptive?(1:19:25) - Advice for Big Picture ThinkersTranscriptThis transcript was autogenerated and thus may contain errors.Dwarkesh Patel: the rapid implosion of a company worth tens of billions of dollars. Insider dealing and romantic entanglements between sister companies, a politically generous c e o, who is well connected in Washington, the use of a company's own stock as its collateral, the attempt, the short-lived attempt to get bought out by a previous competitor, and the fraudulent abuse of mark to market account.[00:01:00] We are not talking about ftx, we are talking about Enron, which my guest today, Bethany McClean, uh, first broke the story of and has written an amazing and detailed book about, uh, called The Smartest Guys in the Room. And she has also written, uh, a book about the housing crisis. All the devils are here, a book about Fannie and Freddy Shaky Ground, and a book about fracking Saudi America, all of which we'll get into.She's, in my opinion, the best finance nonfiction writer out there, and I'm really, really excited to have this conversation now. So, Bethany, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. Bethany McLean: Thank you so much for the, for the probably Undeserved Conference, for having me on the show. Dwarkesh Patel: My first question, what are the odds that Sbf read the smartest guys in the room and just followed it as a playbook, given the similarities there?Bethany McLean: You, you know, I, I love that idea. I have to, I have to admit, I guess I love that idea. I don't know. That would make me responsible for what, for what happened, . So maybe I don't love that idea. L let me take that back . [00:02:00] Anyway, but I, I, I actually think that, that, that even if he had read the book, it would never have occurred to him that, that there was a similarity because self-delusion is such a, Strong component of all of these stories of business gone wrong.It's very rare that you have one of the characters at the heart of this who actually understands what they're doing and understands that they're moving over into the dark side and thinks about the potential repercussions of this and chooses this path. Anyway, that's usually not the way these stories go.So it's entirely possible that Sbf studied Enron, knew all about it, and never envisioned that there were any similarities between that and what he was doing. Dwarkesh Patel: Oh, that's a fascinating, um, which I guess raises the question of what are we doing when we're documenting and trying to learn from books like yours?If somebody who is a, about to commit the same exact kind of thing can read that book and not realize that he's doing the same exact thing, is there something that just [00:03:00] prevents us from learning the lessons of history that we, we can never just, uh, get the analogy right, and we're just guided by our own delusions.Bethany McLean: Wasn't there a great quote that history rhymes, but it doesn't repeat. I'm Yeah. Relying on who it is who said that, but I think that's, that's absolutely true. Oh, I think it's important for all of us, those of us who are not gonna find ourselves at the center of, uh, giant fraud or, so, I hope, I think my time for that has passed.Maybe not you, but, um, I think it's important for all of us to understand what went wrong. And I, I do think these, I do think just there, there's a great value and greater understanding of the world without necessarily a practical payoff for it. So I think when something goes wrong on a massive societal level, it's really important to try to, to try to explain it.Human beings have needed narrative since the dawn of time, and we need narrative all, all, all the more now we need, we need to make sense of the world. So I like to believe. Process of making, trying to make sense of the world. , um, [00:04:00] has a value in, in and of itself. Maybe there is small, some small deterrence aspect to it in that I often think that if people understand more the process by which things go go wrong, that it isn't deliberate, that it's not bad people setting out to do bad things.It's human beings, um, at first convincing themselves even that they're doing the right thing and then ending up in a situation that they, they never meant to be in. And maybe on the margin that does, maybe on the margin that does, that does help because maybe it has deterred some people who, who would've started down that path, but for the fact that they now see that that's the, that's the usual path.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. That actually raises the next question I wanted to ask you. Bern Hobart, uh, he's a finance writer as well. He wrote a blog post, um, about, uh, I mean this was before FTX obviously, and he was talking about Enron and he said in the end, it actually looks like we fixed the precise problem. Enron represented.Nobody I know solely looks at gap [00:05:00] financials. Everybody ultimately models based on free cash flow, we're much more averse to companies that set up a deliberate conflict of interest between management and shareholders. And I guess there's a way in which you can read that and say, oh, it doesn't FTX prove I'm wrong.But, you know, there's another way you can look at it is that FTX deliberately set up outside the us. So there's a story to be told that actually we learned the lessons of Enron and, you know, uh, so remains obviously worked. Uh, that's why, you know, they were in The Bahamas and we haven't seen the scale fraud of that scale in, you know, the continental United States.Um, do, do you think that the FTX saga and I guess the absence of other frauds of that scale in America shows that. The regulations and this changed business and investment practices in the aftermath of Enron have actually. Bethany McLean: Well, I think they've probably worked in narrowly, written in, in the way in which the writer you quoted articulated, I think it would be very hard for the cfo, F O of a publicly traded company to set up other private [00:06:00] equity firms that he ran, that did all their business with his company.Because everybody would say That's Enron and it would be completely. On the nose. And so, and Sarbanes Oxley in the sense of, in the sense of helping to reign in corporate fraud of the sort that was practiced by Enron, which was this abuse of very specific accounting rules. Um, I think I, I, I think that worked.But you know, you say there hasn't been fraud on a scale like Enron up until perhaps f ftx, but you're forgetting the global financial crisis. Yeah. And then the end, the line between what happened at Enron. and, and what happened in the global financial crisis. It's not a matter of black and white. It's not a matter of, one thing was clear cut fraud and one thing great.We love these practices. Isn't this fantastic? This is the way we want business to operate. They're both somewhere in the murky middle. You know, a lot of what happened at Enron wasn't actually outright fraud. I've coined this phrase, legal fraud to describe, um, to describe what it is that, that, that, that happened at Enron.And a lot of what [00:07:00] happened in the global financial crisis was legal, hence the lack of prosecutions. But it's also not behavior that that leads to a healthy market or mm-hmm. , for that matter, a a a a healthy society. And so there's a reason that you had Sarbanes Oxley and what was it, eight short, short years later you had Dodd-Frank and so Riri broadly.I'm not sure Sarbanes actually did that much good. And what I mean by that is when President George Bush signed it into law in the Rose Garden, he gave this speech about how investors were now protected and everything was great and your, your ordinary investors could take comfort that the laws were meant to protect them from wrongdoing.And you compare that to the speech that President Barack Obama gave eight years later when he signed Don Frank into law in the Rose Garden. And it's remarkably similar that now ordinary investors can count on the rules and regulations keeping themself from people who are prey on their financial wellbeing.[00:08:00] And I don't think it was, it's, it's true in either case because our markets, particularly modern markets move and evolve so quickly that the thing that's coming out of left field to get you is never gonna be the thing you are protecting against. Mm. . Dwarkesh Patel: , but given the fact that Enron, as you say, was committing legal fraud, is it possible that the government, um, when they prosecuted skilling and Fastow and lay, they in fact, We're not, uh, they, they prosecuted them to a greater extent than the law as written at the time would have warranted.In other words, were, uh, was there something legally invalid in the, in this, in the quantity of sentence that they got? Is it possible? Bethany McLean: So that's a really, it, it's, it's a, I I get what you're asking. I think it's a really tricky question because I think in absolute terms, um, Enron needed to be prosecuted and needed to be prosecuted aggressively.And while I say it was legal fraud, that is for the most part, there was actually real fraud around, around, uh, but it's on the margin. It doesn't [00:09:00] entire, it doesn't explain the entirety of Enron's collapse. Much of what they did was using and abusing the accounting rules in order to create an appearance of economic reality.Nothing to do with actual, with actual reality. But then there was actual fraud in the sense that Andy Fasta was stealing money from these partnerships to benefit himself. And they were, if you believe, the core tenant of the prosecution, which was their, this agreement called Global Galactic that was signed by, that was between Andy fau and Jeff Skilling, where Jeff agreed that Andy's partnerships would never lose money.Then that invalidated all of the, all of the accounting, and that's the chief reason that that. That skilling was, was, was convicted, um, was that the jury believed the existence of this, of this, of this agreement that in, um, one set of insider stock sales, which, which we can talk about, which was also a really key moment relative to the, so in absolute terms, I don't know, it's, it's hard for me to, to say there was [00:10:00] such, Enron was such a, to a degree that is still surprising to me, such a, a watershed moment in our, in our country, far beyond business itself.it, it, it caused so much insecurity that about our retirements, our retirement assets safe. Can you trust the company where you work? That I think the government did, did have to prosecute aggressively, but relative to the financial crisis where a lot of people made off with a lot of money and never had to give any of it back, does it seem fair that, that, that Jeff Skilling went to jail for over a decade and no one involved in a major way in the financial crisis paid any price whatsoever?People didn't even really have to give up that much of the money they made then. Then it seems a little bit unfair. Yes, so I think it's, it's an absolute versus a relative Dwarkesh Patel: question. Yeah. Yeah. By the way, who do you think made more money? Um, the investment banks, uh, like, uh, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, um, from doing, [00:11:00] providing their services to Enron as the stock was going up, or Jim Chanos from shorting the stock?In absolute terms, who made more money? Bethany McLean: Oh, I think the investment banks for sure. I mean, they made, they made so much money in investment banking fees from, from, from Enron. But, you know, it's a good question. . , it's a good question actually, because I think Jim made a lot of money too, so, Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I, I, you've spoken about, I guess the usefulness and the shortage of short sellers des a sort of, uh, corrective on irrational exuberance.And I'm curious why you think that shortage exists in the first place. Like, if you believe in the efficient market hypothesis, you should think that, you know, if some company has terrible financials and implausible numbers, then people would be lining up to short it. And then you would never have a phenomenon like Enron.And so it's, it's, you know, it's so odd that you can. , you know, reporters who are basically ahead of the market in terms of predicting what's gonna happen. Uh, well, uh, how do you square that with like the efficient [00:12:00] market hypothesis? Well, do you Bethany McLean: believe in the efficient market hypothesis, ? Dwarkesh Patel: I, I, I'd like to, but I'm like trying to , trying to wrap my head around Enron.Bethany McLean: I, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm not sure how you. Can, unless you, unless you adopt Warren Buffett's point of view, and I'm gonna mangle the quote because, uh, but, but it's that the market in the short term is a voting machine in the long term. It's a weighing machine, right? Mm-hmm. , or is it the other way around? . Anyway, but the idea is that the market may be very efficient for a long, very inefficient, for a long period of time.But, but it does actually, rationality does actually work in, in, in the end. And I think I might believe that, but isn't it John Maynard Cas who said the market can remain irrational for a lot longer than you can remain solvent. And so I think that's true too. I think believing that the market is efficient and rational in the short term is just obviously wrongUm, but back to your question about short sellers, which is, which is interesting, you know, I think part of it is that there is still this, um, there certainly was a couple of [00:13:00] decades ago, and I think it still exists, this idea that. Owning stocks is Mom, American, and apple pie in shorting stocks somehow is bad and evil and rooting, rooting against America.And I remember going back to the Enron days, someone, people criticizing me, even other people in the press saying, but you took a tip from a short seller. They're biased. And I. , I would say. But, but, but wait, the analysts who have buy ratings on stocks and the portfolio managers who own those stocks, they're biased too.They want the stocks to go up. Everybody's biased. So the trick as a journalist is getting information from all sides and figuring out who you think is right and what makes sense. But it's not avoiding anybody with any bias. But it was really interesting that people saw the bias on the part of short sellers and did not see it on the part of, of, of Longs.And I think there is that preconception that exists broadly, that somehow you are doing something wrong and you're somehow rooting for a company's failure. And that this is, I don't know, anti-American if you, if, if you [00:14:00] short a stock. And so I think that's part of why there's, there's, there's a shortage of shortage of, of, of short sellers.Um, I think also, I mean, we've had. Incredible, unprecedented bull market for the last four decades as a result of falling interest rates, and especially in the decade before the pandemic hit, it was very, very difficult to make money shorting anything because everything went to the moon. Didn't matter if its numbers were good, if it was eventually unmasked to be somewhat fraudulent, , it stocks just went to the moon anyway.The riskier the better. And so it is only diehard short sellers that have managed to stick it out . Yeah, and I think, I think lastly, Jim Chano said this to me once, and I, I think it's true that he could find, dozens of people who were skilled enough to come, smart enough to come work for him.There's no shortage of that. People who are technically skilled and really smart, but being able to be contrarian for a long period of time, especially when the market is going against you, is a different sort [00:15:00] of person. It that it requires a completely different mindset to have everybody in the world saying, you're wrong to be losing money because the stock is continuing to go up and to be able to hold fast to your conviction.And I think that's another, uh, part of the explanation for why there are fewer short sellers. Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah, and that raised an interesting question about. Uh, venture capital, for example, where, or private markets in general? Um, at least in the public markets, there's shorting maybe in shortage, but it, it is a possible mechanism, whereas, uh, I'm a programmer.So, you know, if, if like a one guy thinks the company's worth a hundred million dollars and everybody else thinks it's not, you know, the company will still be, uh, the price will still be said by the, you know, the person who's a believer. Um, does that increase the risk of some sort of bubble in venture capital and in technology?Um, and I guess in private markets generally, if they're, they're not public, is that something you worry about that they're, they will be incredible bubbles built up if there's a lot of money that's floating around in these Bethany McLean: circles. . Well, I think we're seeing that now, [00:16:00] right? And I don't think it's a coincidence that FTX and Theranos were not publicly traded companies, right?Mm-hmm. . Um, there's a certain sort of, uh, black box quality to these companies because people aren't charting them and aren't, aren't, and aren't, you know, whispering to journalists about that. That there's something wrong here and there aren't publicly available financials for people to dig through and look, look, and look at the numbers.So now I don't think that's a coincidence. And I do think this gigantic move into private assets has been, um, probably not great for the, for the, for the, for the. for the, for the safety of the system. And you'd say, well, it's just institutional investors who can afford to lose money who are losing money.But it's really not because institutional investors are just pension fund money. Mm-hmm. and in some cases now mutual fund money. So that distinction that the people who are investing in this stuff can afford to lose it is not really true. Um, so I don't, I don't like that rationalization. I think we're gonna see how that plays out.There was [00:17:00] just a really good piece in the Economist about private equity marks on their portfolio companies and how they are still looked to be much higher than what you would think they should be given the carnage in the market. And so all of what, what actually things are really worth in private markets, both for venture capital firms and for private equity firms, Is absent another, another bubble starting, starting in the markets.I think we're gonna see how that plays out over, over the next year. And it might be a wake up call for, for a lot of people. Um, you know, all that, all that said, it's an interesting thing because investors have been very complicit in this, right? In the sense that a lot of investors are absolutely delighted to have prep, to have their, their private, um, their private investments marked at a high level.They don't have to go to the committee overseeing the investments and say, look, I lost 20% of your money the way they might, um, if, if the numbers were public. And so that the ability of these of private investors to smooth as they call it, the, the, the returns is, is it's [00:18:00] been, it's been part of the appeal.It hasn't been a negative, it's been a positive. And so I would say that investors who wanted this moving are. Art might be getting what they deserve except for the pointing made earlier that it isn't, it isn't their money. It's, it's the money of, of teachers and firefighters and individual investors a around the country, and that's, that's problematic.