Podcasts about Theory

Newt talks with Professor Avi Loeb about the latest news on 3I/ATLAS, the third interstellar object discovered passing through our solar system. Loeb highlights its unusual characteristics and the possibility of it being a technological artifact rather than a natural object. He emphasizes the importance of scientific curiosity and the need for academia to embrace risk-taking and exploration beyond conventional boundaries. He advocates for a broader search for intelligent life in the universe, suggesting that the discovery of alien technology could significantly alter human priorities and investments in space exploration. Their conversation also touches on the cultural and institutional challenges within the scientific community, urging a shift towards a more open-minded and exploratory approach to science. He concludes with a reflection on the potential of science to inspire and engage the public, particularly the younger generation. Avi Loeb is the Frank B. Baird, Jr., Professor of Science at Harvard University. He serves as Director of the Institute for Theory and Computation within the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and also heads the Galileo Project. His blog about 3I/ATLAS is avi-loeb.medium.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A theory

Host: Charles iamBranded MadisonGuest: The Conspiracy Theory Panel (2010)Season: 14 Episode: 47http://www.nexxlegacy.comhttp://www.nexxlegacy.com/partners#Nexxlegacy #Radio #Podcast

In this episode, Brian sits down with prolific Australian author and independent researcher George Mitrovic, whose staggering body of work spans more than 140 published books since 2012. George opens up about his lifelong fascination with mysteries and the unconventional research methods that have shaped his career.From childhood curiosity to a vast personal archive of data, George shares how his passion led him deep into the study of Bigfoot and other unexplained phenomena. He takes listeners inside some of the most compelling Bigfoot sightings in his collection—including lesser-known international reports and the intriguing “Whistling Patty” encounter.Throughout the conversation, George emphasizes the importance of following the evidence, resisting preconceived ideas, and letting data build the foundation of any hypothesis. The discussion expands beyond traditional cryptozoology into the cutting edge of theory, touching on quantum physics, multiverse possibilities, and how these concepts might intersect with the Bigfoot mystery.George also highlights the breadth of his published work, particularly his research on Bigfoot, giants, and global cryptid traditions.Get George's BookGet Our FREE NewsletterGet Brian's Books Leave Us A VoicemailVisit Our WebsiteSupport Our SponsorsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/sasquatch-odyssey--4839697/support.

Rod Babers and Jeff Howe break down the things that were working against Georgia and what Texas MUST DO to beat Arkansas.   Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week on Talkin' Rock, it's Chris Robertson of Black Stone Cherry and the guys from Set It Off. Chris started us off by discussing their upcoming EP, which is set to drop on March 6th. There are six new songs and one cover. More about that in a minute. Celebrate is the name of the EP, and the first single to come from it. Chris said that the song is about everyday small victories. The cover song is with Tyler Connolly of Theory of a Deadman, and they covered the Simple Minds classic Don't You (Forget About Me). Chris said he's always wanted to cover that song and add more punch to it. We discussed Detroit rock legends, their European tour with Alice Cooper, and more. They play District 142 on Saturday, November 22.Set It Off wraps up this episode. The guys dived into going independent a couple of years ago, and it seems to have worked for them. They are loving being in control of their path and say it's opened more doors than they thought it would. They also have a new EP that they dropped a couple of weeks ago. We discussed great wings in Detroit, touring with I Prevail, and how well they treated them, and more. They play Saint Andrew's Hall on Thanksgiving Eve. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Join us for Episode 11 of Season 5 of Knights Of The Nephilim. Deep diving into Esoteric and Occult Doctrine, Magickal Mechanics, Theory, and Ritual Practice.This week on Knights of the Nephilim, we enter the inner chambers of one of the most controversial, secretive, and misunderstood orders in the modern occult world. Our guest, Druwydion Pendragon, Master Councilor of The Brotherhood of Satan, speaks on Generational Satanism, Old Blood Families, the Brotherhood of the Serpent, and the future of Satanic Unity.No speculation. No conspiracy. Only firsthand reality.Brought to you by: Celestial Oddities Radio and The Coterie Of Samil Arcane Occult Order. "Step Into The Circle"

Hi guysss!! It is so cold outside atm ❄️

In this episode of the Theory of Thinking Investment podcast, James Whelan and Heath Moss discuss the excitement surrounding Ashes Day, market insights, and the current economic landscape. They delve into the implications of market volatility, the impact of AI on investment strategies, and the significance of Oracle's credit default swaps. The conversation wraps up with a look at the ongoing appetite for funding in the AI sector.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/the-bip-show. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

An hour packed of new versions of old favourites and new tunes to make your Friday explode and want to get you on the dance floor. if nothing else your feet won't stop tapping and you will definitely have a smile on your face and you will soon forget the winter blues.... ⚡️Like the Show? Click the [Repost] ↻ button so more people can hear it!

