Podcasts about Szabo

Municipales 2026 : dans trois mois, les Français élisent leurs maires, mais pour quoi faire ? On attend d'eux qu'ils gèrent le quotidien, préparent l'avenir et restent les premiers recours des citoyens. À chaque campagne, mêmes promesses : qualité de vie, dynamisme, sécurité, écologie. Reste une question : veut-on un maire gestionnaire, un maire visionnaire… ou simplement un maire proche des habitants ? Avec :- Jean Petaux, politologue, ingénieur de recherche en sciences politiques- Cédric Szabo, directeur de l'AMRF - Association des Maires Ruraux de France- Armel Le Coz, co-fondateur de l'ONG Démocratie OuverteRetrouvez tous nos contenus, articles et épisodes sur rcf.frSi vous avez apprécié cet épisode, participez à sa production en soutenant RCF.Vous pouvez également laisser un commentaire ou une note afin de nous aider à le faire rayonner sur la plateforme.Retrouvez d'autres contenus d'économie et société ci-dessous :Silence, on crie : https://audmns.com/jqOozgUOù va la vie ? La bioéthique en podcast : https://audmns.com/UuYCdISContre courant : https://audmns.com/swImDAMAu bonheur des herbes : https://audmns.com/XPVizmQSacré patrimoine : https://audmns.com/TNJhOETEnfin, n'hésitez pas à vous abonner pour ne manquer aucun nouvel épisode.À bientôt à l'écoute de RCF sur les ondes ou sur rcf.fr !Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Jacqui Felgate for The Producer's Point. This week, Jimmy and Jacqui talk about things your partner (or co-worker) does that annoy you?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Birding will change your life.

Stockholm transforms into a glowing gallery during Nobel Week Lights. Our guests Lara Szabo Greisman, co-founder of the festival, and Elise Cervin, Outreach & Production for Tensta, share how art, science, and community meet through light.We explore the stories behind the installations, how the festival brings Nobel ideas to life in public space, and what it means to create connections from the city center to the suburbs through creativity and light.Read more https://www.nobelprizemuseum.se/en/nobel-week-lights/___Keep Up the Good Work. Keep Loving Cities ❤️️__All opinions expressed in each episode are personal to the guest and do not represent the Host of Urbanistica Podcast unless otherwise stated.____Follow Urbanistica on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ,⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠,⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ &⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Youtube channel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠._____Let's connect and talk further about this episode ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mustafa Sherif Linkedin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠._____Visit  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mustafasherif.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ for collaborations and nominations or email me at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠info@mustafasherif.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠_____Thanks to Urbanistica Podcast partner AFRY (Urban Planning and Design)AFRY is an international engineering and design company providing sustainable solutions in the fields of energy, industry, and infrastructure.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Tony McManus to ask him a Question of the day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of 21st Century Water, we sit down with Jeffrey Szabo, CEO of the Suffolk County Water Authority, to explore how strong leadership and strategic planning are transforming one of the largest water utilities in New York. Szabo shares his path from public administration into the water sector, emphasizing that a technical background isn't a prerequisite for impactful leadership. His administrative expertise and focus on culture, innovation, and accountability have positioned the organization as an industry leader.We begin with Szabo's early days in government and how he unexpectedly transitioned into water utility management. Initially unsure about his fit for the role, he realized his skills in project management, strategic visioning, and organizational leadership were exactly what the Authority needed. Over the past 16 years, he's led with a clear strategic direction, focusing first on departmental metrics, then developing the Authority's first and second strategic plans. These plans focus on core operational pillars—like treatment, laboratory science, customer service, and technology—while more recently emphasizing culture, professional growth, and employee retention.Szabo stresses the importance of empowering staff, shifting the culture from passive compliance to active participation. Early challenges included getting employees comfortable with open dialogue, process review, and decision-making autonomy. Over time, the organization evolved into one where continuous improvement and innovation are expected and supported.We then move into the scale of the infrastructure managed by the Authority. It serves 1.2 million residents across an 86-mile stretch, supported by 6,000 miles of water main, over 250 well fields, and 60 storage tanks. The utility draws entirely from a sole source aquifer and operates 600 wells, all maintained with a keen eye on sustainability and proactive investment. Szabo outlines a $110 million capital budget and a $175 million O&M budget, highlighting costs around labor, electricity, and ongoing treatment upgrades.On innovation, Szabo talks about meter-reading pilots, paperless work orders, and customer service enhancements. He also shares their proactive approach to PFAS contamination. Instead of waiting for regulations, they invested early in treatment systems, funded transparently through a dedicated surcharge. The result: full compliance with future federal regulations—six years ahead of schedule.Lastly, Szabo reflects on his role as president of AMWA and the value of knowledge-sharing among the nation's top utility leaders. He closes by defining his legacy: an organization known for innovation, transparency, and empowered people—not just infrastructure.Suffolk County Water Authority: https://www.scwa.comAssociation of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA): https://www.amwa.net00:00 - Introduction to 21st Century Water00:33 - Jeffrey Szabo's Background and Government Experience03:15 - Transition to Suffolk County Water Authority07:30 - Building and Implementing a Strategic Plan10:40 - Culture Shift and Staff Empowerment15:15 - Overview of Water Infrastructure and Scale18:20 - Budget, O&M, and Capital Investments21:00 - Innovation and Future Planning24:00 - Addressing PFAS Proactively27:25 - Leadership in AMWA31:28 - Reflections on Legacy and Organizational Change34:53 - Closing Remarks Aquasight Website: https://aquasight.io/

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Jacqui Felgate for The Producer's Point. This week, Jimmy and Jacqui talk about what 'unwritten rules' do you have?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Tony McManus to ask him a Question of the day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Pat Panetta about the top stories on 3AW Drive this week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Jacqui Felgate for The Producer's Point. This week, Jimmy and Jacqui talk about words we no longer use.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Description (Apple & Spotify)Volcanic wines are among the most distinctive on earth, and no one unpacks their character quite like John Szabo, MS. Author of Volcanic Wines: Salt, Grit and Power, critic at WineAlign, and long-time explorer of lava-born terroirs, John covers what makes a wine “volcanic,” why these bottles often taste more savory and saline than fruity, how regions like Santorini, Etna, Washington, Oregon, Lake County, Moon Mountain, and Tokaj fit into the picture, and where to hunt for compelling bottles now. We also discuss Santorini's drought/over-tourism pressure, a new Volcanic Origin certification, and the rise of dry Furmint from Hungary.

From European judo champion to international Power Slap sensation, Franciska Szabo has lived more lives than most could imagine. In this raw and revealing conversation, Franciska opens up about her journey from Hungary’s judo mats to the bright lights of Las Vegas — where strength, pain, and fame collide. She shares the sacrifices behind her Olympic dreams, the injuries that shaped her resilience, and the double life she led as “Sheena Bathory,” a name that became infamous across the combat and domination worlds. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Jacqui Felgate for The Producer's Point. This week, Jimmy and Jacqui talk about what is the best thing we've adopted from overseas?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Five Questions, Billy sits down with John Szabo, Master Sommelier, author, and volcanic wine expert, to discuss his journey from restaurant kitchens to becoming one of Canada's most respected wine writers and educators.John shares insights from his decades exploring global wine culture, from his work co-founding Volcanic Wines International to his advocacy for sustainability and regenerative farming. He highlights the rise of Canadian wines, the rediscovery of Hungary's historic regions, and the enduring fascination with volcanic terroirs. John also challenges the “clean wine” marketing trend and shares a powerful story from Italy's volcanic heartland.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Tony McManus about... - Who is the Greatest Rock Band in the World? - One Favourite book from Your Childhood? - What is Your Scariest Movie of All Time?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Pat Panetta about the top stories on 3AW Drive this week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo joins Jacqui Felgate for The Producer's Point. This week, Jimmy and Jacqui talk about when have you accidentally offended someone?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Simon Owens about what the best piece of advice you've been given?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Au Royaume-Uni, la Croix de George est la récompense la plus importante qu'un civil peut recevoir. Rares sont les personnes à pouvoir porter fièrement cette insigne de la Seconde Guerre Mondiale, mis en place par le roi George VI. Plus rares encore sont les femmes à l'avoir reçue. Elles ne sont que trois ; Noor Khan, Violette Szabo et Odette Samson. Trois icônes de la résistance, trois femmes au destin tragique, trois incroyables histoires à retrouver dans Secrets d'Agents.Tant pis si elle n'est pas la plus forte ou la plus rusée, le SOE ne veut pas se séparer de Violette Szabo aussi facilement. Son tempérament est très apprécié au sein de l'organisation. Elle a ce don de remonter le moral des troupes, même si elle porte en elle le deuil encore récent de son mari, tombé au combat. On lui propose une formation d'opératrice radio, un poste souvent confié aux espionnes.