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. Being in the world of technology and being around people in it has. made me, somewhat shocked when I read about these numbers from the past. For example, when I'm reading your books and they're detailing things that happened in the nineties or the two thousands, and then you realize that the salary that Hank Paulson made a c e o of Goldman, or that skilling made as, you know, um, c e o of Enron, you know, I, it's like I have friends who are my age, like 22 year olds who are raising seed rounds, , that are as big as like these people's salaries.And so it just feels like the, these books were, you have $50 billion frauds or, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars of collapse and the individuals there, um, it just feels like they, it's missing a few zeros, uh, [00:19:00] because of the delusion of the private markets. But, um, but speaking of short sellers and speaking of private equity, um, I think it'd be interesting to talk about sbf.So, you know, your 2018 Vanity Fair article I thought was really interesting about, you know, sbf factory in Buffalo H How, how do you think back on Tesla and sbf now, given the fact that. The stock did continue to rise afterwards, and the factory, I believe, was completed and it's, I hired the 1500 or so people that had promised New York State, uh, is sbf just a fraud?Who can pull it off? And so he's a visionary. How, how do you think about sbf in the aftermath? Bethany McLean: So I don't think that's right about Buffalo and I have to look, but I don't think they ended up, I mean, the Solar City business that Tesla has pretty much collapsed. I don't think people haven't gotten their roofs.There was just a piece about how they're canceling some of their roof installations. So sbf has repeatedly made grand visions about that business that haven't played out. And I will check this for you post the podcast, but I don't think [00:20:00] if there is employment at that factory in, in Buffalo, it's not because they're churn out solar, solar, solar products that are, that are, that are doing.What was originally promised. So I guess I, I think about that story in a, in a couple of ways. It definitely, um, it was not meant to be a piece about Tesla. It was meant to be a piece that shown a little bit of light on how sbf operates and his willingness to flout the rules and his reliance on government subsidies, despite the fact that he, um, presents himself as this libertarian free, free, free market free marketeer, and his willingness to lie to, to, to, on some level enrich himself, which also runs counter to the Elon sbf narrative that he doesn't care about making money for, for himself.Because the main reason for Teslas to by Solar City was that Solar City had the main reason, was it Tes, that was, that Solar City had, that, that sbf and his, and his and his relatives had extended the these loans to Solar City that were gonna go. [00:21:00] There were gonna be lo all the money was gonna be lost at Solar City when bankrupt.And by having Tesla buy it, sbf was able to bail himself out, um, as, as as well. And I also think a good reason for the, for the, for, and it brings us to the present time, but a reason for the acquisition was that sbf knows that this image of himself as the invincible and vulnerable who can always raise money and whose companies always work out in the end, was really important.And if Solar City had gone bankrupt, it would've cast a big question mark over over sbf, over over the sbf narrative. And so I think he literally couldn't afford to let Solar City go bankrupt. Um, all of that said, I have, I have been, and was I, I was quite skeptical of Tesla and I thought about it in, in, in, in.And I always believed that the product was great. I just, mm-hmm. wasn't sure about the company's money making potential. And I think that, that, it's something I started thinking about, um, background, the Solar City time, maybe earlier, but this line, something I've talked about [00:22:00] before. But this line between a visionary and a fraudster.You know, you think that they're on two opposite ends of the spectrum, but in reality they're where the ends of the circle meet. Characteristics of one. One has that many of the characteristics of the other. And sometimes I think the only thing that really separates the two is that the fraudster is able to keep getting mo raising money in order to get through the really difficult time where he or she isn't telling the truth.And then they, that person goes down in history as a visionary. Um, but because no one ever looks back to the moment in time when they were lying, the fraudster gets caught in the middle. Um, so Enron's Lo lost access to to the capital markets lost AC access to funding as the market collapsed after the.com boom.And people began to wonder whether skilling was telling the truth about Enron's broadband business. And then there were all the disclosures about Andy fasa partnerships if Enron had been able to continue raising money, Business of Enron's called Enron Broadband might well have been Netflix. It was Netflix ahead of its time.So Enron just got caught in the middle and all [00:23:00] the fraud, all the fraud got exposed . Um, but that's not because Jeff Skilling wasn't a visionary who had really grand plans for, for, for, for the future. So I think sbf falls somewhere in that spectrum of, of, of fraudster and visionary. And what's gonna be really interesting why I said that this, we bring it to the present time about what happens to the mu narrative.If something fails is what happens. Yeah. Is as the world watch watches Twitter implode, um, what does that mean then for the Elon sbf narrative overall? Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. Um, going back to the Smartest Guys is the Room, the title obviously suggests something about. The, I guess in general, the ability and the likelihood of very smart people committing fraud or things of that sort.Um, but you know, Begar Jones has this book called Hi Mind, where he talks about how the smarter people are more likely to cooperate in prisoners dilemma type situations. They have longer time preference. And one of the things you've written about is the problem in corporate America is people having shorter, [00:24:00] um, uh, you know, doing two too big time discounting.So, uh, given that trend we see in general of greater Cooperativeness, um, and other kinds of traits of more intelligent people, do you think the reason we often find people like S B F and skilling running big frauds just by being very intelligent, is it just that on, on average smarter people, maybe less likely to commit fraud, but when they do commit fraud, they do it at such garat scales and they're able to do it at such gar scales that it just brings down entire empires?How, how, how do you think about the relationship between intelligence and fraud? . Bethany McLean: That's interesting. Um, I'm not sure I know a coherent answer to that. Um, smartest guys in the room as a title was a little bit tongue in cheek. It wasn't meant to say, these guys actually are the smartest guys in the room. It was, it, it was a little bit, it was a little bit ironic, but that doesn't take away from the really good question that you asked, which is what, what, what is that relationship?I, I mean, I think if you look at the history of corporate fraud, you are not going to find unintelligent people having [00:25:00] been the masterminds behind this. You're gonna find really, really, really smart, even brilliant people having, having, having been, been behind it, maybe some at part of that is this linkage between the visionary and the fraud star that so many of these, of these corporate frauds are people who have qualities of the visionary and to.The qualities of, of a visionary, you have to have a pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty high intelligence. Um, and I do think so many of these stories are, are about then self delusion. So I don't think smart people are any less likely to suffer from self delusion than dumb people. And they're probably more likely to, because you can rationalize, you know, the smart person's ability to rationalize just about anything they wanna rational rationalize is pretty profound.Whereas perhaps someone who doesn't have quite the same, the same brain power isn't gonna be able to create a narrative under which their actions are blameless and they're doing the right thing. So I think sometimes, so maybe there is some sort of relationship [00:26:00] there that somebody more qualified than I am would have to study between smart people's ability to, to, to rationalize just about anything as a way of, as part of the path to self delusion and part of the path by which these things happen.Yeah, that's completely, that's completely , that's Bethany theory. There's absolutely nothing to back that . I'm just Dwarkesh Patel: well clear. Let's do some more speculation. So, um, one of the things, uh, John Ray talked about in his testimony, um, was it two days ago where he said that, you know, FTX had done $5 billion of investments and deals in the last year, and most of those investments were worth a fraction of the value that FTX paid for them.And we see this also in, obviously in Enron, right? With, uh, broadband and with, um, ul, or is that how pronounce it, but basically their international department. Yeah. Um, what is this, uh, this obsession with deal making for its own sake? Is that to appease investors and make them think a lot's going on, is that because of [00:27:00] the hubris of the founder, of just wanting to set up a big empire as fast as possible, even if you're getting a bad sticker price?What, why do we see this pattern of just, you know, excessive deal making for its own sake? Bethany McLean: That's an interesting question too. I'm not sure that that's, um, limited to companies that go splat dramatically. There's a lot of, a lot of deal making in, in corporate America has that same frenzied quality. Um, I haven't seen an updated study on, on this in a, in a long time, but, you know, I began my career working as an analyst in an m and a department at at at Goldman Sachs.And. Definitely deals are done for the sake of doing deals. And I once joked that synergies are kind of like UFOs. A lot of people claim to have seen them, but there's no proof that they actually exist. , and again, I haven't seen an updated study on, on, on this, but there was one years back that showed that most m and a transactions don't result in increased value for shareholders.And most synergies, most promised synergies never materialize. [00:28:00] Just getting bigger for the sake of getting bigger and doing deals for the short term value of showing Wall Street a projection. That earnings are gonna be so much higher even after the cost of the debt that you've taken on. And that they're these great synergies that are gonna come about from, from combining businesses.So I don't know that either the frenzy deal doing or deal doing deals gone wrong is, um, solely limited to people who are committing fraud. , I think it's kinda across the spectrum. , . Dwarkesh Patel: Um, um, well one, one thing I find interesting about your books is how you detail that. And correct me if this is the wrong way to read them, but that, uh, incentives are not the only thing that matter.You know, there there's this perception that, you know, we've set up bad incentives for these actors and that's why they did bad things. But also, um, the power of one individual to shape a co co company's culture and the power of that culture to enable bad behavior, whether scaling at Enron or with Clarkson Right at Moody's.Yeah. Um, is that a good, good way of reading your books or how, how do you think [00:29:00] about the relative importance of culture and incentive? Bethany McLean: I think that's really fair. But incentives are part of culture, right? If, if you've set up a culture where, where how you're valued is what you get paid, I think it's a little, it's a little difficult to separate those two things out because, because the, the incentives do help make the culture, but for sure culture is incredibly, um, incredibly compelling.I've often thought and said that if I had, when I was leaving my short lived career in investment banking, if I had, if I had gotten in some of the head hunters I was talking to, if one of them had said, there's this great, really energetic, interesting energy company down in Houston, , why don't interview there?If I had gone there, would I have been a whistleblower or would I have been a believer? And I'd like to believe I would've been a whistleblower, but I think it's equally likely that I would've been a believer. Culture is so strong. It creates this. What's maybe a miasma that you can't see outside?I remember a guy I talked to who's a trader at Enron, really smart guy, and he [00:30:00] was like, after the, after the bankruptcy, he said, of course, if we're all getting paid based on creating reported earnings and there's all this cash going out the door in order to do these deals that are creating reported earnings, and that's the culture of the entire firm, of course it's not gonna work economically.He said, I never thought about it. . It just didn't, it didn't, it didn't occur to me. And I think the more compelling the CEO o the more likely you are to have that kind of mass delusion. I mean, there's a reason cult exist, right? . We, we are as human beings, remarkably susceptible to.Visionary leaders. It's just, it's the way the human brain is wired. We, we wanna believe, and especially if somebody has the ability to put a vision forward, like Jeff Gilling did at Enron, like Elizabeth Holmes did it Theranos like SPF F did, where you feel like you are in the service of something greater by helping this, vision, , actualize then, then you're, particularly susceptible.And I think that is the place where [00:31:00] incentives don't quite explain things. That is, there is this very human desire to matter, to do something important. Mm-hmm to be doing something that's gonna change the world. And when somebody can tap into that desire in people that feeling that what you're doing isn't just work in a paycheck and the incentives you have, but I mean, I guess it is part of the incentive, but that you're part of some greater good.That's incredibly powerful. Yeah. Dwarkesh Patel: It's what we all speaking of. We all wanna matter. . Yeah. Speaking of peoples psychology, uh, crime and punishment, underrated or overrated as a way to analyze the psychology of people like scaling and S B F or maybe SBF specifically because of the utilitarian nature of SB F'S crime?Um, Bethany McLean: I think it's, I think it's underrated, overrated. I'm not sure anybody. , I'm not sure anybody has ever proven that jail sentences for white collar criminals do anything to deter subsequent white collar crime. Mm-hmm. , and I think one part of this is the self delusion that I've, that I talked about. Nobody thinks, [00:32:00] oh, I'm doing the same thing as Jeff Skilling did at Enron, and if I, and if I do this, then I too might end up in jail.Therefore, I don't wanna do this. I just don't think that's the way the, the, the, the, the thought process works. I think Elizabeth Holmes at Theranos, probably for the most part, convinced herself that this was going to work, and that if you just push forward and push hard enough and keep telling people what they wanna hear and keep being able to raise money, it's gonna work.You know, if. . If, if you pause to think, well, what if it doesn't work and I've lied and I go to jail, then, then you'd stop right, right then and there. So I think that, I think that, that I'm, I'm not, I'm not sure it's much of a deterrent. I remember, and partly I'm, I'm biased because I remember a piece, my co-author Peter Alkin, and I wrote out right after Jess Gilling and Kenley were, were convicted and can lay, we're we're convicted.And we wrote a piece for Fortune in which we said that the entire world has changed. Now that corporate executives are, um, are, are put on high alert that behavior in the gray area will no longer be tolerated and that it will be aggressively prosecuted. And this was spring of [00:33:00] 2006 and the events that caused the global financial crisis were pretty well underway.It didn't. Do much to prevent the global financial crisis. Mm-hmm. , Enron's, Enron's jail time, didn't do anything to present, prevent, Elizabeth Holmes doesn't seem to have done anything to change what Sbf was doing. So I just, I, I just, I'm, I'm, I'm not sure, I'm sure a psychologist or somebody who specializes in studying white color crime could probably make a argument that refutes everything I said and that shows that has had a deterring effect.But I just, I just don't think that people who get themselves into this situation, con, con, consciously think, this is what I'm doing. Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. Um, speaking of other incentives, stock options, uh, you've spoken about how that creates short-term incentives for the executives who are making decisions. If you wanted to set up an instrument that aligned an executive or a leader's compensation with the long-term performance of a company, what would that look like?W would you have the options of less than 10 years instead of a [00:34:00] year? H how would you design it? How do you usually design a compensation scheme to award long-term thinking? Bethany McLean: If I could do that, I should ru rule the world . I think that very sweet. I think that is one of the really tough, um, problems confronting boards or anybody who is determining anybody who's determining stock options and that almost anybody who's determining compensation and that most compensation schemes seem to have really terrible unintended consequences.They look really good on paper. And then as they're implemented, it turns out that there was a way in which they accomplished exactly the opposite of, uh, thing the people who designing them wanted, wanted them to accomplish. I mean, if you think back to the advent of stock options, what could sound better?Right. Giving management a share of the company such that if, if, if shareholders did well, that they'd do well, nobody envisioned the ways in which stock options could be repriced. The ways in which meeting earnings targets could lead to gaming the ways in which the incentive of stock-based [00:35:00] compensation could lead to people trying to get anything they could in order to get the stock price higher and cash out when they're, as soon as their stock options vested.So, and even there was, there was, the whole valiant saga was fascinating on this front because the people who designed Mike Pearson's compensation package as ceo e o Valiant, they were convinced that this was absolutely the way to do it. And he got bigger and bigger, um, stock option incentives for hitting certain, for having the stock achieve certain levels.But of course, that creates this incredible bias to just get the stock to go up no matter, no matter what else you do. Um, it does seem to me that vesting over the long term is. is, is a much better way to go about things. But then do you create incentives for people to play games in order to get the stock lower at, at various points where there's about to be a stock optional board so they have a better chance of having directions be, be worth, be worth something over the long term.And do you, particularly on Wall Street there is this, or in firms where this sort of stuff matters the most? There [00:36:00] is this, there was this clearing out of dead wood that happened where people got paid and they got outta the way and made way for younger people. And I don't know, it was a harsh culture, but maybe it made sense on some level.And now at least I've been told with much longer vesting periods, you have people who don't wanna let go. And so you have more of a problem with people who should have retired, stick sticking around instead of in, in, instead of clearing out. And then it also becomes a question, How much money is, is enough.So if somebody is getting millions of dollars in short-term compensation and then they have a whole bunch more money tied up in long-term compensation, do the long-term numbers matter? At what point do they, do they, do they really matter? I mean, if you gave me $5 million today, I'm not so sure I'd really care if I were getting another $5 million in 10 years.Right. ? Yeah. So, so I think all of that is, is it, it's, I'm not, I'm not sure there's a perfect compensation system. All things considered though, I think longer term is, is probably better, [00:37:00] but. Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah, I didn't think about that downside of the long investing period. That's so interesting there. I guess there is no free lunch.Uh, so with Enron, um, it, it was clear that there was a lot of talent at the firm and that you had these companies and these trading firms launch at the aftermath by people who left Enron, kinder Morgan and John Arnold's, um, uh, Sintas, uh, that were wildly profitable and did well. Do you think we'll see the same thing with FTX, that while Sbf himself and maybe the, his close cadre were frauds, there actually was a lot of great trading and engineering talent there that are gonna start these very successful firms in the aftermath.Bethany McLean: That's, that's interesting. And just, just for the sake of clarification, kinder Morgan was actually started years before Enron's collapsed, when Rich Kinder, who was vying with Jeffs skilling in a sense, to become Chief Operating Officer. Um, Ken Lay, picked Jeffs skilling and Kinder left. Mm-hmm. and took a few assets and went to create Kinder, kinder Morgan.But your overall point, I'm just clarifying your overall point holds, there were a lot of people who [00:38:00] left Enron and went on to do, to have pretty, pretty remarkable careers. I think the answer with ftx, I bet there will be some for sure. But whether they will be in the crypto space, I guess depends on your views on the long-term viability of, of, of the crypto space.And I have never , it's funny is crypto exploded over the last couple of years. I was, I've been working on this book about the pandemic and it's been busy and difficult enough that I have not lifted my head to, to think about much else. And I always thought, I don't get it. I don't understand , I mean, I understand the whole argument about the blockchain being valuable for lots of transactions and I, I get that, but I never understood crypto itself and I thought, well, I just need to, as soon as this book is done, I just need to put a month into understanding this because it's obviously an important, important enough part of our world that I need to figure it out.So now I think, oh, Okay, maybe I didn't understand it for a reason and maybe, um, maybe there isn't anything to understand and I've just saved myself a whole life of crime because it's all gone. And you have [00:39:00] people like Larry Fink at BlackRock saying, whole industry is gonna implode. It's done. And certainly with the news today, this morning of finances auditor basically saying We're out.Um, I, I don't, I don't know how much of it was, how much of it was, is, was a Ponzi scheme. You might know better than I do. And so I don't know what's left after this whole thing implodes. It's a little bit like, there is an analogy here that when Enron imploded, yes, a lot of people went on to start other successful businesses, but the whole energy trading business is practiced by kind of under capitalized, um, um, energy firms went away and that never came back.Yeah. And so I, I, I don't, I don't know, I'm, it'll be, I, I don't know. What do you. The Dwarkesh Patel: time to be worried will be when Bethany McLean writes an article titled Is Bitcoin Overvalued for the Audience. My Moments on That ? Yeah, for the audience that, that was, I believe the first skeptical article about Enron's, um, stock price.Yeah. Uh, and it was titled [00:40:00] Is Enron Overvalued. In aftermath understated, , title. But , Bethany McLean: , I joked that that story should have won, won, won awards for the NICU title and business journalism history. , given that the company was bankrupt six months later was overpricedDwarkesh Patel: Um, uh, well, let me ask a bigger question about finance in general. So finance is 9% of gdp, I believe. How much of that is the productive use and thinking and allocation of the, uh, the capital towards their most productive ends? And how much of that is just zero sum or negative sum games? Um, if, if you had to break that down, like, is 9% too high, do you think, or is it just.I think it's Bethany McLean: too high. I have no idea how to think about breaking it down to what the proper level should be. But I think there are other ways to think about how you can see that in past decades it hasn't been at the right level when you've had all sorts of smart kids. Um, Leaving, leaving business school and leaving college and heading into [00:41:00] finance and hedge funds and private equity is their career of choice.I think that's a sign that that finance is too big when it's sucking up too much of, of, of the talent of the country. Um, and when the rewards for doing it are so disproportionate relative to the rewards of of, of doing other things. Um, the counter to that is that there've also been a lot of rewards for starting businesses.And that's probably, I think, how you want it to be in a, in a product. In a productive economy. So I think the number is, is too high. I don't know how to think about what it should be other than what a, actually, a former Goldman Sachs partner said this to me when I was working on all the devils are here, and she said that finance is supposed to be like the, the substrata of our world.It's supposed to be the thing that enables other things to happen. It's not supposed to be the world itself. So the, the role of a financial system is to enable businesses to get started, to provide capital. That's what it's supposed to be. It's the lubricant that enables business, but it's not supposed to be the thing itself.Right. And it's become the thing itself. [00:42:00] You've, you've, you've, you've, you've got a problem. Um, um, and I think the other, Dwarkesh Patel: there's your article about crypto , that paragraph right there. . Bethany McLean: There you go. That's, that's a good, um, and I think, I think the other way, you, you, you can see, and perhaps this is way too simplistic, but the other way I've thought about it is that how can it be if you can run a hedge fund and make billions of dollars from, and have five people, 10 people, whatever it is, versus starting a company that employs people mm-hmm.and changes a neighborhood and provides jobs and, you know, provides a product that, that, that, that, that improves people's lives. It, it is a shame that too much of the talent and such a huge share of the financial rewards are going to the former rather than the latter. And that just can't mean good things for the future.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. Yeah. And I, you know, when people criticize technology, for example, for the idea that, you know, these people who would've been, I don't know, otherwise teachers or something, they're, you know, making half a million dollars at Google. [00:43:00] Um, and I think like when I was in India, people were using Google Maps to get through the streets in Mumbai, which is, which is unimaginable to me before going there that, you know, you would be able to do that with, um, a service built out of Silicon Valley.And so, Yeah, I think that actually is a good allocation of capital and talent. I, I'm not, I'm not sure about finance. Um, yeah, Bethany McLean: I think I, I, I agree with you. I think there are other problems with Google and with the, the social media giants, but, but they are real businesses that employ people, that make products that have had, uh, huge.Um, impact on on, on people's, on people's lives. So in, in that sense, it's very different than a private equity firm, for instance, and especially private equity, even more so than hedge funds draws my ire. Mm-hmm. , because I think one of the reasons they, that it, they've been able to make part of the financialization of our economy has been due to super, super low interest rates and low interest rates that have enabled so many people to make so much money in finance are not, they're just a gift.It wasn't because these people were uniquely smart, they just [00:44:00] found themselves in a great moment in time. And the fact that they now think they're really smart because money makes me crazy. Dwarkesh Patel: Um, are Fanny and Freddy America special purpose entities? Are they our Alameda? It's just the way we hide our debt and uh, that's interesting.Yeah. Bethany McLean: Well, I guess we, you know what? I don't know anymore because, so I last wrote about them when was it in 2016 and I don't know now. No, you're right. Their, their debt is still off, off, off balance sheet. So Yeah, in a lot of ways they, they were. . I would argue though that the old Fanny and Freddy were structured more honestly than, than the new Fanny and Freddy, that it really is conservatorship that have made them, um, that have made them America's off balance sheet entities, because at least when they were their own independent entities.Yes, there was this odd thing known as the implicit guarantee, which is when you think about, back to your point about efficient markets, how can you possibly believe there's an as such a thing as an efficient market when their [00:45:00] Fanny and Freddy had an implicit guarantee, meaning it wasn't real. There was no place where it was written down that the US government would bail Fanny and Freddie out in a crisis, and everybody denied that it existed and yet it did exist.Yeah. Dwarkesh Patel: No, but we, I feel like that confirms the official market hypothesis, right? The, the market correctly, they thought that mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddy would have governments. Uh, okay, okay. You might be father Bethany McLean: and they did . You might be right. I, I, I think what I was getting at you, you might be right.I think what I was getting at is that it is such a screwed up concept. I mean, how can you possibly, when I first, when people were first explaining this to me, when I first read about Fanny and Freddie, I was like, no, no, wait. This is American capitalism . This is, no, wait. What? I don't, I don't understand . Um, um, so yeah, but I, I, I, I think that Fanny and Freddie, at least with shareholders that were forced to bear some level of, of the risks were actually a more honest way of going about this whole screwed up American way of financing mortgages than, than the current setup is.Dwarkesh Patel: What [00:46:00] is the future of these firms? Or are they just gonna say in conservatorship forever? Or is there any developments there? Well, what's gonna happen to them? Bethany McLean: The lawsuit, the latest lawsuit that could have answered that in some ways ended in a mistrial. Um, I don't think, I don't, I don't think unfortunately anybody in government sees any currency in, and I mean, currency in the broad sense, not in the literal sense of money in, in taking this on.And unfortunately, what someone once said to me about it, I think remains true and it's really depressing, but is that various lawmakers get interested in Fannie and Freddy. They engage with it only to figure out it's really, really goddamn complicated. Mm-hmm. and that, and that any kind of solution is gonna involve angering people on one side of the aisle or another and potentially angering their constituent constituents.And they slowly back away, um, from doing anything that could, that, that could affect change. So I think we have a really unhealthy situation. I don't think it's great for these two [00:47:00] entities to be in conservatorship, but at this point, I'm not sure it's gonna change. Dwarkesh Patel: Yep. Speaking of debt and mortgages, um, so total household debt in the United States has been, uh, climbing recently after it's, it's like slightly d decline after 2008, but I think in quarter three alone it increased 350 billion and now it's at 16.5 trillion.Uh, the total US household debt, should we worried about this? Are, are, are we gonna see another sort of collapse because of this? Or what, what should we think about this? Bethany McLean: I don't know. I don't know how to think about that because it's too tied up in other things that no one knows. Are we going to have a recession?How severe is the recession going to be? What is the max unemployment rate that we're gonna hit if we do, if we do have a recession? And all of those things dictate how to, how to think about that number. I. Think consumer debt is embedded in the bowels of the financial system in the same way mortgages were.And in the end, the, the, the [00:48:00] problem with the financial crisis of 2008, it wasn't the losses on the mortgages themselves. It was the way in which they were embedded in the plumbing of the financial system. Mm-hmm. and ways that nobody understood. And then the resulting loss of confidence from the fact that nobody had understood that slash lies had been told about, about that.And that's what caused, that's what caused everything to, to collapse. Consumer debt is a little more visible and seeable and I, I don't think that it has that same, um, that same opaque quality to it that, that mortgage backed securities did. I could be, I could be wrong. I haven't, I haven't, I haven't dug into it enough, enough to understand enough to understand that.But you can see the delinquencies starting to climb. Um, I mean, I guess you could on, on, on mortgages as well, but there was this, there was this profound belief with mortgages that since home prices would never decline, there would never be losses on these instruments because you could always sell the underlying property for more than you had [00:49:00] paid for it, and therefore everything would be fine.And that's what led to a lot of the bad practices in the industry is that lenders didn't think they had to care if they were screwing the home buyer because they always thought they could take the home back and, and, and, and, and make more money on it. And consumer debt is, is unsecured. And so it's, it's, it's different.I think people think about it differently, but I'd have. I'd have to, I'd have to do some more homework to understand where consumer debt sits in the overall architecture of the financial industry. Dwarkesh Patel: I, I, I'm really glad you brought up this theme about what does the overall big picture look like? I feel like this is the theme of all your books that people will be, So obsessed with their subsection of their job or, or that ar area that they won't notice that, um, broader trends like the ones you're talking about.And in Enron it's like, why, why, why do we have all these special purpose entities? What is the total debt load of Enron? Um, or with the, you know, mortgage back securities a similar kind of thing, right? What, what, uh, maybe they weren't correlated in the past, [00:50:00] but what's that? Do we really think that there's really no correlation, um, uh, between, uh, delinquencies across the country?Um, so that, that kind of big picture, think. Whose job is that today? Is it journalists? Is it short sellers? Is it people writing on ck? Who's doing that? Is it anybody's job? Is, is it just like, uh, an important role with nobody assigned to it? Bethany McLean: I think it's the latter. I think it's an important role with nobody, with nobody assigned to it, and there there is a limit.I mean, , I hate to say this, it is not, uh, um, it is not an accident that many of my books have been written. That's probably not fair. It's not true of my book un fracking, but that some of my books have been written after the calamity happened. So they weren't so much foretelling the calamity as they were unpacking the calamity after it happened, which is a different role.And as I said at the start of our conversation, I think an important one to explain to people why this big, bad thing took, took place. But it's not prediction, I don't know, as people that were very good at, at prediction, um, they tried [00:51:00] to set up, what was it called? In the wake of the global financial crisis, they established this thing called fsoc, and now I'm forgetting what the acronym stands for.Financial Security Oversight Committee. And it's supposed to be this, this body that does think about these big picture. That thinks about the ways, the ways an exam, for example, in which mortgage backed securities were, um, were, were, were, were, were, were, were repopulating through the entire financial system and ways that would be cause a loss to be much more than a loss.That it wouldn't just be the loss of money and that security, it would echo and magnify. And so that there are people who are supposed to be thinking about it. But I think, I think it's, it's, it's really hard to see that and. In increasingly complex world, it's even, it's even harder than it was before, because the reverberations from things are really hard to map out in, in, in advance, and especially when some part of those reverberations are a loss of confidence, then all bets [00:52:00] are off because when confidence cracks, lots of things fall apart.But how do you possibly analyze in any quantitative way the the risk that that confidence will collapse? Mm-hmm. . So I think it's, I think, I think, I think it's difficult. That said, and of course I am talking my own book here, I don't think that the lack of the, the increased financial problems of journalism really help matters in that respect, because in an ideal world, you want a lot of people out there writing and thinking about various pieces of this, and then maybe somebody can come along and see the.Pieces and say, oh my God, there's this big picture thing here that we all need to be thinking about. But there's, there's a kind of serendipity in the ability to do that one, that one that the chances, I guess the best way to say that is the chances of that serendipity are dramatically increased by having a lot of people out there doing homework, um, on the various pieces of the puzzle.And so I think in a world, particularly where local news has been decimated mm-hmm. , um, the [00:53:00] chances of that sort of serendipity are, are definitely lower. And people may think, oh, it doesn't matter. We still got national news. We've got the Washington Post, we've got the Wall Street Journal, we've got the New York Times.Um, I would love to have somebody do a piece of analysis and go back through the New York Times stories and see how many were sparked by lp, a piece in the local paper that maybe you wouldn't even notice from reading the New York Times piece, because it'd be in like the sixth paragraph that, oh yeah, credit should go to this person at this local paper who started writing about this.But if you no longer have the person at the local paper who started writing about this, You know, it's, it's, it's, it's less likely that the big national piece gets written. And I think that's a part of the implosion of local news, that people, a part of the cost of the implosion of local news that people don't really understand the idea that the national press functions at, at the same level, um, without local news is just not true.Dwarkesh Patel: Yeah. And, but even if you have the local news, and I, that's a really important point, but even if you have that local news, there still has to be somebody whose job it is to synthesize it all together. And [00:54:00] I'm curious, what is the training that requires? So you, I mean, your training is, you know, math and English major and then working at working in investment banking.Um, is that the, uh, I mean, obviously the anecdotal experience then equals one, seems that that's great training for synthesizing all these pieces together. But what is the right sort of education for somebody who is thinking about the big picture? Bethany McLean: I, I don't, I don't know.And there may be, there may be, there are probably multiple answers to that question, right? There's probably no one, one right answer for me. In, in the end. My, my math major has proven to be pivotal. Even though , my mother dug up these, um, my, my parents were moving and so my mother was going through all her stuff and she dug up these, some my math work from, from college.Literally, if it weren't for the fact that I recognized my own handwriting, I would not recognize these pages on pages of math formula and proofs. And they're like, get gibberish to me now. So , but I, but I still think that math has, so I do not wanna exaggerate my mathematical ability at this stage of [00:55:00] the game.It's basically no. But I do think that doing math proofs any kind of formal, any kind of training and logic is really, really important because the more you've been formally trained in logic, the more you realize when there are piece is missing and when something isn't quite, isn't quite adding on, it just forces you to think in, in a way that is, that in a way that connects the dots.Um, because you know, if you're moving from A to B and B doesn't follow a, you, you understand that B doesn't follow a And I think that that, that, that kind of training is, is really, really important. It's what's given. , whatever kind of backbone I have as a journalist is not because I like to create controversy and like to make people mad.I actually don't. It's just because something doesn't make sense to me. And so maybe it doesn't make sense to me because I'm not getting it, or it doesn't make sense to me because B doesn't actually follow, follow away, and you're just being told that it does. And so I think that, I think that training is, is really, really important.Um, I also have, have often thought [00:56:00] that another part of training is realizing that basic rule that you learned in kindergarten, which is, um, you know, believe your imagination or you know, your imagine follow your imagination. Because the truth is anything can happen. And I think if you look at business history over the last couple of decades, it will be the improbable becoming probable.Truth over and over and over again. I mean, the idea that Enron could implode one of the biggest, supposedly most successful companies in corporate America could be bankrupt within six months. The, from its year, from its stock price high. The idea that the biggest, most successful, um, financial institutions on wall, on Wall Street could all be crumbling into bankruptcy without the aid of the US government.The idea that a young woman with no college degree and no real experience in engineering could create, uh, uh, um, could create a machine that was going to revolutionize blood testing and land on the cover of every business magazine, and that this [00:57:00] whole thing could turn out to be pretty much a fraud. The entire idea of ftx, I mean, over and over again, these things have happened.Forget Bernie Madoff if you had told people a year ago that FTX was gonna implode six months ago, three months ago, people would've been like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. And so I think just that, that, that, that knowledge that the improbable happens over and over again is also a really fundamental, fundamentally important.Dwarkesh Patel: If we're con continuing on the theme of ftx, I, I interviewed him about four or five months ago.Wow. And this is one of these interviews that I'm really, I'm, I don't know if embarrass is the right word, but I knew things then that I could have like asked, poked harder about. But it's also the kind of thing where you look back in retrospect and you're. If it had turned out well, it's, it's not obvious what the red flags are.Um, while you're in the moment, there's things you can look back at the story of Facebook and how, you know, Marcus Zuckerberg acted in the early days of Facebook and you could say, if the thing fell apart, that this is why, or, you know, this is a red flag. So [00:58:00] I have a hard time thinking about how I should have done that interview.B

SHOW TOPICLearning about Neighbors for Neighbors with Ms. Annie MersingSPECIAL GUESTMs. Annie Mersing, Seneca Valley Foundation Director of DevelopmentMs. Annie Mersing earned her Bachelor of Science in Business Administration with a Concentration in Management from Robert Morris University. Ms. Mersing has been in the Seneca Valley School District since 2019, first serving as the Executive Assistant to the Superintendent of Schools.  Now in the role as the Director of Development for the Seneca Valley Foundation, Ms. Mersing also serves as the District's Director of Advancement and provides assistance with securing and writing District grants.IN THIS EPISODE, WE WILL REVIEWWhat is the Seneca Valley Foundation (SVF)? Who does it help and what types of programs does the SVF support?What is Neighbors for Neighbors?Why is it important for the community to help with Neighbors for Neighbors?How can someone find out more information or donate?

Jarno Vanhatapio är grundaren till e-handelssuccén NA-KD som efter fem år omsätter häpnadsväckande 2 miljader kronor. Med 900 miljoner kronor riskkapital i ryggen har han på kort tid byggt ett av Europas snabbast växande e-handelsbolag.Veckans avsnitt i Framtidens E-handel är en personlig dialog med Jarno där han berättar hur han balanserar sitt familjeliv med business, vilka byggstenar som är viktiga när man bygger ett e-handelsbolag, vikten av bra bruttomarginaler, och hur man tar sig igenom motgångar. Jarno går även igenom hur NA-KD arbetar med influencer marketing, hur han ser på attribuering av olika marknadsföringskanaler, och vilka som är hans största råd till andra entreprenörer. Hur gör han för att inte tappa sitt eget driv? Hur skalar man något som i sin natur inte är skalbart? Hur tänker han när han investerar i start-up´s? Jarno berättar slutligen om vad han har lärt sig genom åren för att lyckas som entreprenör. Missa inte detta i veckans avsnitt av podcasten Framtidens E-handel!Här hittar du Jarno Vanhatapio & NA-KDhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/jarno-vanhatapio-45ab6827/ https://www.na-kd.com/svFölj Björn på LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/bjornspenger/Följ Framtidens E-handel på LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/framtidens-e-handel/Veckans sponsorhttps://www.maddenanalytics.com/ Tusen tack för att du lyssnar!Support till showen http://supporter.acast.com/framtidens-e-handel. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