Au Royaume-Uni, la Croix de George est la récompense la plus importante qu'un civil peut recevoir. Rares sont les personnes à pouvoir porter fièrement cette insigne de la Seconde Guerre Mondiale, mis en place par le roi George VI. Plus rares encore sont les femmes à l'avoir reçue. Elles ne sont que trois ; Noor Khan, Violette Szabo et Odette Samson. Trois icônes de la résistance, trois femmes au destin tragique, trois incroyables histoires à retrouver dans Secrets d'Agents.Violette Szabo naît le 26 juin 1921 à Levallois-Perret, dans la banlieue ouest de Paris. Elle est l'unique fille d'une fratrie de cinq enfants et grandit dans une famille aux revenus très modestes. Son père, Charles George Bushell est un soldat britannique ayant servi dans la Somme durant la Première Guerre mondiale. C'est après l'armistice qu'il rencontre la mère de Violette, Reine Leroy, une couturière originaire de la région. Le couple vit quelque temps en France avant de rejoindre l'Angleterre avec leurs deux enfants. Charles Bushell espère trouver un emploi stable.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Tony McManus about which state (except your own) would you most like to travel to?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Pat Panetta about the top stories on 3AW Drive this week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jay Berg joined Bitcoin in 2010 and became the first person to tweet about BTCUSD when the price hit a new high of $12. In this episode, he talks about why most Bitcoiners are wrong in their recent filter debate and how SidePit aims to fix trading. Time stamps: 00:01:57 - Hot take: Maxis wrong, shitcoining new Bitcoining 00:03:00 - Bitcoin kernel: Litecoin, Ethereum, Zcash, Lightning, Liquid 00:03:23 - Bitcoin failed as P2P cash 00:04:09 - Filters vs. OP_RETURN debate 00:05:18 - Luke Dash Jr. fork prediction 00:05:45 - Original sin: No OP_CTV (BIP 119) 00:06:47 - 2017 civil war: Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn 00:07:45 - Craig Wright conspiracy 00:08:42 - Wright intro: Bitcoin Belle, Gavin signing (2015) 00:09:32 - Debate with Nick Szabo 00:10:02 - Szabo denies Satoshi; Hal Finney, John Nash possibles 00:11:05 - Civil war apology 00:12:08 - Shitcoiner as new maxi 00:12:42 - Code over 21M meme 00:13:58 - Jay's background: Bloomberg, EURUSD 00:14:49 - 1998 digital cash, double spend 00:15:39 - Fortress HFT 00:17:03 - Bitcoin discovery (2009) 00:18:36 - BTCUSD tweets: Newberg Consulting 00:20:00 - 2010-2014 decentralized era 00:21:10 - Roger Ver adoption (2011) 00:21:30 - BitMEX on 2010 data debates 00:22:01 - OP_RETURN war: Counterparty, Omni 00:22:34 - Ethereum rise 00:23:13 - CP FUD on chain 00:23:36 - Cognitive dissonance 00:24:30 - Ethereum wars: Jimmy Song, Samson Mow 00:25:01 - Ethereum scales Bitcoin tweet 00:27:11 - Plebs control post-2017 00:28:05 - 21M changeable 00:29:06 - BIP 42: Pieter Wuille 00:30:23 - Security budget FUD 00:30:57 - Ethereum VM anti-pattern 00:32:25 - Rock-paper-scissors example 00:35:03 - MEV in DeFi 00:38:12 - Ethereum scales post-war 00:38:45 - Roger Ver buy Core attempt 00:38:52 - Luke Jr. block increase 00:39:38 - OP_CTV from no two-way peg 00:40:05 - Blocked by Adam Back 00:41:36 - Full RBF issue 00:42:10 - Sponsor: Layer2 Labs, Paul Sztorc, Drivechain (BIP 300) 00:42:35 - Sidechains: Thunder, Zside, BitAsset, EthSide 00:43:45 - Litecoin BIP 300 test 00:44:26 - Lightning not Bitcoin 00:45:44 - Sponsor: Citrea ZK rollup 00:46:02 - DeFi, Tornado Cash on Bitcoin 00:47:29 - OP_RETURN bytes need 00:50:02 - Lightning custodians 00:50:58 - Lightning as Bitcoin how? 03:26:01 - Zcash soft fork (2013) 03:26:42 - Trump Ethereum: World Liberty 03:27:50 - BIP 300, OP_CTV excitement 03:28:38 - Stubborn fork potential 03:28:49 - Stamp JPEG issue 03:29:11 - Luke Jr. denial 03:30:28 - No real JPEGs 03:32:24 - Gloria Zhao attack 03:32:54 - Matthew Kratter channel 03:33:21 - Mechanic handler theory 03:34:38 - Luke lost Bitcoin 03:35:48 - Richard Heart Hex debate 03:37:20 - Maxi used ETH 03:37:51 - Gresham's law 03:38:56 - Jason Lowery defense 03:40:31 - Naka, David Bailey 03:41:34 - Maxi cycle 03:42:23 - Cult elements 03:42:52 - Hypocrisy: Dogecoin, Litecoin 03:43:30 - Freedom Index: Monero, Zcash, Pirate, Zano, Nym 03:45:43 - Nym mixnet 03:46:44 - Zano tokens, FUSD 03:48:23 - Roger Ver Zano 03:49:40 - Saberhagen Cryptonote 03:51:55 - Alpha vs beta 03:55:10 - Ethereum leveraged BTC 03:56:21 - Opportunity 03:58:21 - Dorsey funding 03:58:51 - Renaissance or burn 03:59:30 - Number up vs fundamentals 04:00:28 - Success/failure 04:02:17 - Laszlo Pizza fear 04:03:00 - Swaps 04:03:24 - Lightning failure 04:04:30 - Platforms differences 04:05:56 - Shitcoiners new 04:07:20 - No blockchain solve? 04:08:49 - 2010-14 decentralized 04:09:40 - Mt. Gox exchanges 04:10:59 - SidePit swaps 04:11:18 - Follow: sidpit.com, JAYBNY 04:11:51 - Launch Q404:15:01 - Next: Sean Bowe Tachyon 04:15:13 - Sponsors: SideShift, Citrea, LayerTwo Labs, Bitcoin dot com News, Noones

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Tony McManus about what is your secret garden?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Shane McInnes and Jimmy Szabo discuss chores. Do you and your partner have designated chores? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tra dieci giorni il Consiglio dell'Unione Europea voterà la discussa proposta Chat Control. Se dovesse essere approvata le conversazioni private di tutti i cittadini europei potranno venire monitorate e lette dagli Stati e dalle forze dell'ordine. Un incubo distopico che ci renderebbe come la Cina.Inoltre: nella diatriba OP_RETURN si minacciano hard fork su Bitcoin, il lightning network conquista gli utenti di Chipper Cash in Africa, l'uomo più intelligente (o più scemo) del mondo è un bitcoiner. It's showtime!

3AW Drive Executive Producer Jimmy Szabo spoke to Tony McManus to find out things you use to do but don't anymore?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week at The Collective Church, Hamish, Sean and Christos each shared powerful testimonies of God's goodness and guidance. From prophetic words, miraculous protection and discipleship in everyday life, to freedom, authentic community and generational impact, to trusting God through major life transitions and hidden seasons, their stories echo one invitation: surrender the reins, walk with the Spirit, and discover the adventure of God-led lives in community. Follow The Collective Church on Facebook

Jimmy Szabo spoke to Pat Panetta about the top stories on 3AW Drive this week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Benjamin Wallace's new book is The Mysterious Mr. Nakamoto: A Fifteen-Year Quest to Unmask the Secret Genius Behind Crypto.   It's the greatest whodunit. Whoever created Bitcoin became the world's richest person, yet we don't know who he is. In fact, we don't even know if it's one person. There have been other cases where identities have been hidden for a while: Mysterious Whistleblowers (Deep Throat) Mysterious Authors (Ferrante, Klein, Publius) Mysterious Artists (Banksy) Mysterious Spies / Hackers (Cambridge Five, QAnon figureheads, Cicada 3301) However, nothing tops the enigma of Satoshi Nakamoto. Watch my interview with Benjamin Wallace on the WanderLearn Show: Watch the Video Interview Questions for Benjamin Wallace In 60 seconds, tell us why we should be curious about who Satoshi Nakamoto was. What's the percentage chance that Satoshi Nakamoto is more than one person? What's the percentage chance that Satoshi Nakamoto is dead? Assuming he's alive, what's the percentage chance that Satoshi Nakamoto will voluntarily reveal himself in his old age or via a dead man's switch video? Who are your top 4 candidates for Satoshi Nakamoto? If those 4 candidates are in a pie chart, how big is the 5th piece of the pie: the Someone Else slice?  Although Nakamoto's OPSEC was impeccable, is it realistic to believe that he faked his Britishisms, his double-spacing after periods, and potentially running his prose & code through a stylometry mixer because he was certain that Bitcoin would become a multi-trillion-dollar asset? What new insights have you had since you wrote the book? What's the percentage chance that we will definitively solve this mystery like we solved the Deep Throat mystery? Or will the ending be more like Forrest Fenn (e.g., a partial conclusion because we know the treasure was found and by whom, but we don't know where)?  What surprised you in your investigation? It seems you want Nakamoto to be Hal Finney, but it's hard to believe he didn't tap into the fortune when his life was on the line. And why not admit to being Nakamoto when he was on his deathbed? Perhaps to protect his family from assaults? Perhaps because he collaborated with someone else and doesn't want to unmask him. But then he could admit that he was part of the Satoshi team and leave it at that. Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? In his book, Wallace writes that any plausible Nakamoto candidate should have the following characteristics: Software tools Coding quirks Age Geography Schedule Use of English Nationality Prose style Politics Life circumstances (How had Nakamoto found the time to launch Bitcoin? Why had he left the project when he did?" Resume ("I'm not a lawyer.") Emotional range (humble, confident, testy, appreciative) Motivation to create Bitcoin Rationale, and the foresight and skill, to create a bulletproof pseudonym (Who would bother wiping a crime scene clean before it was a crime scene? Who was already that good at privacy in 2008?) Monkish capacity to renounce a fortune Although this list severely restricts who Satoshi Nakamoto could be, it still leaves countless possibilities. Wallace, who has been trying to crack this mystery for 15 years, has yet to meet a candidate who checks all the boxes. Wallace refrains from declaring that he has solved the mystery, even though countless "detectives" have already done so. He interviews people who tell him, with 100% certainty, that Satoshi Nakamoto is: Nick Szabo James A. Donald Adam Back Hal Finney Peter Todd (according to HBO) Elon Musk Numerous other options It's tempting to select what you think is the most viable candidate, throw in a heavy dose of confirmation bias, and declare, "Mystery solved, Sherlock!" Plenty have done so. It requires great restraint to resist the temptation of calling it a day, and instead, persevere pugnaciously like Wallace has in what is the greatest whodunit of the 21st century.  Many suspects seem highly implausible. Elon Musk, for example, is a bombastic self-promoter who would love to proclaim he was the genius behind Bitcoin. It's unimaginable why he would keep his mouth shut. Hal Finney was a sincere, honest, and good guy. As he said many times when he was dying of ALS, he had no reason NOT to reveal that he was Satoshi Nakamoto. Therefore, it's not him, even though it would provide a neat explanation as to why the old Satoshi Nakamoto bitcoins haven't moved.  Adam Back is plausible, although ex-cypherpunk Jon Callas says, "The primary argument against Adam Back is he couldn't keep his mouth shut." Still, an engrossing 3-part documentary argues that Nakamoto is Adam Back. Here's the final episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfcvX0P1b5g  Is Nick Szabo Satoshi Nakamoto? For several years, I believed Nick Szabo was Satoshi Nakamoto. It was an unoriginal deduction since Szabo is a popular choice among amateur Nakamoto detectives. Indeed, Szabo was one of Wallace's prime candidates for a long time. However, in his book, Wallace explains why Szabo has too many strikes against him: Szabo is a scatterbrain when it comes to projects. He doesn't focus on one thing for years. He juggles 150 balls. Nakamoto was laser-focused for 18 months. He told Jeremy Clark that Szabo "seemed to think that his bit gold was better" than Bitcoin. Clark also said Szabo is an "incoherent" presenter, whereas Nakamoto was "lucid."  Although Szabo is intensely private, he's not a complete recluse. He likes sharing ideas and getting public recognition.  Minor point: Satoshi Nakamoto wrote, "I'm not a lawyer," but Szabo is one. Although these points suggest Szabo is unlikely to be Satoshi, Szabo remains a strong Nakamoto candidate, given the absence of a perfect candidate. Besides, Clark's points are easily refuted. Just because Szabo implied Bitgold was better than Bitcoin means little. Szabo could say that to shake off people who think he's Satoshi. Or he could genuinely believe that aspects of Bitgold were superior to Bitcoin. Clark said Szabo "seemed to think..." He didn't say, "Szabo emphatically said..." Also, I listened to Szabo speak for 2.5 hours on the Tim Ferriss Show, and he sounded plenty lucid to me.  Szabo is a decent speaker. Naturally, Szabo always denies he's Satoshi. As Wallace says, denying you're not the guy proves nothing. Mark Felt was an obvious suspect for being the Deep Throat in the Watergate scandal. He denied for decades. And guess what? He was Deep Throat! Sometimes the most obvious suspect is the criminal (think O.J. Simpson). Is James A. Donald Satoshi Nakamoto? After reading The Mysterious Mr. Nakamoto, I added another suspect to my short list: James A. Donald. Satoshi Nakamoto used the rare term "hosed" a few times. Donald did so twice.  Furthermore, Donald was the first person to respond to Satoshi Nakamoto's original Bitcoin post, albeit in a critical way. He has various other attributes that Satoshi Nakamoto shares (read the book to see them all).  However, Donald is rough around the edges, whereas Satoshi Nakamoto was silky smooth, polite, and unoffensive. Again, James A. Donald is no slam dunk candidate. Nobody is. Hence, the mystery endures.  The only negative aspect about this book is that it may provide too much detail for the casual reader with limited interest in this mystery. If you're just looking for the answer, I'll tell you now: we do not know who Satoshi Nakamoto is.  For Satoshi sleuths, there is no better resource than The Mysterious Mr. Nakamoto: A Fifteen-Year Quest to Unmask the Secret Genius Behind Crypto. It delves deeper and wider than any video, article, or book about the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. Believe me, I've gone down that rabbit hole. Why should we care who Satoshi Nakamoto is? Many argue we don't need to know who Satoshi Nakamoto is because: Knowing his identity could taint the "immaculate conception" of Bitcoin because we might learn that Satoshi Nakamoto was an asshole. We should respect Satoshi Nakamoto's right to privacy. He obviously wanted to be pseudonymous, so let him be. If Satoshi Nakamoto is alive, it would imbue him with too much power, especially over the Bitcoin protocol.  I strongly disagree with this lack of curiosity. Why? There's a chance that in the 25th century, historians will consider Bitcoin one of the top 10 inventions of all time. I'm not saying that Bitcoin will be around in the 25th century, but something like it will exist and be the global currency, and historians will link its existence to Bitcoin. In 2001, Arthur C. Clarke predicted that by 2016, "All existing currencies are abolished. A universal currency is adopted based on the 'megawatt hour.'" Eight years before Clarke's prediction, Bitcoin was created. Although Clarke was wrong about other currencies being abolished,  Bitcoin's value is loosely correlated with its energy consumption. I explain why Bitcoin is worth anything. Consider the Top 10 Inventions and Their Inventors Imagine if we didn't know who these inventors were: The Printing Press - Johannes Gutenberg (c. 1440): This invention revolutionized communication, allowing for the mass production of books and the widespread dissemination of knowledge, leading to the Renaissance and the Scientific Revolution. The Electric Light Bulb - Thomas Edison (1879): While others experimented with electric lighting, Edison created a practical, long-lasting, and commercially viable incandescent light bulb, which transformed society by extending the day and enabling new industries. The Telephone - Alexander Graham Bell (1876): The telephone revolutionized long-distance communication, enabling people to speak to each other across vast distances in real time. The Steam Engine - James Watt (1778): Watt's improvements to earlier steam engines significantly increased their efficiency, powering the Industrial Revolution and leading to the mechanization of factories, transportation, and other industries. The Automobile - Karl Benz (1885): Benz is credited with creating the first practical automobile powered by an internal combustion engine, ushering in the age of personal transportation and reshaping urban and rural life. Alternating Current (AC) Electrical System - Nikola Tesla (late 1880s): While Edison championed direct current (DC), Tesla's work on AC made it possible to transmit electricity over long distances, laying the groundwork for modern electrical grids. The Airplane - Orville and Wilbur Wright (1903): The Wright brothers achieved the first successful controlled, powered flight of a heavier-than-air aircraft, fundamentally changing travel, commerce, and warfare. Penicillin - Alexander Fleming (1928): Fleming's discovery of the first antibiotic revolutionized medicine by providing a cure for many bacterial infections, saving millions of lives. The Internet / World Wide Web - Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn (Internet, 1970s) & Tim Berners-Lee (World Wide Web, 1989): These inventions created a global network of information and communication, transforming almost every aspect of modern society, from business and education to personal life. The Computer - Charles Babbage (early 19th century): Babbage's designs for the "Analytical Engine" laid the theoretical groundwork for modern computers. Later, inventors like John Atanasoff, Alan Turing, and others developed the first electronic and programmable computers. Imagine if we had no clue who invented penicillin or the telephone. Wouldn't historians do their best to figure that out, especially since they were recent and impactful inventions? Would you just shrug your shoulders and say, "Who cares? My telephone works." Sure, many wouldn't give a shit. However, for other, more curious minds, we'd like to know.  Major Inventions with Unknown Inventors Here are four major inventions whose creator is a mystery: The Wheel: The invention of the wheel is one of the most important technological advancements in human history, enabling transportation and mechanization. Archaeological evidence suggests it originated in Mesopotamia around 3500 BC, but there is no record of who first conceived of it. The challenge wasn't just creating the wheel itself, but also the wheel-and-axle system, which required precise engineering. Writing: The development of writing systems enabled the permanent storage and transmission of information, transforming human society. The earliest known writing system, cuneiform, emerged in Sumer (ancient Mesopotamia) around 3400 BC. However, like the wheel, it was likely the result of a gradual process of development by many different people, not the work of a single inventor. Fire making: Some person probably rubbed two sticks together, and the rest is history. Since we can't know who that individual was, it would still be fascinating to know where it started and if it was developed in more than one place independently, like Calculus.  Bitcoin: Yeah, it's a major invention. It's been the best-performing asset since 2010, it's worth more than any company, and Satoshi Nakamoto is the wealthiest person ever. It has sparked a multi-trillion-dollar industry in just 15 years. So, yes, it's important, and yet we don't know who created it. Verdict: 10 out of 10 stars! Admittedly, I'm a Bitcoin fan who has produced many videos and articles about the first cryptocurrency, so I'm biased. Still, if you love a perplexing mystery, you will love trying to solve this one. The good news is that we haven't solved it yet.  My Satoshi Nakamoto Fantasy There's a good chance that Satoshi Nakamoto is around my age. If so, he also has a 30-year life expectancy.  I hope that in 2050, a video appears on the Internet that shows an old man who says, "I am Satoshi Nakamoto. To prove it, I will do what no Satoshi pretender has been able to do: move the 'Satoshi' coins that have been dormant since I mined them in 2009." He records himself and his computer screen, and with a few clicks and keyboard taps, the transactions get broadcast onto the Bitcoin blockchain for all to see.    Next, he says, "I am donating my one million bitcoins to the Bitcoin Core for ongoing maintenance and to the following charities." Or perhaps he'll use the one million Bitcoins to create a Bitcoin node on the Moon. Or perhaps he will "burn" his Bitcoin, reducing the total BTC supply to 20 million coins, not 21 million. Regardless, I hope Nakamoto will finally unmask himself, just like Mark Felt (aka Deep Throat) did when he was 91 (he died at 95).  Yeah, this fantasy is unlikely, but we can dream, can't we? Connect Send me an anonymous voicemail at SpeakPipe.com/FTapon You can post comments, ask questions, and sign up for my newsletter at https://wanderlearn.com. If you like this podcast, subscribe and share!  On social media, my username is always FTapon. Connect with me on: Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram TikTok LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr   Sponsors 1. My Patrons sponsored this show! Claim your monthly reward by becoming a patron for as little as $2/month at https://Patreon.com/FTapon 2. For the best travel credit card, get one of the Chase Sapphire cards and get 75-100k bonus miles! 3. Get $5 when you sign up for Roamless, my favorite global eSIM with its unlimited hotspot & data that never expires! Use code LR32K 4. Or get 5% off when you sign up with Saily, another global eSIM with a built-in VPN & ad blocker. 5. Get 25% off when you sign up for Trusted Housesitters, a site that helps you find sitters or homes to sit in. 6. Start your podcast with my company, Podbean, and get one month free! 7. In the United States, I recommend trading cryptocurrency with Kraken.  8. Outside the USA, trade crypto with Binance and get 5% off your trading fees! 9. For backpacking gear, buy from Gossamer Gear.