以下について話しました。 --- AI契約審査サービスを提供するLegalForce（東京都江東区）は6月23日、ソフトバンクビジョンファンド（SVF）2をリード投資家とし約137億円を調達したことを発表した。新たに海外事業に取り組み、まずは米国に進出する。 【今日のニュース】https://www.itmedia.co.jp/business/articles/2206/23/news112.html

Kunskapsstyrning, SVF, NPO etc, är det evidensbaserad organisering av sjukvården eller är det mest fancy words? Oskar Lindfors gästar podden och Arin undrar varför Oskar ”lackade ur”. Ja men vi gör ändå vårt bästa för att vrida på flera aspekter men är det inte ändå en stor gåta hur SKR har tänkt kring detta? Och är det bara vi som inte är så övertygade? Vad har vi missat och vad tycker du? Kommentera gärna! Hilda och Arin som vanligt och Oskar Lindfors, Specialist i allmänmedicin som gäst

Det här är första delen i en ny serie om "Techjättar" och sociala medier. I den här serien pratar vi om endel av de problem och risker som vi ser i och med de stora plattformarna. I det här första avsnittet pratar vi om att Svf slutat annonsera på Facebook, Instagram och Youtube.

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideSonocurrent:https://www.sonocurrent.com/Video Podcast Episode:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ql-SgDg1eckModules used in this episode: After Later Audio uO_c, Monsoon, Noise Engineering Numeric Repetitor Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Electus Versio, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Befaco Sampling Modulator, Even VCO, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Sonocurrent MC3A, Bastl ABC Mixer, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Sven Gustavsson som undervisar i Hållbar design på Grafisk form & kommunikationsutbildningen på Svf gästar oss. Vi pratar om begreppet, vad det innebär och vad man får lära sig på utbildningen i ämnet med samma namn som avsnittet.

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: After Later Audio uO_c, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Numeric Repetitor, Electus Versio, Erica Synths Pico RND, Pico BBD, Pico DSP, Make Noise Mimeophon, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Befaco Rampage, Bastl ABC Mixer ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideSonocurrent:https://www.sonocurrent.com/Modules used in this episode: After Later Audio Monsoon, uO_c, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Sonocurrent MC3A, MT2D, Noise Engineering Numeric Repetitor, Desmodus Versio, Befaco Sampling Modulator, Rampage, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Doepfer A-124 Wasp Filter, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF, Entropy, Vnicursal VCA, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder,  ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Do mojego domowego studia zaprosiłem tym razem Monikę Umińską i Dawida Bulandę, onkologów pracujących w Kalmarze. Dawid jest świeżo upieczonym specjalistą po specjalizacji właśnie w Kalmarze, a Monika ukończyła w 2015 roku specjalizację z onkologii w Gdańsku, a od 2 lat pracuje już w Szwecji. W naszej rozmowie charakteryzujemy szwedzką onkologię z punktu widzenia zarówno lekarza, jak i pacjenta, z perspektywy mniejszej kliniki, jak i kliniki uniwersyteckiej, od strony radioterapii onkologicznej, jak i onkologii klinicznej. Rozmowa była tak interesująca i merytoryczna że zajęła nam prawie 2 godziny, podzieliliśmy ją więc na 2 części. Z pierwszej części dowiesz się: - czy w Szwecji, tak jak w Polsce, funkcjonują 2 specjalności onkologiczne? - jak wygląda opieka nad pacjentem onkologicznym, praca na oddziale oraz w przychodni? - w jaki sposób pacjent trafia do onkologa i co to jest SVF? - jak wiele może pielęgniarka onkologiczna i w jakim stopniu może odciążyć obowiązki lekarza? - czy funkcjonują konsylia wielodyscyplinarne i jakie decyzje na nich zapadają? - kiedy onkolodzy dyżurują i jak wyglądają takie dyżury? Jeśli masz jakieś dodatkowe pytania odezwij się do mnie lub zadaj pytanie na grupie FB: https://www.facebook.com/groups/lekarzwszwecji/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/lekarzwszwecji/message

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideSonocurrent:https://www.sonocurrent.com/Modules used in this episode: After Later Audio uO_c, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Sonocurrent MC3A, MT2D, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Noise Engineering Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Cursus Iteritas, Numeric Repetitor, Desmodus Versio, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Befaco Sampling Modulator, Rampage, Bastl ABC Mixer ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

SHOW TOPICThe Season of Giving with Mr. Mike PelloniSPECIAL GUESTMr. Mike Pelloni, Rowan Elementary/Evans City Elementary Health/Physical Education TeacherMike Pelloni is in his sixth year as a health/physical education teacher at Rowan Elementary and Evans City Elementary Schools. He earned a  Bachelor of Science in Kinesiology from Penn State University and a Master of Education in Physical Education from Slippery Rock University. Prior to his time at Seneca Valley, he has also taught the importance of health at South Butler County School District, Knoch High School and Middle School, Ambridge High School, and South Morrison Elementary in Virginia. In addition to teaching the importance of physical activity, sports skills, and sportsmanship, Mr. Pelloni implements a diverse curriculum based on locomotor, non-locomotor, agility, balance, and coordination, fine and gross motor skills through various physical activities and games. IN THIS EPISODE, WE WILL REVIEW•How Seneca Valley Foundation (SVF) funds extra needs in the classroom •Why the SVF donation was so valuable •How the donation impacted students •What teachers, parents, students and community members would benefit from knowing about SVF USEFUL INFORMATIONhttps://www.svsd.net/domain/1132

SHOW TOPICThe Season of Giving with Ms. Megan BonistalliSPECIAL GUESTMs. Megan Bonistalli, Seneca Valley Senior High School Art TeacherMegan Bonistalli is an art teacher at the Seneca Valley Senior High School and has been with the district since 2006. She performed her undergraduate studies at The Pennsylvania State University, where she received both a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in ceramics and a Bachelor of Science degree in art education. Her Masters in Art Education was earned from Carlow University. Megan's love of clay led her to develop a Pottery and Ceramic Techniques Program for Seneca Valley, which she has taught exclusively since its inception. She currently serves as the National Honor Society Adviser, The Scholastic Art Awards Coordinator for the Pittsburgh Region, and the Mud Geeks Pottery Club sponsor.IN THIS EPISODE, WE WILL REVIEW•How Seneca Valley Foundation (SVF) funds extra needs in the classroom •Why the SVF donation was so valuable •How the donation impacted students •What teachers, parents, students and community members would benefit from knowing about SVF USEFUL INFORMATIONhttps://www.svsd.net/domain/1132

SHOW TOPICThe Season of Giving with Ms. Annie Mersing SPECIAL GUESTMs. Annie Mersing, Seneca Valley Foundation Director of DevelopmentMs. Annie Mersing earned her Bachelor of Science in Business Administration with a Concentration in Management from Robert Morris University. Ms. Mersing has been in the Seneca Valley School District since 2019, first serving as the Executive Assistant to the Superintendent of Schools.  Now in the role as the Director of Development for the Seneca Valley Foundation, Ms. Mersing also serves as the District's Director of Advancement and provides assistance with securing and writing District grants.IN THIS EPISODE, WE WILL REVIEWWhat is the Seneca Valley Foundation (SVF)? Who does it help?What are SVF's future goals? How can someone give to SVF?USEFUL INFORMATIONhttps://www.svsd.net/domain/1132

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, After Later Audio uO_c, Monsoon, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico VCO, Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Befaco Even VCO, Rampage, Sampling Modulator, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF, Entropy, Vnicursal VCA, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Matrix Mixer, Make Noise Mimeophon, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Numeric Repetitor ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Esam  sasnieguši sesto duci aplūkoto valstu raidījumā Diplomātiskās pusdienas. Tāpēc gribas kārtējo reizi paskatīties uz senākajām civilizācijām un ko tās atstājušas mūsdienām. Un, kur gan bez inkiem šajā gadījumā. Tādēļ dodamies uz moderno Peru Republiku, kuras teritorijā kādreiz atradās Inku valsts centrs. Runājot par seno tradīciju turpināšanu un kā tās mijiedarbojas ar mūsdienām, nesen izskanēja, ka pirms dažām nedēļām Peru ziemeļu reģionā Loreto kāda dziļos Amazones džungļos dzīvojoša un no pārējās pasaules nošķirta cilts tikai tagad uzzināja par globālo Covid pandēmiju. Un uzzināja viņi to no medicīniskā personāla, kas atveda viņiem vakcīnas pret Covid. Respektīvi, dzīvoja vienā mierā pašizolācijā, neviena netraucēti, līdz viņiem palīdzību atveda pret slimību, par kuras eksistenci viņi nemaz nenojauta. Tikmēr mēs tūlīt jau otro gadu būsim dzīvojuši par neko citu daudz nepaspējot nemaz kārtīgi padomāt, kā tikai koronas vīrusu un konstanti mainīgiem ierobežojumiem. Bet arī pašā Peru situācija ir reti bēdīga. Valsts veselības sistēmas vājuma dēļ un zemās vakcinācijas dēļ no koronavīrusa līdz šim ir miruši jau 206 tūkstoši cilvēku. Salīdzinājumam – Latvijā slimība ir prasījusi gandrīz 4000 cilvēku dzīvības. Protams, ka Peru arī ir vairāk iedzīvotāju – virs 32 miljoniem. Peru Republika atrodas Dienvidamerikas rietumos Klusā okeāna krastos un valstī trīs oficiālās valodas: spāņu valoda, kā arī vietējo valodas - kečvu (Quechua) un aimara (Aymara). Interesanti, ka valsts nosaukums Peru ir cēlies no kečvu valodas vārda, kas nozīmē pārpilnības zemi. Valsts lepojas ar daudzveidīgu mantojumu, kā seno Inku galvaspilsētu Kusko un vienu no septiņiem pasaules brīnumiem – Maču Pikču. Inku impēriju tiek uzskatīta par lielāko impēriju. Inki pirmo reizi parādījās Andu kalnu reģionā 12. gadsimtā un ar savu militāro spēku pakāpeniski uzcēla iespaidīgu impēriju. Inku sabiedrība un reliģija balstījās uz trim baušļiem: nezodz, nemelo un neesi slinks. Par svētvietām runājot, Maču Pikču ir seno inku drupu vieta, kas ir viens no septiņiem pasaules brīnumiem un 1983.gadā drupas tika iekļautas UNESCO Pasaules mantojuma sarakstā. Starp citu, Rietumos Maču Pikču eksistence nebija plaši zināma līdz pat 1911.gadam, kad to atklāja Jēlas universitātes profesors Hirams Bingems, kuru uz vietni veda vietējais kečvu valodā runājošs iedzīvotājs. Šobrīd Maču Pikču ir ekonomiski nozīmīgākais tūrisma objekts Peru, kas nekovid apstākļos ienes būtiskus finanšu resursus valstij. Peru ekonomika jau sen bijusi atkarīga no izejvielu eksporta uz vairāk attīstītajām ziemeļu puslodes valstīm. Tā ir viena no pasaulē vadošajām zvejniecības valstīm un viena no lielākajām sudraba un vara ražotājvalstīm. Peru nominālais IKP 2020.gadā pēc Pasaules Bankas datiem bija 176 miljardi eiro. Peru ekonomika mūsdienās atspoguļo savu ģeogrāfisko daudzveidību, proti, klimats veicina plaši attīstītu lauksaimniecību, Andu kalni, kuri ir bagāti ar derīgajiem izrakteņiem, ļauj veikt to ieguvi, ar zivīm bagātais Klusā okeāna ūdeņi ļauj veicināt komerciālo zvejniecību. Peru ir atkarīga no eksporta, kas padara valsts ekonomiku neaizsargātu pret pasaules tirgus cenu svārstībām. Peru ekonomiskā vēsture ir visnotaļ raiba. Valsts ir gājusi cauri daudziem ekonomiskajiem eksperimentiem, no kuriem viens no interesantākajiem ir Alberto Fudžimori neoliberālais ekstrēmisms. Fujimori bija valsts prezidenta amatā no 1990.gada līdz 2000.gadam. Bez partijas un bez lielas naudas, bet ar pamatīgu populisma devu Fudžimori tika ievēlēts par prezidentu un visnotaļ ātri kļuva par faktisku diktatoru. 1992.gadā Fujimori veica apvērsumu un atlaida parlamentu un tad sāka īstenot tā saukto deleģēto demokrātiju, proti, prezidenta darbībām valdībā nav jābūt līdzīgām ar vēlēšanu kampaņas solījumiem. Ar ko tad Fuhimori valdīšana ir ievērības cienīga? Viena no Fujimori prioritātēm bija uzlabot Peru attiecības ar finanšu institūcijām. Finanšu institūcijas, kā SVF un Pasaules Banka norādīja, ka Peru jāveic izmaiņas saskaņā ar institūciju politiku, ja vēlas saņemt atbalstu. Bēdīgi slavenā “Vašingtonas konsensa” idejiskajā pieejā, protams. Peru darīja visu, lai kļūtu pievilcīga ārvalstu investoriem. Tostarp arī ierobežoja streiku iespējamību un arodbiedrības, veica ļoti plašu privatizācijas procesu, pārdodot vai par ļoti zemiem procentiem izīrējot ārvalstu investoriem derīgo izrakteņu raktuves un, runā, ka pat upes pārdodot privātīpašumā. Lai saglabātu savu popularitāti sabiedrībā situācijā, kad tika pieņemti lēmumi, kas bija pretrunā ar valsts iedzīvotāju ekonomiskajām vajadzībām, režīma laikā tika izdarīts spiediens uz medijiem, lai izvērstu, uzturētu un paplašinātu valdības pozīciju. Rezultātā televīzija un radio kļuva par skatuvi, kurā režīms uzturēja draudzīgu un pievilcīgu “demokrātisko” fasādi. Fujimori režīmam bija diktatoriem raksturīgie centieni izrēķināties ar opozīciju, sevišķi marksistiski noskaņoto. Ne tikai tika izvērstas vardarbīgas militārā kampaņas, bet režīma laikā tika veikta arī Peru nabadzīgāko iedzīvotāju un pamatiedzīvotāju grupu piespiedu sterilizēšana. Tikai tādēļ, ka tie neatbilda iedomai par perfektu kapitālisma sistēmu. Bet neskatoties uz visu šo, un faktu, ka Fuhimori jau kādu laiku ne tikai ir apsūdzēts noziegumos pret cilvēci, bet arī ir ieslodzīts cietumā Čīlē, viņu tāpat atbalsta apmēram puse Peru iedzīvotāju. Un to pierāda arī fakts, ka viņa meita Keiko Fuhimori ir populāra Peru parlamenta deputāte, aktīva sava tēva aizstāve un jau trīsreiz tikai otrajā kārtā zaudējusi prezidenta vēlēšanās. Latīņamerikas valstis klasiski ir bijušas cīņu vieta starp brīvā tirgus sistēmas aizstāvjiem un marksistiem. Peru stāsts, ņemot vērā Fuhimori, ir tikpat interesants attiecībā uz marksistu politiķiem un to grupām. Par to intervijā stāsta Peru Katoļu Pontifika universitātes vēsturnieks Havjērs Agilārs. Peru ir kolorīta valsts visās tās formās. Iekšējie satricinājumi un nesaskaņas ir tās vēstures mantojums un liktenis, acīmredzot