Volcanic soils account for only around one percent of the earth's surface, but they produce some of the world's most alluring wines explains John Szabo MS in his award -winning book, “Volcanic Wines- Salt, Grit and Power.” Szabo became Canada's first Master Sommelier in 2004. He is a partner and principal critic for WineAlign.com, Canada's largest wine publication, and a buyer for the WineAlign Exchange wine club. He co-hosts the podcast, Wine Thieves, with Sara d'Amato. Follow @johnszabomsThe Connected Table is broadcast live Wednesdays at 2PM ET and Music on W4CY Radio (www.w4cy.com) part of Talk 4 Radio (www.talk4radio.com) on the Talk 4 Media Network (www.talk4media.com).  The Connected Table Podcast is also available on Talk 4 Media (www.talk4media.com), Talk 4 Podcasting (www.talk4podcasting.com), iHeartRadio, Amazon Music, Pandora, Spotify, Audible, and over 100 other podcast outlets.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-connected-table-live--1277037/support.

Lyssa Rome is a speech-language pathologist in the San Francisco Bay Area. She is on staff at the Aphasia Center of California, where she facilitates groups for people with aphasia and their care partners. She owns an LPAA-focused private practice and specializes in working with people with neurogenic communication disorders. She has worked in acute hospital, skilled nursing, and continuum of care settings. Prior to becoming an SLP, Lyssa was a public radio journalist, editor, and podcast producer. In this episode, Lyssa Rome interviews Liz Hoover about group treatment for aphasia.   Guest info Dr. Liz Hoover is a clinical professor of speech language and hearing sciences and the clinical director of the Aphasia Resource Center at Boston University. She holds board certification from the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences, or ANCDS, and is an ASHA fellow. She was selected as a 2024 Tavistock Trust for Aphasia Distinguished Scholar, USA and Canada. Liz was a founding member of Aphasia Access and served on the board for several years. She has 30 years of experience working with people with aphasia and other communication disorders across the continuum of care. She's contributed to numerous presentations and publications, and most of her work focuses on the effectiveness of group treatment for individuals with aphasia.   Listener Take-aways In today's episode you will: Describe the evidence supporting aphasia conversation groups as an effective interventions for linguistic and psychosocial outcomes. Differentiate the potential benefits of dyads versus larger groups in relation to client goals. Identify how aphasia severity and group composition can influence treatment outcomes.   Edited transcript Lyssa Rome Welcome to the Aphasia Access Aphasia Conversations Podcast. I'm Lyssa Rome. I'm a speech language pathologist on staff at the Aphasia Center of California and I see clients with aphasia and other neurogenic communication disorders in my LPAA-focused private practice. I'm also a member of the Aphasia Access Podcast Working Group. Aphasia Access strives to provide members with information, inspiration and ideas that support their aphasia care through a variety of educational materials and resources.   I'm today's host for an episode that will feature Dr. Elizabeth Hoover, who was selected as a 2024 Tavistock Trust for Aphasia Distinguished Scholar, USA and Canada.   Liz Hoover is a clinical professor of speech language and hearing sciences and the clinical director of the Aphasia Resource Center at Boston University. She holds board certification from the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences, or ANCDS, and is an ASHA fellow. Liz was a founding member of Aphasia Access and served on the board for several years. She has 30 years of experience working with people with aphasia and other communication disorders across the continuum of care. She's contributed to numerous presentations and publications, and most of her work focuses on the effectiveness of group treatment for individuals with aphasia. Liz, welcome back to the podcast.   So in 2017 you spoke with Ellen Bernstein Ellis about intensive comprehensive aphasia programs or ICAPs and inter professional practice at the Aphasia Resource Center at BU and treatment for verb production using VNest, among other topics. So this time, I thought we could focus on some of your recent research with Gayle DeDe and others on conversation group treatment.   Liz Hoover Sounds good.   Lyssa Rome All right, so my first question is how you became interested in studying group treatment?   Liz Hoover Yeah, I actually have Dr. Jan Avent to thank for my interest in groups. She was my aphasia professor when I was a graduate student doing my masters at Cal State East Bay. As you know, Cal State East Bay is home to the Aphasia Treatment Program. When I was there, it preceded ATP. But I was involved in her cooperative group treatment study, and as a graduate student, I was allowed to facilitate some of her groups in this study, and I was involved in the moderate-to-severe group. She was also incredibly generous at sharing that very early body of work for socially oriented group treatments and exposing us to the work of John Lyons and Audrey Holland. Jan also invited us to go to a conference on group treatment that was run by the Life Link group. It's out of Texas Woman's University, Delaina Walker-Batson and Jean Ford. And it just was a life changing and pivotal experience for me in recognizing how group treatment could not be just an adjunct to individual goals, but actually be the type of treatment that is beneficial for folks with aphasia. So it's been a love my entire career.   Lyssa Rome And now I know you've been studying group treatment in this randomized control trial. This was a collaborative research project, so I'm hoping you can tell us a little bit more about that project. What were your research questions? Tell us a little bit more.   Liz Hoover Yeah, so thank you. I'll just start by acknowledging that the work is funded by two NIDCD grants, and to acknowledge their generosity, and then also acknowledge Dr. Gayle DeDe, who is currently at Temple University. She is a co- main PI in this work, and of course it wouldn't have happened without her. So you know, Gayle and I have known each other for many, many years. She's a former student, doctoral student at Boston University, and by way of background, she and I were interested in working together and interested in trying to build on some evidence for group treatment. I think we drank the Kool Aid early on, as you might say.   And you know, just looking at the literature, there have been two trials on the evidence for this kind of work. And so those of us who are involved in groups, know that it's helpful for people with aphasia, our clients tell us how much they enjoy it, and they vote with their feet, right? In that they come back for more treatments. And aphasia centers have grown dramatically in the last couple of decades in the United States.   So clearly we know they work, but what we don't know is why they work. What are those essential ingredients, and how is that driving the change that we think we see? And from a personal perspective, that's important for me to understand and for us to have explained in the literature, because until we can justify it in the scientific terms, I worry it will forever be a private-pay adjunct that is only accessible to people who can pay for it, or who are lucky enough to be close enough to a center that can get them access—virtual groups aside, and the advent of that—but it's important that I think this intervention is validated to the scientific community in our field.   So we designed this trial. It's a randomized control trial to help build the research evidence for conversation, group treatment, and to also look at the critical components. This was inspired by a paper actually from Nina Simmons Mackie in 2014 and Linda Worrell. They looked at group treatment and showed that there were at least eight first-tier elements that changed the variability or on which we might modify group conversation treatment. And so, you know, if we're all doing things differently, how can we predict the change, and how can we expect outcomes?   Lyssa Rome So I was hoping you could describe this randomized, controlled trial. You know, it was collaborative, and I'm curious about what you and your collaborators had as your research questions.   Liz Hoover So our primary aims of the study were to understand if communication or conversation treatment is associated with changes in measures of communicative ability and psychosocial measures. So that's a general effectiveness question. And then to look in more deeply to see if the group size or the group composition or even the individual profile of the client with aphasia influences the expected outcome.   Because if you think about group treatment, the size of the group is not an insignificant issue, right? So a small group environment of two people has much more… it still gives you some peer support from the other individual with aphasia, but you have many opportunities for conversational turns and linguistic and communication practice and to drive the saliency of the conversation in a direction that's meaningful and useful and informative.   Whereas in a large group environment of say, six to eight people with aphasia and two clinicians, you might see much more influence in the needed social support and vicarious learning and shared lived experience and so forth, and still have some opportunity for communication and linguistic practice. So there's conflicting hypotheses there about which group environment might be better for one individual over another.   And then there's the question of, well, who's in that group with you? Does that matter? Some of the literature says that if you have somebody with a different profile of aphasia, it can set up a therapeutic benefit of the helper experience, where you can gain purpose by enabling and supporting and being a facilitator of somebody else with aphasia.   But if you're in a group environment where your peers have similar conversation goals as you, maybe your practice turns, and your ability to learn vicariously from their conversation turns is greater. So again, two conflicting theories here about what might be best. So we decided to try and manipulate these group environments and measure outcomes on several different communication measures. We selected measures that were linguistic, functional, and psychosocial.   