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: After Later Audio uO_c, Monsoon, Noise Engineering Desmodus Versio, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico VCO, Pico RND, Pico BBD, Pico DSP, DIY Multimode VCF, Doepfer A-124 Wasp Filter, Zlob Diode Chaos, Vnicursal VCA, Entropy, SVF, Befaco Even VCO, Chopping Kinky, AI Synthesis Matrix Mixer, Quad VCA/Mixer, Bastl ABC Mixer, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, After Later Audio uO_c, Noise Engineering Numeric Repetitor, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Cursus Iteritas, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico RND, Pico BBD, DIY Swamp, AI Synthesis Matrix Mixer, Quad VCA/Mixer, Bastl ABC Mixer, Zlob Diode Chaos, Vnicursal VCA, Entropy, SVF, Befaco Rampage, Sampling Modulator, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, After Later Audio uO_c, Monsoon, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Matrix Mixer, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Numeric Repetitor, Desmodus Versio, Befaco Even VCO, Sampling Modulator, Rampage, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico VCO, Pico DSP, Bastl ABC Mixer, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, Doepfer A-124 Wasp Filter ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Numeric Repetitor, Desmodus Versio, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, DIY Multimode VCF, Pico RND, Pico DSP, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, After Later Audio uO_c, Monsoon, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, Befaco Even VCO, Sampling Modulator, Rampage, Chopping Kinky, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Stompbox Adapter, Doepfer A-124 Wasp Filter, Bastl ABC Mixer ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Numeric Repetitor, Erica Synths Pico RND, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Make Noise Mimeophon, Befaco Rampage, AI Synthesis Stompbox Adapter ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideKnas page on the Polygamist:http://www.knasmusic.com/products/polygamist/polygamist.phpModules used in this episode (besides the Polygamist): Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Desmodus Versio, Make Noise Mimeophon, After Later Audio Monsoon, Bastl ABC Mixer, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF, Erica Synths Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Zlob Diode Chaos, Vnicursal VCA, SVF, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico RND, DIY Multimode VCF, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Make Noise Mimeophon, Noise Engineering Desmodus Versio, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Bastl ABC Mixer, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, Befaco Even VCO, Rampage, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Erica Synths Pico VCO, Pico RND, Black Wavetable VCO, Zlob Diode Chaos, Entropy, Vnicursal VCA, SVF, Befaco Rampage, After Later Audio Monsoon ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Erica Synths Pico RND, Pico DSP, Pico BBD, DIY Swamp, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Zlob Vnicursal VCA, SVF, Diode Chaos, Entropy, AI Synthesis Stompbox Adapter, Quad VCA/Mixer, Bastl ABC Mixer, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Noise Engineering Desmodus Versio, Cursus Iteritas, After Later Audio Monsoon ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

This is the second presentation of the REthink Energy: Countdown to COP26 lecture series, co-organised by the IIEA and ESB. On this occasion, three expert speakers assesses a new framework for energy solutions, developed by the World Economic Forum in partnership with Accenture, which shifts the political and commercial focus beyond cost to include value. In collaboration with ESB, Accenture has applied this new System Value Framework (SVF) to Ireland to assess pathways to achieve 7% annual emissions reductions per annum to 2030. The SVF seeks to evaluate economic, environmental, social, and technical outcomes of potential energy solutions - not just their cost implications. Kristen Panerali outlines the key features of this new framework, while Stephanie Jamison shares the findings of the Irish market analysis. Finally, Dr Paul Deane highlights the potential opportunities that the framework presents to achieve Ireland's 2030 climate and energy targets. About the Speakers: Kristen Panerali is Head of Electricity at the World Economic Forum (WEF). She focuses on enabling public and private sector activity to identify the most effective policies, actions, and cooperation to accelerate the energy transition. Ms Panerali has 20 years of experience in the government and energy-related private sector. Prior to joining the WEF, she worked in electricity sector strategy, acquisitions, project development and financing with the AES Corporation, AES Solar and SunEdison. Previously, Ms Panerali worked at the White House in various political roles at the National Economic Council and Office of Management and Budget. Stephanie Jamison is the Global Industry Lead for Accenture's Utilities business, responsible for a portfolio of services across the utility value chain. Ms Jamison has a proven track record of helping clients with energy transition and growth strategies while driving business transformation programs with utilities in North America and Europe. Stephanie conducts research and has published articles related to the Digitally Enabled Grid and the New Energy Consumer and is a World Economic Fellow with the Energy and Materials industry platform. Dr Paul Deane is a senior research fellow in clean energy futures at the Environmental Research Institute's MaREI Centre in UCC. He has authored and co-authored over 120 technical papers on the future of energy in areas such as electricity markets, European and global power systems, renewable energy integration and energy access. He was first author on Ireland's Low Carbon Roadmap in 2015 and provides technical assistance to several electricity modelling projects in Ireland and Europe. Dr Deane is an active contributor to European policy thinking on clean energy and in 2019 was the Royal Irish Academy speaker in computer science and engineering.

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Erica Synths, Pico RND, Pico DSP, DIY Swamp, Black Wavetable VCO, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, AI Synthesis Stompbox Adapter, Quad VCA/Mixer, Zlob Vnicursal VCA, SVF, Diode Chaos, Befaco Rampage, Even VCO, Sampling Modulator, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Bastl ABC Mixer ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

I det här avsnittet gästas vi av David och Tilda som studerar Grafisk design & kommunikation på Svf. De berättar hur det är, vad som är så bra med Gdk. Funderar du på att studera något liknande är det här avsnittet särskilt mycket för dig!

In this latest installment, things get... a little weird. We present to you: Brazil (1985) vs Southland Tales (2006), two strangely similar yet VERY different sci-fi dystopian comedies (one intentional, one we're not sure) about Kafkaesque government bureaucracy, terrorism, and plastic surgery. Both boast talented all-star casts (if not necessarily in the right roles), great scores (if not necessarily in the right places), and some fascinating dream sequences (if indeed Justin Timberlake singing The Killers is a dream sequence... we're still not 100% sure).Join us for lots of fiction and very little science on this special episode of SvF!

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/user/MrSystemSuicideModules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, Noise Engineering Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Cursus Iteritas, Desmodus Versio, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Befaco Mutes, Even VCO, Sampling Modulator, Chopping Kinky, Rampage, Erica Synths Pico VCO, Pico BBD, Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Multimode VCF, Black Wavetable VCO, Pittsburgh Modular Crush, Zlob Vnicursal VCA, SVF, Diode Chaos, AI Synthesis AI007 Quad VCA/Mixer, Bastl ABC mixer, After Later Audio Monsoon, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

One year ago this month, we went to Austin to cover Time After Time on our first ever live show at Other Worlds Film Festival. This year we are back for the 2020 OWFF virtual festival! This time around, we tackle the Sylvester Stallone 90s comic-book adaptation Judge Dredd and its 2012 remake Dredd. We talk about sci-fi bullets and the wounds they cause, the nature of the fictional designer drug "slo-mo", and where the heck a city the size of the entire eastern seaboard grows its food. Join us for this very special raw, unfiltered episode of SvF!

Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityBandcamp:https://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Freq Boutique 44:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DraNnqd-LAModules used in this patch: Ornament and Crime, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Desmodus Versio, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Schlappi Engineering Angle Grinder, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Zlob Diode Chaos, Vnicursal VCA, SVF, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, Pico VCO, Pico RND, DIY Swamp, Befaco Rampage, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes Chaos Module, After Later Audio Monsoon ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Gewalt gegen Frauen und Mädchen ist alltäglich. Seit 1976 können sie in einem Berliner Verein lernen, sich mit Taekwondo-Techniken gegen Angriffe zu wehren. Ein Besuch beim "SvF", einem der ältesten Selbstverteidigungsvereine für Frauen in Europa. Von Peter Kaiser www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Nachspiel Hören bis: 19.01.2038 04:14 Direkter Link zur Audiodatei

https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityhttps://nullphiinfinity.bandcamp.com/https://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Modules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Make Noise Maths, Mimeophon, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Basimilus Iteritas Alter, Desmodus Versio, Erica Synths Black Wavetable VCO, DIY Multimode VCF, Pico RND, Befaco Sampling Modulator, AI Synthesis AI007 Quad VCA/Mixer, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

脂肪膠製作, SVF gel preparation 醫學美容的治療有三個原則：第一、下垂的要拉提，第二、凹陷的要填充，第三、過多的要減少。 其中，凹陷填充我們統稱為填充劑，英文叫 filler, 最早用矽膠填充，但是因為與人體不相容，會因地心引力而改變位置，形成不自然的外觀。後來用玻尿酸、微晶瓷、水微晶、聚左璇乳酸……等等。成分作用有些不同，原理都一樣，也都會隨時間慢慢消失，隔一段時間要再次治療。 填充劑當中，還有一個自體脂肪，優點是穩定後就不會消失，缺點是注射後會吸收一部分，效果不好預測。如果自體脂肪能有其他填充劑的效果，打多少就是多少，不吸收的話就很完美了。 現在，醫學的進步已經帶來好消息，將自體脂肪經過特殊處理後，可以得到「脂肪膠」，可以像玻尿酸一樣，打多少就是多少，三個月後吸收率不會超過20%，遠程保存率相當高，已經是一大進步了。 「脂肪膠」這是我暫時的命名，也有人稱為「微粹脂肪」，英文名稱都是 SVF gel，如果按照字面翻譯，應該是「血管間質成分膠」，太長太麻煩了。既然是脂肪純化來的，又是膠狀物，叫「脂肪膠」比較容易懂。 脂肪膠能做什麼？簡單說，玻尿酸能做的脂肪膠都能做。隆鼻、墊下巴、夫妻宮填充、額頭填充、臉頰填充、甚至耳垂加厚、男女私密處都可以使用。根據國外醫學文獻的報導，脂肪膠稀釋之後還能改善細紋和凹陷，例如頸紋、肥胖紋、妊娠紋、唇紋……都可以改善。

「奈米脂肪」是利用機械性純化處理脂肪後得到的脂肪產品。 用一種特殊的抽脂管將脂肪抽出，得到較為細碎的脂肪，稱為「微細脂肪」( Microfat)，超音波溶脂後得到的脂肪，也有「微細脂肪」的效果。然後將微細脂肪放進10ml 的針筒內，來回對打，把脂肪細胞搗碎，得到一種乳糜化的脂肪，就稱為「奈米脂肪」( Nanofat)。 奈米脂肪內幾乎已經沒有完整的脂肪細胞，但是脂肪幹細胞、間質細胞、血管內皮細胞的含量很豐富，可以拿來做淺層注射，改善細紋。 以前難以處理的黑眼圈、皮膚細紋、唇紋都可以得到不錯的改善。但是因為裡面破油多，引起的發炎反應較明顯，注射後局部的腫脹頗明顯。 2017年以後，醫學文獻發表進一步處理奈米脂肪後得到「脂肪膠」(SVF gel)，可作淺層和深層的填充，改善更多問題。請關注更多「Grand Beauty」大醫美頻道，我們會有更新的訊息天公給您喔。

Dagen avsnitt är historiskt! Vi har med oss vår allra första gäst, och inte vem som helst utan P3 Klubbens egna Nanna Olasdotter Hallberg!Nanna lär oss allt hon kan om hennes favorit epok, Jägare/samlare samhället! Ett underbart avsnitt med andra ord! Följ Nanna på Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nannaolasdotter/?hl=sv och följ även P3 klubben: https://www.instagram.com/p3klubben/?hl=svFölj oss på instagram: https://www.instagram.com/historiaforidioter/?hl=svKontakt: historiaforidioterpodcast@gmail.com See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityhttps://www.youtube.com/user/mrsystemsuicidehttps://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Modules used in this episode: Ornament and Crime, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Erica Synths Pico VCO, Pico RND, Zlob Entropy, Diode Chaos, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Befaco Rampage, Even VCO, Sampling Modulator, Bastl Little Nerd, AI Synthesis Quad VCA, Matrix Mixer, Make Noise Maths, 0-coast, After Later Audio Monsoon.  ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

https://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityhttps://www.youtube.com/user/mrsystemsuicidehttps://www.instagram.com/nullphiinfinity/Modules used in this patch: Erica Synths DIY Multimode VCF, DIY Swamp, Black Wavetable VCO, Pico RND, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF, Doepfer A-124 Wasp Filter, AI Synthesis Matrix Mixer, Quad VCA/Mixer, Snazzy FX Kitty Eyes, Make Noise Maths, 0-Coast, After Later Audio Monsoon,  ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

https://www.communityjusticeexchange.org/nbfn-directoryhttps://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityModules used in this patch: AI Synthesis Stomp Box Adapter, Quad VCA, Make Noise Maths, Ornament and Crime, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF, Befaco Even VCO, Rampage, Erica Synths Swamp, Pico RND, After Later Audio Monsoon ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

https://www.communityjusticeexchange.org/nbfn-directoryhttps://www.patreon.com/nullphiinfinityModules used in this patch: Ornament and Crime, After Later Audio Monsoon, Zlob Diode Chaos, SVF, Vnicursal VCA, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, Erica Synths Pico VCO. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

In this episode, our host Dr. Trevor Turner, RMSK interviews Dr. Chris Rogers and Dr. Mary Ambach (https://sdomg.com/), Interventional Pain specialists in San Diego, CA about the use of fat-derived stem cells to treat orthopedic disease with a focus on their ongoing clinical trial for knee osteoarthritis.In this episode, we discuss key concepts such as: how effective are these injections, and what should be treated with them? Are they safe? How common are complications from liposuction, and how painful is it? How is this changing the way we obtain stem cells, and how is it different from cells from the bone marrow? What are future directions of the field?Have more questions? Do not hesitate to check out our updated research based library where we accumulate the best scientific evidence from around the world for orthopedic applications of PRP (https://www.georgiaboneandjoint.org/prp-educational-library/) and stem cells (https://www.georgiaboneandjoint.org/bmac-evidence-based-literature-library/). Or check out our blog (https://www.georgiaboneandjoint.org/blog/) or book online: https://www.georgiaboneandjoint.org/book-appointment/.

https://www.communityjusticeexchange.org/nbfn-directoryModules used: Ornament and Crime, Erica Synths DIY Swamp, DIY Multimode VCF, Pico RND, Pico VCO, Make Noise Maths, Befaco Rampage, Chopping Kinky, Sampling Modulator, After Later Audio Monsoon, Doepfer A-124 Wasp Filter, AI Synthesis Quad VCA/Mixer, Bastl Little Nerd, SVF Diode Chaos, Entropy, SVF, Noise Engineering Cursus Iteritas, LMNC Saftey Valve. ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

Historia för idioter är podden där vi pratar om historia på ett lätt och vardagligt sätt och tar på allt det roliga som skolverket missar!I vårt andra specialavsnitt så pratar vi om den brittiska sångerskan Vera Lynn som nyligen gick bort.Följ oss på Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/historiaforidioter/?hl=svFölj oss på Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/groups/878924342613497/ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Historia för idioter är podden där vi pratar om historia på ett lätt och vardagligt sätt och tar på allt det roliga som skolverket missar!I detta avsnitt så byter vi roller och Theo tar rodret och Alex sitter och killgissar när vi pratar om en av de fem goda kejsarna, Marcus Aurelius. Och som vanligt, glöm inte att lyssna efter det så kallade ljuget! Följ oss på isntagram: https://www.instagram.com/historiaforidioter/?hl=svFölj oss på Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/878924342613497/ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

How likely is it that humans can catch horrible diseases from adorable monkeys? Are those big, shiny decontamination suits all that effective? Can deadly snot work its way through the ventilation system of a crowded theater? These questions and more (even some intelligent ones) as Scott and Steven do the SvF treatment on Outbreak (1995) and Contagion (2011), two very different takes on one very scary scenario.  And we have a guest! Dr. Vincent DeGennaro (yep, Steven's brother) is an epidemiologist who has fought disease all over the globe and is currently hard at work in Haiti. He's also a big movie nut, which makes Dr. Vince the perfect person to help dissect these two star-studded thrillers in the areas of entertainment value and (especially) scientific intelligence. 

  Subscribe to our mailing list * indicates required Email Address *   References https://www.stemcures.com/simplified-fda-stem-cell-guidelines-for-lower-back-pain-and-joint-pain-treatment https://search.usa.gov/search?query=fat+derived+stem+cells+for+low+back+pain&affiliate=fda1 https://www.dallasprpandstemcell.com/fda-confirms-that-whartons-jelly-products-are-biologic-drugs-must-be-registered-as-such/

The FDA and Regenerative Medicine Procedures: A Summary of the FDAs Stance on PRP, BMAC, SVF, Amnio and more!   Subscribe to our mailing list for Free Board Prep Material & More! * indicates required Email Address * Email Format Reference https://www.stemcures.com/simplified-fda-stem-cell-guidelines-for-lower-back-pain-and-joint-pain-treatment   https://search.usa.gov/search?query=fat+derived+stem+cells+for+low+back+pain&affiliate=fda1 https://www.dallasprpandstemcell.com/fda-confirms-that-whartons-jelly-products-are-biologic-drugs-must-be-registered-as-such/

Scott and Steven take a short break from the normal SVF format to bring you a breakdown of the best science fiction films they saw at Fantastic Fest 2019 -- and there are a lot of them. (We also cover some non-sci-fi as well.) Grab a pen for this episode because you're going to want to keep an eye out for most of these movies... like the creepy Lovecraft adaptation that stars Nicolas Cage!   As always, thanks for the support. Spread the word if you like the show!   Thank you, Fantastic Fest! 

If you love volcanoes, prepare for your new favorite episode of Science vs Fiction. Not only do Scott and Steven discuss 1997's warring lava movies, Dante's Peak and Volcano, but they've also invited a guest along! Geologist / volcanologist Jess Phoenix (https://twitter.com/jessphoenix2018) (of the excellent podcast Catastrophe! (https://www.catastropheshow.com/) ) is not only an expert, educator, and the founder of Blueprint Earth, but she's also a huge movie geek who really knows her stuff.  --- Thanks for listening! To support SvF financially -- and enjoy some bonus episodes -- please visit https://www.patreon.com/scottEweinberg

Continuación del episodio 006 Qué es BIM360. Las 5 claves de "Docs" Gestor documental sencillo y 100% online, pero específico para el sector AEC:Visor de archivos de diseño, comparador de versiones, gestor de incidencias...)Pago por usuario (lo más habitual 130-260€ al año).El mejor para la fase de diseño, si trabajamos en entorno Autodesk (Revit, Navisworks, Autocad, Infraworks...).En proyectos BIM, se puede usar como entorno común de datos (CDE), pero en proyectos públicos medianos/grandes y en empresas privadas que gestionan muchos proyectos a la vez, se queda corto de funcionalidades de gestión y flujos avanzados, con respecto a la competencia (Aconex y Viewpoint).Tienda de aplicaciones de terceros y API abierta que permiten agregar y desarrollar nuevas funcionalidades. Carpetas: lo que entendemos todos Estructura e información completamente separada para cada proyecto. Interfaz sencilla muy similar a una ventana de windows, con iconos de archivos y carpetas en la parte principal, pestañas en la parte superior, y un navegador "en árbol" de carpetas en la vertical izquierda.Podemos crear todas las carpetas y subcarpetas que queramos. Permisos 5 niveles de permisos, pero dos son los más usados:Ver y descargar.Ver, descargar, cargar y editar.Otros son:Solo cargar.Ver, descargar y cargar.Control total (editor que puede modificar permisos).En en roadmap a corto plazo está "Ver sin descargar".Si no tienes permisos para una carpeta, directamente no la ves.Si tienes permisos para una carpeta, los tienes tambien para todo lo que hay dentro. Puedes ampliar permisos dentro, pero no reducirlos.No hay permisos por archivo. "Planos": la carpeta rarita Sólo admite archivos de diseño: RVT, DWG, IFC, PDF y DWF.No se crea un icono por archivo, sino un icono por cada vista 2D, 3D y plano del archivo. Si es un archivo de Revit, puedes elegir qué vistas y planos quieres que aparezcan.Si es un PDF, el número y nombre de cada icono lo saca automáticamente de cada plano. ¿Para qué se usa? Es el equivalente a tener los planos impresos en papel. Facilita el acceso a los planos a personal menos "informático".Hay quién la usa como la zona "Publicado" para poner hay los planos que son contractualmente entregables.Al poder manejar vistas de forma independiente, también es en esta zona donde se suben las vistas 3D que queremos usar para el módulo de detección de interferencias (Model Coordination). Consideraciones en "Planos" Al ver que los planos de Revit aparecen en esta zona, muchos preguntan que si se pueden imprimir o guardar en pdf desde aquí. Si, pero de uno en uno. En el caso de los PDF, puedes exportar cada página como un pdf independiente, y puedes exportar varios a la vez.No se pueden copiar ni mover archivos desde o hacia la carpeta Planos, hay descargarlos de la zona Archivos y volver a subirlos. Fallo épico.La aplicación Desktop Conector no sincroniza con la carpeta Planos.No usar nunca la carpeta "Planos" para guardar archivos "cloud" de Revit, no tendríamos forma de eliminarlos o cambiarles el nombre. Visor online Formatos soportados 39 formatos: los más famosos:Autodesk: Revit, Autocad, Navisworks, Inventor, 3DS Max, FBX...Otros interesantes en BIM: IFC, Sketchup, DGN (sólo 3D), Rhino. Industriales: Catia, Siemens NX, Solidworks... Ofimática: imágenes, PDF y Microsoft Office.Los archivos de Word, Excel y Powerpoint, los podemos editar si tenemos cuenta profesional de Office 365. Gran olvidado: nubes de puntos.Todo se convierte al formato SVF (el glTF de Autodesk), para que se muevan de forma ligera en un navegador web o teléfono. Funcionalidades Ver propiedades.Hacer secciones en 3D.Modo "paseo".Apagar/aislar capas y categorías (revit sólo en 3D).Medir longitudes, áreas y ángulos.Vistas en paralelo.Comparador de versiones. Marcas de revisión.Incidencias. Comparador de versiones La joya de la corona de la productividad en BIM360. 2D superpuesto (azul sobre rojo): DWG, DWF y PDF.2D inteligente: RVT.3D inteligente: DWG, RVT, IFC (sólo de revit, ArchiCAD y Tekla) y NWD.Otras plataformas también tienen comparadores pero sólo de CAD e IFC. Consideraciones del Visor online Cuidado con las vistas 2D rasterizadas en Revit, se pierden las funciones de Propiedades, Medir y el Comparador:Imágenes, estampados o renders.Nubes de puntos.Sombras, vista sombreada o realista.Degradados, jirones de niebla (depth cueing), líneas de croquis (sketchy lines).Materiales con aspectos con imágenes personalizadas, no se ven en el visor. Sólo funcionan los aspectos que vienen por defecto con revit.El visor está capado para funcionar sólo con la versión de Revit actual y las 4 anteriores. (Hoy sería de 2016 en adelante). Otros (otro día) Marcas de revisión.Incidencias.Flujos de aprobación.Transmisiones.Conjuntos. ¿Quieres que responda a tus preguntas en el podcast? Envíamelas en la sección de contactar. ¿Quieres escuchar otro episodio? Los tienes todos en la sección de Podcast de esta web.