We collected data over four years. The first two years, we enrolled people with all different kinds of profiles of aphasia. The only inclusion criteria from a communication perspective, as you needed some ability to comprehend at a sentence level, so that you could process what was being said by the other people in the group. And in year one, the treatment was at Boston University and Temple University, which is where Gayle's aphasia center is housed. In year two, we added a community site at the Adler Aphasia Center and Maywood, New Jersey, so we had three sites going.   The treatment conditions were dyad, large group, and then a no treatment group. So this group was tested at the same time, didn't get any other intervention, and then we gave them group treatment once the testing cycle was over. So we call that a historical control or a delayed-treatment control group. And then in years three and four, we aim to enroll people who had homogeneous profiles.   So the first through the third cycle was people with moderate to severe profiles. And then in the final, fourth cycle, it was people with mild profiles with aphasia. This allowed us to collect enough data in enough size to be able to look at overall effectiveness and then effects of heterogeneity or homogeneity in the group, and the influence of the profile of aphasia, as well as the group size.   And across the four years, we aim to enroll 216 participants, and 193 completed the study. So it's the largest of its kind for this particular kind of group treatment that we know of anyway. So this data set has allowed us to look at overall efficacy of conversation group treatment, and then also take a look at a couple of those critical ingredients. Does the size of the group make a difference? And does the composition of your group make a difference?   Lyssa Rome And what did you find?   Liz Hoover Well, we're not quite done with all of our analysis yet, but we found overall that there's a significant treatment effect for just the treatment conditions, not the control group. So whether you were in the dyad or whether you were in a large treatment group, you got better on some of the outcome measures we selected. And the control group not only didn't but on a couple of those measures, their performance actually declined. And so showing significantly that there's a treatment effect. Did you have a question?   Lyssa Rome Yeah, I wanted to interrupt and ask, what were the outcome measures? What outcome measures were you looking at?   Liz Hoover Yeah. So we had about 14 measures in total that aligned with the core outcome set that was established by the ROMA group. So we had as our linguistic measure the Comprehensive Aphasia Test. We had a primary outcome measure, which was a patient reported measure of functional communication, which is the ACOM by Will Hula and colleagues, the Aphasia Communication Outcome measure, we had Audrey Holland and colleagues' objective functional measure, the CADL, and then a series of other psychosocial and patient reported outcome measures, so the wall question from the ALA, the Moss Social Scale, the Communication Confidence Rating Scale in Aphasia by Leora Cherney and Edie Babbitt.   Lyssa Rome Thank you. When I interrupted you to ask about outcome measures. You were telling us about some of the findings so far.   Liz Hoover Yeah, so our primary outcome measures showed significant changes in language for both the treatment conditions and a slightly larger effect for the large group. And then we saw, at a more micro level, the results pointing to a complex interaction, actually, between the group size and the treatment outcome. So we saw changes on more linguistic measures. like the repetition sub scores of the CAT and verb naming from another naming subtest for the dyad group, whereas bigger, more robust changes on the ACOM the CADL and the discourse measure from the CAT for the large group.   And then diving in a little bit more deeply for the composition, these data are actually quite interesting. The papers are in review and preparation at the moment, but it looks like we are seeing significant changes for the moderate-to-severe group on objective functional measures and patient reported functional measures of communication, which is so exciting to see for this particular cohort, whose naming scores were zero, in some cases, on entrance, and we're seeing for the mild group, some changes on auditory comprehension, naming, not surprisingly, and also the ACOM and the CADL. So they're showing the same changes, just with different effect sizes or slightly different ranges. And once again, no change in the control group, and in some cases, on some measures, we're seeing a decline in performance over time.   So it's validating that the intervention is helpful in general. What we found with the homogeneous groups is that in a homogeneous large group environment, those groups seem to do a little better. There's a significant effect over time between the homogeneous and the heterogeneous groups. So thinking about why that might have taken place, we wonder if the shared lived experience of your profile of aphasia, your focus on similar kinds of communication, or linguistic targets within the conversation environment might be helping to offset the limited number of practice trials you get in that larger group environment.   So that's an interesting finding to see these differences in who's in the group with you. Because I think clinically, we tend to assign groups, or sort of schedule groups according to what's convenient for the client, what might be pragmatic for the setting, without really wondering why one group could be important or one group might be preferential. If we think about it, there are conflicting hypotheses as to why a group of your like aphasia severity might have a different outcome, right? That idea that you can help people who have a different profile than you, that you're sharing different kinds of models of communication, versus that perhaps more intense practice effect when you share more specific goals and targets and lived experiences. So it's interesting to think about the group environment from that perspective, I think,   Lyssa Rome And to have also some evidence that clinicians and people at aphasia centers can look to help make decisions about group compositions, I think is incredibly helpful.   Earlier, you mentioned that one of the goals of this research project has been to identify the active ingredients of group therapy. And I know that you've been part of a working group for the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System, or RTSS. Applying that, how have you tried to identify the active ingredients and what? What do you think it is about these treatments that actually drives change?   Liz Hoover I'll first of all say, this is a work in process. You know, I don't think we've got all of the answers. We're just starting to think about it with the idea, again, that if we clinically decide to make some changes to our group, we're at least doing it with some information behind us, and it's a thoughtful and intentional change, as opposed to a gut reaction or a happenstance change. So Gayle and I have worked on developing this image, or this model. It's in a couple of our papers. We can share the resources for that. But it's about trying to think of the flow of communication, group treatment, and what aspects of the treatment might be influential in the outcomes we see downstream.   I think for group treatment, you can't separate entirely many of the ingredients. Group treatment is multifaceted, it's interconnected, and it's not possible—I would heavily debate that with anybody—I don't think it's possible to sort of truly separate some of these ingredients. But when you alter the composition or the environment in which you do the treatment, I do think we are influencing the relative weight of these ingredients.   So we've been thinking about there being this group dynamics component, which is the supportive environment of the peers in the group with you, that social support, the insider affiliation and shared lived experience, the opportunity to observe and see the success of some of these different communication strategies, so that vicarious learning that takes place as you see somebody else practice. But also, I think, cope in a trajectory of your treatment process.   And then we've got linguistic practice so that turn taking where you're actually trying to communicate verbally using supported communication where you're expanding on your utterances or trying to communicate verbally in a specific way or process particular kinds of linguistic targets. A then communication practice in terms of that multimodal effectiveness of communication.   And these then are linked to these three ingredients, dynamic group dynamics, linguistic practice and communication practice. They each have their own mechanism of action or a treatment theory that explains how they might affect change. So for linguistic practice, it's the amount of practice, but also how you hear it practiced or see it practiced with the other group participant. And the same thing for the various multimodal communication acts. And in thinking about a large group versus the dyad or a small group, you know you've got this conflicting hypothesis or the setup for a competing best group, or benefit in that the large group will influence more broadly in the group dynamics, or more deeply in the group dynamics, in that there's a much bigger opportunity to see the vicarious learning and experience the support and potentially experience the communication practice, given a varied number of participants.   But yet in the dyad, your opportunity for linguistic practice is much, much stronger. And our work has counted this the exponential number of turns you get in a dyad versus a large group. And you know, I think that's why the results we saw with the dyad on those linguistic outcomes were unique to that group environment.   Lyssa Rome It points, I think, to the complexity of decision making around group structure and what's right for which client, maybe even so it sounds like some of that work is still in progress. I'm curious about sort of thinking about what you know so far based on this work, what advice would you have for clinicians who are working in aphasia centers or or helping to sort of think about the structure of group treatments? What should clinicians in those roles keep in mind?   Liz Hoover Yeah, that's a great question, and I'll add the caveat that this may change. My advice for this may change in a year's time, or it might evolve as we learn more. But I think what it means is that the decisions you make should be thoughtful. We're starting to learn more about severity in aphasia and how that influences the outcomes. So I think, what is it that your client wants to get out of the group? If they're interested in more linguistic changes, then perhaps the dyad is a better place to start. If they clearly need, or are voicing the need, for more psychosocial support, then the large, you know, traditional sized and perhaps a homogeneous group is the right place to start. But they're both more effective than no treatment. And so being, there's no wrong answer. It's just understanding your client's needs. Is there a better fit?   