Vi älskar att meditera! Jessica är meditationslärare och har mediterat regelbundet sedan 2009. Jenny hittade till meditationen lite senare men även hon är numera frälst.I det här avsnittet delar vi med oss av de positiva effekter vi upplever att meditation har i våra liv. Regelbunden meditation hjälper oss att bli medvetna om våra tankar, vilket gör att vi kan sortera bort negativa tankar som inte stärker oss. Meditationen hjälper oss också att bli mer närvarande i nuet och den gör oss till snällare medmänniskor. Vi blir inte heller så reaktiva utan det ger oss ett skydd mot utmanande händelser i livet, både stora och små. Det är som en krockudde i vardagen helt enkelt! :) Meditation har stress-sänkande effekt och det finns mycket forskning på hälsofördelar med meditation.Vi pratar om:-Koppling mellan yoga och meditation-Olika tekniker; andning; mantrameditation, tyst meditation-Fördelar som vi ser i vår vardag när vi regelbundet mediterar-Hur meditation gör oss snällare mot oss själva och dem runtomkring-Varför rekommendationen är att vi sitter och inte ligger när vi mediterar-Minskad brottslighet i Washingtonhttp://www.worldpeacegroup.org/washington_crime_study.htmlOm headspacehttps://www.headspace.com/Länk till Appen: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.getsomeheadspace.android&hl=svFör information och anmälan till vårt retreat 12-14 oktober i Ubbhult utanför GöteborgLänk till eventet på facebookFör anmälan:info@andromedahealth.seSÅ HÄR STÖTTAR DU VÅR PODCAST:1. Gå till www.jessicaisegran.com/gc-link-tree och donera till vår podcast!2. Prenumerera där du lyssnar på oss!3. Skriv en recension på iTunes nu!Dela podden med en vän redan idag!VILL DU SÄGA HEJ TILL OSS, BOKA RETREATS ELLER LIKNANDE SÅ HITTAR DU OSS HÄR:Maila oss om du har idéer, frågor eller bara vill säga något trevligt :)Thegamechangerspodcast@gmail.comHitta podcasten på Insta:@TheGameChangersPodcastPå Facebook:The Game Changers PodcastVåra företag:jessicaisegran.com Om du vill boka coachning, privatlektion i yoga eller meditation.Soulplanet.se Om du vill boka Reconnective Healing eller “Nå dina mål” med mental träning.Instagram@jessicaisegran@soulplanet_wellnessFacebookSoulplanet - Jennys sidaJessica Isegran - Jessicas sidaMusik:Werq by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

NordicBets allsvenska podcast Ljugarbänken är tillbaka med avsnitt 92 och den här veckan avhandlar trion Bergman, Edman och Lindström bland annat:Är Allsvenskan på väg mot basketregler?Ska MFF slarva sig ut ur Europa?Allsvenskans Xavi!Nästa Emil Forsberg!Edmans kanske mest traumatiska livshändelse!Svensk breddfotboll är usel!Klippare är i vanlig ordning Martin Gustafsson!Tre saker till:Missa inte chansen att vinna snygga Ljugarbänken-tröjor och C More-abonnemang genom att rygga Edman och Lindströms tripplar under #LoveTheBet på https://www.nordicbet.com/svFölj oss på Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/ljugarbankenpodcast/Följ oss på Twitter! https://twitter.com/ljugarbank See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This is the review of the bengali movie Bidaay Byomkesh directed by Debaloy Bhattacharya and produced by Shrikant Mohta and Mahendra Soni under the banner of Shree Venkatesh Films. The film released on 20 July 2018. It is the sixth installment of Byomkesh film series produced by SVF. Cast Abir Chatterjee as Byomkesh Bakshi / Satyaki Bakshi (Double Role) Sohini Sarkar as Satyabati / Tunna (Double Role) Rahul Banerjee as Ajit Bandopadhyay Joy Sengupta as Abhimanyu Bakshi Bidipta Chakrabarty Rupankar Bagchi Sujoy Prosad Chatterjee Arindam Sil Bidaay Byomkesh (বিদায় ব্যোমকেশ) | Official Trailer https://youtu.be/zwiBBB-88fE Shondhye Namar Aagey | Bidaay Byomkesh | Full Video Song - https://youtu.be/9YUdKQMq0Tk Follow us - YT channel - www.youtube.com/channel/UCEQg-6lBCvPZn9 Instagram - instagram.com/brainskibaat Facebook - www.facebook.com/brainskibaat/ Twitter - twitter.com/BrainsKiBaat Telegram - https://t.me/BrainsKiBaat

As you probably know, stem cell therapy outside of the research setting is the Wild West. It’s offered everywhere, here and outside of the US (there’s a whole “stem cell tourism trade”). Radical claims are made routinely without much evidence or oversight. Pricing for therapy, and protocols used, vary widely, although anyone (even those participating in research trials) can expect to spend thousands of dollars. Given that my patient has MS, I reached out to Dr. Terry Wahls and asked if she had any insight into a direction for us. She suggested I look into a massive, years-long multi-center clinical trial using stromal vascular fractions (AKA adipose-derived stem cells and growth factors) for a variety of conditions, including MS. The first publication from this study out February 2017, focusing on safety of SVF over 5 years, demonstrated a very low number of adverse events, and significant improvement in pain rating in a variety of musculoskeletal diseases. (N =1524)

The Revolution of Regenerative Medicine: The traditional approach to medicine was the use of the body to heal itself (risk avoidance and appropriate nutrition/activity). While the advances of surgery, antibiotics, and drugs have been revolutionary in many areas, it is clear that we have strayed from the original respect of the body’s innate healing ability. Through the use of the body’s own SVF (cells and extracellular factors), a brand new set of possibilities has been opened. Deployment options from a multi-specialty team include directed image-guided placement and intravenous/intrathecal. Please see the medical practice description and biography for Gregory Laurence, MD on podcast episode 1.

The Revolution of Regenerative Medicine: Dr. Laurence responds to a roundtable question from a post-myocardial infarction (heart attack) patient who previously was enrolled in an (IRB) approved human trial. The patient was not a responder to the direct placement of bone marrow-derived SVF into the heart. The patient is not certain whether her non-response was due to a placebo treatment or if there would have been a better way to deliver her own SVF (stem cells and extracellular factors). Dr. Laurence’s perspective is that the body normally effectively delivers oxygen and nutrition through the vascular network. He believes that if a direct placement of SVF/cells is indicated, that an additional vascular deployment would almost always be indicated. This interaction begs the question: If efficacy can be demonstrated for healing diseased hearts, why would our paradigm not change to using similar approaches (along with healthy living) to treat all organs in a PREVENTIVE manner. Only time will tell if this strategy will meet the high standard of evidence-based medicine. Please see the medical practice description and biography for Gregory Laurence, MD on podcast episode 1.

The Revolution of Regenerative Medicine: Healthy people, best candidates for cell surgery Dr. Laurence is excited that several areas of medicine have shown substantial progress with SVF response-rates. Stem Cells have shown the ability to stabilize or cause disease regression. Networks of physicians have at times seen dramatic results in the areas of brain, heart, joint, and lung medicine. Efficacy has been particularly impressive in the area of autoimmune, inflammatory, and pain conditions. It is possible that the most overlooked potential patient is the one who seems to be free of significant degenerative or chronic disease. The concept of “cellular regeneration” might be validated over time. That concept is that the highest level health might be accomplished through a lifelong commitment to periodic scheduled SVF/Cell Surgical deployments. This idea implies that the patient's own organ is the template over which a “new” fully compatible organ would generate. This reality might require the future ability to expand autologous cells and deploy in the most appropriate manner, potentially in combination with engineered cells. Please see the medical practice description and biography for Gregory Laurence, MD on podcast episode 1.

The Revolution of Regenerative Medicine: Dr. Laurence explains the concept of point of care (POC) procedures. Using a fat removal (lipo-aspiration) technique that Dr. Laurence has used for a decade, fatty tissue is painlessly harvested from a fatty area of the body and is separated in a closed system. Using either an enzymatic, energy, or mechanical technique, the fat cells are separated from the stromal vascular fraction (SVF). The SVF is then deployed in the most appropriate manner for tissue repair. This procedure is available worldwide, and patients are traveling from the U.S. to Europe, South America, China, and Mexico, paying up to a 500% premium for this procedure. This cost difference contrasts with other medical tourism procedures, where travel has traditionally been associated with deep discounts. Please see the medical practice description and biography for Gregory Laurence, MD on podcast episode 1.

The Revolution of Regenerative Medicine: There is still much that we do not know about the best protocols to enhance results—engineered cells vs. native stromal vascular fraction (SVF) vs expanded cell. In time we will develop a higher level of customized treatment protocols. Dr. Laurence believes the treatment of healthy individuals will become more common as it becomes more known that SVF provides cellular optimization. Many jobs and professions are high risk for strain and injury to the body as it is damaged through repetitive motion or high strain activities. The NFL has only recently recognized its responsibility to protect athletes. Individuals who have advanced cancer, who smoke, or who are unwilling to accept that a positive result may not be appreciated are not candidates for treatment. Please see the medical practice description and biography for Gregory Laurence, MD on podcast episode 1.

The Revolution of Regenerative Medicine: Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) is a combination of multiple cellular and extracellular factors which can be moved from one area of the body to another. Bone marrow SVF-acquisition may be demonstrated to have substantial efficacy for certain clinical applications, but fatty compartments are normally easier to access. Most physicians don’t realize that the majority of cells in adipose/fat tissue are NOT fat cells. There is some evidence that adipose-derived SVF may have higher counts of the most important cells. These cellular (and extracellular factors), once they are removed and re-deployed, essentially perform the same tasks that they were always meant to perform in their original fat tissue location. The important cell players: the mesenchymal stem cell, hematopoietic stem cell, pericyte, macrophage, lymphocyte, and pre-adipocyte all have unique roles. Likely they work together in a “symphony” of coordinated behavior. We are still discovering the best way to deploy these factors potentially with engineered “designer cells.” Please see the medical practice description and biography for Gregory Laurence, MD on podcast episode 1.

Vad är Grafisk form & kommunikation och för vem? Vad händer på Gfk och vad händer sen? I första avsnittet av Toppform berättar vi lite om detta och hur man söker till Gfk. Och vad Svf betyder och är för något. Show notes m.m. finns att hitta på toppformpod.se.

Grieķija pagājušā nedēļā nenokārtoja savas parādsaistības ar Starptautisko valūtas fondu (SVF) un neatmaksāja 1,6 miljardu eiro parādu, kļūstot par pirmo attīstīto valsti, kas nepilda savas parādsaistības pret SVF. Tikmēr Grieķijas galvaspilsētā Atēnās vairāk nekā 20 tūkstoši cilvēku bija izgājuši demonstrācijā, paužot atbalstu starptautisko kreditoru priekšlikumiem. Demonstranti, vicinot ES un Grieķijas karogus, pagājušā otrdienā bija sapulcējušies pie parlamenta ēkas. Savukārt vakar, 5. jūlijā grieķi devās balsot referendumā, sakot “jā” vai “nē” starptautisko kreditoru priekšlikumiem valsts finanšu krīzes risināšanā. Raidījumā Septiņas dienas Eiropā Grieķijas referenduma rezultātus analizē Latvijas Universitātes asociētais profesors, politologs Ojārs Skudra un SEB bankas ekonomists Dainis Gašpuitis. Rubrikā Viedokļi. Eiropas Savienība ir nolēmusi palīdzēt Itālijas imigrācijas krīzes jaunākajai māsai - Ungārijai. Pēdējā laikā arī šī valsts ir saņēmusi skaļu kritiku par savu ieceri noraidīt tūkstošiem imigrantu prasības pēc palīdzības; vairākas ES dalībvalstis ir paudušas, ka tas ir nepieņemami. Lai palīdzētu valstij tikt galā ar lielo imigrantu skaitu, kas ierodas no Serbijas, Eiropas Komisija ir solījusi uz Ungāriju nosūtīt finansiālo palīdzību un ekspertu komandu. Lielākā daļa imigrantu Ungārijā ierodas no Kosovas, taču daudzi nāk arī no tālās Sīrijas, Afganistānas un Irākas. Šogad vien caur Serbiju Ungārijā nelegāli jau ir ieradušies vairāk nekā 65 tūkstoši cilvēku. ES migrācijas un iekšlietu komisārs Dimitris Avramopuls diskusijā ar Ungārijas amatpersonām Budapeštā sacīja: “Nebūs melots, ja teiksim, ka Ungārija šobrīd izjūt lielu spiedienu. Līdz šim mēs runājām par Itāliju un Grieķiju, taču tagad mēs esam pievienojuši arī Ungāriju”. Aizvadītajā mēnesī saasinājās arī attiecības starp Austriju un Ungāriju. Budapešta nolēma pārtraukt savu dalību tā dēvētajā Dublinas sistēmā, kas nosaka, ka primāri atbildīga par migrantu lūgumu pēc patvēruma ir tā valsts, kurā pirmajā imigrants ierodas. Tā kā Ungārija ir ES robežvalsts, saskaņā ar šo sistēmu uz tās pleciem arī gulstas vislielākā atbildības nasta. Visplašākā kritika izskanēja no Austrijas, kur nonāk lielākā daļa patvēruma meklētāju no Ungārijas. Dienu vēlāk gan Ungārija centās mīkstināt savu nostāju, skaidrojot, ka tā neatkāpjas no savām starptautiskajām saistībām, vien lūdz atlikt šo normu uz laiku.