And I think that's, that's, that's my wish, that people don't see conversation as something that you do at the beginning to build a rapport, but that it's worthy of being an intervention target. It should be most people's primary goal. I think, right, when we ask, what is it you'd like? “I want to talk more. I want to have a conversation.” Audrey Holland would say it's a moral imperative to to treat the conversation and to listen to folks' stories. So just to think carefully about what it is your client wants to achieve, and if there's an environment in which that might be easier to help them achieve that.   Lyssa Rome It's interesting, as you were saying that I was thinking about what you said earlier on about sort of convincing funders about the value of group treatment, but what you're saying now makes me think that it's all your work is also valuable in convincing speech therapists that referrals to groups or dyads is valuable and and also for people with aphasia and their families that it's worth seeking out.   I'm curious about where in the continuum of care this started for the people who were in your trial. I mean, were these people with chronic aphasia who had had strokes years earlier? Was it a mix? And did that make a difference?   Liz Hoover It was a mix. I think our earliest participant was six months post-onset. Our most chronic participant was 26 years post-onset. So a wide range. We want, obviously, from a study perspective, we needed folks to be outside of the traditional window of spontaneous recovery in stroke-induced aphasia.   But it was important to us to have a treatment dose that was reasonable and applicable to a United States healthcare climate, right? So twice a week for an hour is something that people would get reimbursed for. The overall dose is the minimum that's been shown to be effective in the RELEASE collaborative trial papers. And then, you know, but still, half, less than half the dose that the Elman and Bernstein Ellis study found to be effective. So there may be some wiggle room there to see if, if a larger dose is more effective.   But yeah, I think it's that idea of finding funding, convincing people that this is not just a reasonable treatment approach, but a good approach for many outcomes for people with chronic aphasia. I mean, you know, one of the biggest criticisms we hear from the giants in our field is the frustration with aphasia being treated like it's a quick fix and can be done. But you know, so much of the work shows that people are only just beginning to understand their condition by the time they're discharged from traditional outpatient services. And so there's a need for ongoing treatment indefinitely, I think, as your goals change, as you age, and as your wish to participate in different things changes over a lifetime,   Lyssa Rome Yeah, absolutely. And I think too, when we think about sort of the role of hope, if you know, if there is additional evidence showing that there can be change after that sort of traditional initial period, when we think that change happens the most, that can provide a lot of hope and motivation, I think, to people.   Liz Hoover yeah, we're look going to be looking next at predictors of change, so looking at our study entrance scores and trying to identify which participants were the responders versus the non-responders that you know, because group effects are one thing, but it's good to see who seems to benefit the most from these individual types of environments.   And an early finding is that confidence, or what some people in the field, I'm learning now are referring to as actually communication self-efficacy, but that previous exposure to group potentially and that confidence in your communication is inversely correlated with benefits from treatment on other measures. So if you've got a low confidence in your ability to communicate functionally in different environments, you're predicted to be a responder to conversation treatment.   Lyssa Rome Oh, that's really interesting. What else are you looking forward to working on when it comes to this data set or other projects that you have going on?   Liz Hoover Yeah. So as I mentioned, there's a lot of data still for us to dig into, looking at those individual responders or which factors or variables might make an impact. There is the very next on the list, we're also going to be looking very shortly at the dialogic conversation outcomes. So, it's a conversation treatment. How has conversation changed? That's a question we need to answer. So we're looking at that currently, and might look more closely at other measures. And then I think the question of the dose is an interesting one. The question of how individual variables or the saliency of the group may impact change is another potentially interesting question. There are many different directions you can go.   You know, we've got 193 participants in the study, with three separate testing time points, so it's a lot of data to look at still. And I think we want to be sure we understand what we're looking at, and what those active ingredients might be, that we've got the constructs well defined before we start to recruit for another study and to expand on these findings further.   Lyssa Rome When we were meeting earlier, getting ready for this talk, you mentioned to me a really valuable video resource, and I wanted to make sure we take some time to highlight that. Can you tell us a little bit about what you worked on with your colleagues at Boston University?   Liz Hoover Yes, thank you. So I'll tell you a little bit. We have a video education series. Some of you may have heard about this already, but it's up on our website so bu.edu/aphasiacenter, and we'll still share that link as well. And it's a series of short, aphasia-friendly videos that are curated by our community to give advice and share lived experiences from people with aphasia and their care partners.   This project came about right on the heels of the COVID shutdown at our university. I am involved in our diagnostic clinic, and I was seeing folks who had been in acute care through COVID being treated with people who were wearing masks, who had incredibly shortened lengths of stay because people you know rightly, were trying to get them out of a potentially vulnerable environment. And what we were seeing is a newly diagnosed cohort of people with aphasia who were so under-informed about their condition, and Nina that has a famous quote right of the public being woefully uninformed of the aphasia condition and you don't think it can get any worse until It does.   And I thought, gosh, wouldn't it be wonderful to be able to point them to some short education videos that are by people who have lived their same journey or a version of their same journey. So we fundraised and collaborated with a local production company to come up with these videos. And I'll share, Lyssa, we just learned last week that this video series has been awarded the ASHA 2025 Media Outreach Award. So it's an award winning series.   Lyssa Rome Yeah, that's fantastic, and it's so well deserved. They're really beautifully and professionally produced. And I think I really appreciated hearing from so many different people with aphasia about their experiences as the condition is sort of explained more. So thank you for sharing those and we'll put the links in our show notes along with links to the other articles that you've mentioned in this conversation in our show notes. So thanks.   Liz Hoover Yeah, and I'll just put a big shout out to my colleague, Jerry Kaplan, who's the amazing interviewer and facilitator in many of these videos, and the production company, which is Midnight Brunch. But again, the cinematography and the lighting. They're beautifully done. I think I'm very, very happy with them.   Lyssa Rome Yeah, congrats again on the award too. So to wrap up, I'm wondering if there's anything else that you want listeners to take away from this conversation or from the work that you've been doing on conversation treatments.   Liz Hoover I would just say that I would encourage everybody to try group treatment. It's a wonderful option for intervention for people, and to remind everyone of Barbara Shadden and Katie Strong's work, of that embedded storytelling that can come out in conversation, and of the wonderful Audrey Holland's words, of it being a moral imperative to help people tell their story and to converse. It's yeah… You'll drink the Kool Aid if you try it. Let me just put it that way. It's a wonderful intervention that seems to be meaningful for most clients I've ever had the privilege to work with.   Lyssa Rome I agree with that. And meaningful too, I think for clinicians who get to do the work.   Liz Hoover, thank you so much for your work and for coming to talk with us again, for making your second appearance on the podcast. It's been great talking with you.   Liz Hoover Thank you. It's been fun. I appreciate it.   Lyssa Rome And thanks also to our listeners for the references and resources mentioned in today's show. Please see our show notes. They're available on our website, www.aphasiaaccess.org. There, you can also become a member of our organization, browse our growing library of materials and find out about the Aphasia Access Academy. If you have an idea for a future podcast episode, email us at info@aphasia access.org.   Thanks again for your ongoing support of Aphasia Access. For Aphasia Access Conversations. I'm Lyssa Rome.       Resources Walker-Batson, D., Curtis, S., Smith, P., & Ford, J. (1999). An alternative model for the treatment of aphasia: The Lifelink© approach. In R. Elman (Ed.), Group treatment for neurogenic communication disorders: The expert clinician's approach (pp. 67-75). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann   Hoover, E.L., DeDe, G., Maas, E. (2021). A randomized controlled trial of the effects of group conversation treatment on monologic discourse in aphasia. Journal of Speech-Language and Hearing Research doi/10.1044/2021_JSLHR-21-00023 Hoover, E., Szabo, G., Kohen, F., Vitale, S., McCloskey, N., Maas, E., Kularni, V., & DeDe., G. (2025). The benefits of conversation group treatment for individuals with chronic aphasia: Updated evidence from a multisite randomized controlled trial on measures of language and communication. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology. DOI: 10.1044/2025_AJSLP-24-00279   Aphasia Resource Center at BU   Living with Aphasia video series Aphasia Access Podcast Episode #15: In Conversation with Liz Hoover

Nicole Weaver of Black Bi Reality interviews the contestant who won NBC's Destination X Season 1 Episode 10. Biggy Bailey, Rick Szabo, and Peter Weber competed for the final spot in the episode. The winner talks about the guilt of blindsiding another player. He reveals his plan on how to spend the prize money and more. Patreon Videos patreon.com/BlackBiReality Follow Nicole Weaver: https://www.instagram.com/nikkiberniceinsta/ Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/BlackBiReality Follow on IG: https://www.instagram.com/blackbireality/ Follow on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@blackbireality Photo credit NBC Theme Music DJ MC Pro Branding by Jordan Scruggs https://www.jordanponders.com/letstalk

Pisica și câinele sunt gardienii curajoși ai unei cutiuțe fermecate, care ascunde în ea puterea mării, dar și legătura bazată pe încredere și respect dintre soți. O întâmplare nefericită va aduce ură pentru totdeauna între pisică și câine. Oare despre ce întâmplare o fi vorba?

(SPOILER) Today's episode begins with talking about last nights Big Brother POV episode, the disturbing behavior from Rylie continues, and Tom Sandoval getting X'ed by Simon on AGT.  Then Ana joins me (9:06) to talk about how she got started on her podcast, what they cover, we list our favorites from Taylor's albums, how many times she's seen her, the extent of her fandom, and much, much more.  Music written by Jimmer Podrasky (B'Jingo Songs/Machia Music/Bug Music BMI) 13: A Taylor Swift Fan Podcast Ads: Tropical Smoothie Café - Tropical Smoothie Cafe® brings the goodness –with made-to-order smoothies, bowls and food. You're on Tropic Time now Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Paul Boyce, President and CEO of PWGC, returns with Jeff Szabo, CEO of the Suffolk County Water Authority, for Part 2 of their conversation. This episode covers the proposed 8.5-mile water main extension to Southold, the environmental review process, and how SCWA is managing public concerns and local engagement. Szabo explains the challenges of saltwater intrusion, the limits of groundwater capacity, and why moving water from west to east is essential. The discussion also touches on SCWA’s updated strategic plan, conservation rebate programs, and upgrades to the Oakdale campus. The new MyWaterQuality app, helps residents monitor water conditions near their homes. Don’t miss out—subscribe now and stay informed on the latest industry trends! Visit our website for more details or to suggest future topics: https://pwgrosser.com/podcast/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A special crossover episode of ‘What About Water?' and ‘Environmental Echo', hosted by Paul Boyce, President and CEO of P.W. Grosser Consulting. In this episode, Jeff Szabo, Chief Executive Officer of the Suffolk County Water Authority sits down with Paul to discuss how SCWA became the first utility in New York to comply with the federal PFAS rules—six years early, the rollout of 40+ AOP systems to treat emerging contaminants, and how funding from surcharges and grants is shaping the future of Long Island's water.

Hosted by Paul Boyce, President & CEO of PWGC, this episode of Environmental Echo brings back Jeff Szabo, CEO of the Suffolk County Water Authority, to explore how SCWA became the first utility in New York to comply with the federal PFAS rule—six years early. They cover emerging contaminants, the high-stakes rollout of 40 AOP systems, and how funding from surcharges, grants, and infrastructure bills is shaping the future of Long Island’s water. It’s a conversation about risk, responsibility, and what it takes to build public trust in every drop. Visit our website for more details or to suggest future topics: https://pwgrosser.com/podcast/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, I chat with Jesse Myers, a Bitcoin strategy advisor and the author of the essay Once-in-a-Species. He shares deep excitement for Bitcoin treasury companies and how they might be the gateway for TradFi capital to enter Bitcoin at scale. We also dive deep into the evolutionary roots of money and how the innate human drive for scarcity laid the groundwork for the concept of money, civilization itself, and ultimately Bitcoin as the perfection of scarcity. ––– Offers & Discounts ––– Theya is the world's simplest Bitcoin self-custody solution. Download Theya Now at theya.us/cedric Get up to $100 in Bitcoin on River at river.com/matrix The best Team Bitcoin merch is at HodlersOfficial.com. Use the code Matrix for a discount on your order. Become a sponsor of the show: https://thebitcoinmatrix.com/sponsors/ ––– Get To Know Today's Guest ––– • Jesse Myers on X: https://x.com/Croesus_BTC • Once-in -species Essay: https://www.onceinaspecies.com/p/once-in-a-species-73b ––– Socials ––– • Check out our new website at https://TheBitcoinMatrix.Com • Follow Cedric Youngelman on X: https://x.com/cedyoungelman • Follow The Bitcoin Matrix Podcast on X: https://x.com/_bitcoinmatrix • Follow Cedric Youngelman on Nostr: npub12tq9jxmt707gd5vnce3tqllpm67ktr0mqskcvy58qqa4d074pz9s4ukdcs ––– Chapters ––– 00:00 - Intro 01:04 - Jesse's Bitcoin Journey  02:03 - “Once in a Species”: What Inspired the Essay  02:53 - Nick Szabo, Shell Beads & Proto-Money  05:57 - Jesse's Academic Background: From Neuroscience to Bitcoin  06:58 - Art, Humanity & Neanderthals  09:05 - Who Were the Neanderthals?  13:48 - Why Did Homo Sapiens Triumph?  16:55 - Victorian & Modern Theories on Neanderthals  20:22 - Current Academia's View vs Austrian Economics  24:04 - The Hidden Economic Purpose of Shell Beads  28:23 - Brain Science & Scarcity: The TKTL1 Mutation  31:45 - Symbolic Thought: Neanderthals vs Homo Sapiens  34:38 - Population Density & Dunbar's Number  38:46 - Money as a Social Efficiency Multiplier  43:14 - From Tribalism to Civilization Through Trade  48:28 - Reading Excerpt: Scarcity as the Root of Human Flourishing  50:16 - Lessons from the Past for Bitcoin's Future  56:22 - Bitcoin: The Invention of Perfect Scarcity  01:00:50 - How Bitcoin Changes Civilization  01:05:38 - Deflation, Craftsmanship & Cultural Flywheels  01:07:39 - Closing Thoughts: Scarcity, Collectibles & Civilization  01:11:35 - What's Next: Bitcoin Treasury Strategy & SmarterWeb  DISCLAIMER: All views in this episode are our own and DO NOT reflect the opinions/views of any of our guests or sponsors. I want to take a moment to express my heartfelt gratitude to all of you for tuning in, supporting the show, and contributing. Thank you for listening!

This episode offers a clear, grounded conversation on one of the most misunderstood aspects of Tantra: the role of sexuality. In dialogue with Ashton Szabo, we trace the origins of this confusion, distinguishing between classical Tantra and modern neo-Tantra, and examining how the term itself was co-opted in the West. Listeners are introduced to the true context of sexual practice in the original Tantric tradition—not as a means of enhancing pleasure, but as a rare and advanced form of spiritual realization. The conversation concludes with reflections from the Tantrāloka on how the most intimate experiences can, under the right conditions, dissolve separation and reveal the undivided nature of reality.Discover a treasure trove of guided meditations, teachings, and courses at tantrailluminated.org.Find out more about the upcoming retreats and pilgrimages at https://www.tantrailluminated.org/calendar . Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today, Mary speaks with the seventh eliminated contestant of Destination X.

Hey guys and welcome back to my podcast!NOT ELIMINATED but still in the game on NBC's Destination X, Rick Szabo is here to give us an update on this season and react to last nights episode. Rick is a bird watcher and here is what his bio says about him from NBC:Rick Szabo is an international bird watcher with a penchant for traveling, having visited 49 countries and counting. Originally from Seattle, Rick worked in finance after college and was offered the opportunity to live in Africa, which shaped him into the curious traveler he is today. Now based in Picton, Ontario in Canada, Rick birdwatches professionally and plans to use his birding and travel knowledge to guide him to victory. Rick has been married for 25 years and has three adult children and two daughters-in-law. His competitors may underestimate him because of his lovable dad persona, but he plans to use his kindness to find allies and win the grand prize for his family.Rick and I chat all about the game today. He gives his take on JaNae wishing him luck before he left and what he thinks of the split alliances and why he thought he was in Slovenia.Follow Rick:https://www.instagram.com/birding_with_rick/?hl=enConnect with me on social:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zacharyrealityTiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@zacharyrealityTwitter: https://twitter.com/zacharyrealityYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/@ZacharyReality

In this episode, we sit down with Dr. Rena Szabo, PsyD, a passionate advocate for integrating psychology and medicine, to discuss her unique approach to holistic, person-centered care in the field of psycho-oncology. Dr. Szabo, who works at Banner Health, specializes in understanding the complex biological, psychological, cultural, and environmental factors that influence health and quality of life. With her expertise in behavioral medicine, she helps to foster resilience and well-being among both healthcare professionals and patients, ensuring a comprehensive approach to healing in the oncology setting.As Co-Chair of the Cultivating Happiness in Medicine Steering Committee, Dr. Szabo leads initiatives that focus on enhancing the quality of life within the healthcare community. She also shares her passion for Special Olympics, where she has made significant contributions through the development of the Strong Minds program and her role as Clinical Director for Arizona. Dr. Szabo's work with the Special Olympics and her dedication to improving the mental and emotional well-being of athletes exemplifies her commitment to holistic care across all areas of life.Join us as Dr. Szabo talks about her work, her philosophy on health and resilience, and the importance of integrating behavioral health practices into the medical field.About Our Guest:Dr. Rena Szabo, PsyD, is a clinical psychologist specializing in psycho-oncology and integrated behavioral health. With a deep commitment to the well-being of both patients and healthcare providers, Dr. Szabo works at the intersection of psychology and medicine to enhance overall health and quality of life. She is also deeply involved in Special Olympics Arizona, where she has contributed significantly to developing programs like Strong Minds, which focuses on the mental and emotional health of athletes. Dr. Szabo is also a mother of three and enjoys running, reading, and being part of her faith community.

To prepare for the 2025 NCAA Tennis Sweet 16, Cracked Racquets Editor-in-Chief Alex Gruskin speaks to one representative of every team still alive in the tournament to discuss the team's 2024 season, reflect on their Sweet 16 matchup, and so much more!! Don't forget to give a 5 star review on your favorite podcast app! In addition, add your twitter/instagram handle to the review for a chance to win some FREE CR gear!! Laurel Springs Ranked among the best online private schools in the United States, Laurel Springs stands out when it comes to support, personalization, community, and college prep. They give their K-12 students the resources, guidance, and learning opportunities they need at each grade level to reach their full potential. Find Cracked Racquets Website: https://www.crackedracquets.com Instagram: https://instagram.com/crackedracquets Twitter: https://twitter.com/crackedracquets Facebook: https://Facebook.com/crackedracquets YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/crackedracquets

Happy Earth Day! Listener favorite Sam Szabo (Comics Will Break Your Balls, The Enlightened Transsexual, The Onion) is back to look at the PG-13 porno comics of Poor Helpless Comics! by Ed Subitzky (NYRC, 2023). Topics include, Heather McAdams' Cartoon Girl, going to the movies, National Lampoon, David Letterman, and so very much more. Sally was minutes away from finding out she had covid while recording AND editing this episode, thank you for bearing with us regarding the sound quality. Thank you kindly to our Elite Cathies, Starscruch and Drawn & Quarterly for supporting this show at the $20/month level- you can access 50+ additional episodes for $5/month over at our patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thicklinespod You can read many many MANY comics by Sam over at her patreon: https://www.patreon.com/brainbooger Poor Helpless Comics!: https://www.nyrb.com/products/poor-helpless-comics Heather McAdams info: https://summerpierre.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/where-art-thou-heather-mcadams/  

Full episode at patreon.com/thicklinespod. What says "Happy 420, Two Days Late" like host and guest favorites, Akbar and Jeff? Sally and Sam Szabo find out what it means to be gay in Regan's America with Akbar and Jeff's Guide to Life by Matt Groening (Pantheon, 1989). This strip continued beyond the book's publication date for another TWENTY THREE YEARS so there's lots more of our favorite couple beyond this episode. Topics include: where the elite meet, American Psycho, Working Girl, learning about color cartoons, fezzes and more. Sally was minutes away from finding out she had covid while recording AND editing this episode, thank you for bearing with us regarding the sound quality. Thank you kindly to our Elite Cathies, Starscruch and Drawn & Quarterly for supporting this show at the $20/month level- you can access 50+ additional episodes for $5/month over at our patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thicklinespod You can read many many MANY comics by Sam over at her patreon: https://www.patreon.com/brainbooger   Akbar and Jeff's Guide to Life: https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780679726807

Marty sits down with Jesse Myers to discuss the key behavioral mutation behind the dominance of our species over other early humans.Jesse on Twitter: https://x.com/Croesus_BTCOne-in-a-Species: https://www.onceinaspecies.com/0:00 - Intro0:36 - How Jesse's hypothesis differs from mainstream8:19 - Szabo's shelling out and the fashion argument15:36 - Fold & Coinkite 17:14- The hTKTL1 gene27:03 - Overcoming Dunbar's Number35:24 - Unchained Event35:49 - Public record and barter42:33 - Money allowed energy aggregation51:27 - Developing more advanced money55:35 - Bitcoin is the culmination of our species' edge1:01:39 - Fiat interregnum and bitcoin's addressable market1:10:33 - Digital age is an accelerant1:16:34 - Final thoughtsShoutout to our sponsors:Foldhttps://tftc.io/foldCoinkitehttps://coinkite.comUnchainedhttps://unchained.com/tftc/Join the TFTC Movement:Main YT Channelhttps://www.youtube.com/c/TFTC21/videosClips YT Channelhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUQcW3jxfQfEUS8kqR5pJtQWebsitehttps://tftc.io/Twitterhttps://twitter.com/tftc21Instagramhttps://www.instagram.com/tftc.io/Nostrhttps://primal.net/tftcFollow Marty Bent:Twitterhttps://twitter.com/martybentNostrhttps://primal.net/martybentNewsletterhttps://tftc.io/martys-bent/Podcasthttps://www.tftc.io/tag/podcasts/

Recorded April 5, 2025   This standalone episode is a conversation between myself and two very good friends of mine: Brian Szabo abnd Pete Fischer.   Brian and Pete were in the building and saw the moments when Alex Ovechkin came within one goal, then tied the Great Gretzky's goal record. Hear them describe in their own words, the atmosphere, the electricity and the sheer energy that was a most epic event. April 4 is a night that will live forever among Caps fans---this is the story of two fans who got to enjoy it all live.   Please follow the lead of our great Captain and donate to the V Foundation for cancer research:   v.org/GR8chase.   #ALLCAPS #SportsOTHP #SucramsCapitalsofftheirChainpodcast #TheOfficialCapsChirpPodcast #JenayaTalksCaps #ThatsDCHockey #LockedOnCaps