$1 Patreon sale! Promo Code “DRAMA” (expires Nov 30, 2025): https://www.patreon.com/cw/illuminatiwatcherOn today's episode of the Occult Symbolism and Pop Culture with Isaac Weishaupt podcast we unpack a wild conspiracy theory about the possible identity of the founder of Bitcoin- Satoshi Nakamoto! It all started with an examination of Epstein File email 026360 which took me down a path of Gavin Andresen's REAL identity, occult Runes, death and rebirth rituals, Gavin's connections to Satoshi, the Bitcoin Foundation, Joi Ito, MIT's Media Lab and following the money straight to Epstein himself! It's a wild ride so get ready!Links:$1 Patreon sale! Promo Code “DRAMA” (expires Nov 30, 2025): https://www.patreon.com/cw/illuminatiwatcherIs Bitcoin an Illuminati Ruse?… Cryptocurrency Conspiracy Theories on CTAUC Podcasthttps://www.illuminatiwatcher.com/bitcoin-illuminati-ruse-cryptocurrency-conspiracy-theories-ctauc-podcastI'm back on YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/@occultsymbolism (*Supporter feeds Tier 2 members get videos with early access, no ads)Show sponsors- Get discounts while you support the show and do a little self improvement!*CopyMyCrypto.com/Isaac is where you can copy James McMahon's crypto holdings- listeners get access for just $1 WANT MORE?... Check out my UNCENSORED show with my wife, Breaking Social Norms: https://breakingsocialnorms.com/GRIFTER ALLEY- get bonus content AND go commercial free + other perks:*PATREON.com/IlluminatiWatcher : ad free, HUNDREDS of bonus shows, early access AND TWO OF MY BOOKS! (The Dark Path and Kubrick's Code); you can join the conversations with hundreds of other show supporters here: Patreon.com/IlluminatiWatcher (*Patreon is also NOW enabled to connect with Spotify! https://rb.gy/hcq13)*VIP SECTION: Due to the threat of censorship, I set up a Patreon-type system through MY OWN website! IIt's even setup the same: FREE ebooks, Kubrick's Code video! Sign up at: https://illuminatiwatcher.com/members-section/*APPLE PREMIUM: If you're on the Apple Podcasts app- just click the Premium button and you're in! NO more ads, Early Access, EVERY BONUS EPISODE More from Isaac- links and special offers:*BREAKING SOCIAL NORMS podcast, Index of EVERY episode (back to 2014), Signed paperbacks, shirts, & other merch, Substack, YouTube links, appearances & more: https://allmylinks.com/isaacw *STATEMENT: This show is full of Isaac's useless opinions and presented for entertainment purposes. Audio clips used in Fair Use and taken from YouTube videos. 

Mike and Rico hear from the people on Valenti's conspiracy theory.

In the third hour, Rico gave his top NFL teams and Valenti shared an interesting theory when it comes to J Batt and MSU.

Follow Jon -    / jonwedger  Support My Shows Here - https://linktr.ee/projectrooq LIVE STREAM TTS DONATIONS - https://streamlabs.com/projectrooq/tip Project ROOQ Website MORE CONTENT - https://www.projectrooq.com/ My Patreon - patreon.com/projectrooq Instagram - www.instagram.com/projectrooq/ #PODCAST #YOUTUBE #DISCLOSURE #SHAUNATTWOOD #PROJECTROOQ #NEWS *****************************

Get the ILLUMINATION Trilogy: ⁠Click HereSign Up Free Mini E-Courses: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Free Mini Courses⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign Up for Prayer⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Orbis Prayer Ministry Network – Receive prayer for healing, prophecy, inner healing and deliverance⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate: ⁠⁠⁠Give - Orbis Ministries⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠In this episode, Ken Fish walks us through a whirlwind of global ministry experiences from August through November. From revival meetings in South Africa to mass deliverance in the Netherlands, and powerful healings in Australia, Ken unpacks not just where he's been, but what God has been doing around the world.He shares miraculous stories of healings—including a man's tooth being healed after a word of knowledge, an entire restaurant staff receiving healing prayer, and mass deliverances in Europe. Ken also reflects on the Jerusalem Council II gathering focused on completing the Great Commission, and the unexpected move of God at this year's Illumination Conference, where a visible glory cloud appeared and mass deliverance broke out.Finally, he highlights the supernatural impartation of healing grace spreading through impartation—from Brian Blount's handshake healings in South Africa to similar manifestations in the Netherlands.How to Engage with Orbis:- Check out Ken's book,⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ On the Road with the Holy Spirit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠: https://a.co/d/0OVIIA0- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Partner with Orbis Financially⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Give - Orbis Ministries⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠- Download the app: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠App - Orbis Ministries⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-⁠⁠⁠⁠ Are you interested in learning about Holy Spirit-led ministry? Visit Orbis School of Ministry at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Homepage | Orbis School of Ministry⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or email our Registrar, Jo McKay, at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠jo@orbisminstries.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-⁠⁠⁠⁠ Upcoming Orbis Ministries overseas ministry trips are posted on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠orbisministries.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ under the Train tab- Join an International Ministry Trip link behind the registration/login portal.- Do you want to join Ken's private Facebook discussion group, "God is not a Theory?" Please send a Facebook Direct Message to Bryan Orbis and a friend request to be added to it.

Start-up theory is back again and in full force! This clip was taken from our 24 hr Facebook live Impactathon. This episode of start-up theory is joined by none other than Daniel DiPiazza of Rich20Something (@rich20something). Tom and Daniel discuss everything from tactics to creating impact in different generations though vlogging (video blogging) to when to keep going vs. when to quit. Tom and Daniel share tactics on building hustle and fanning the flames of your passion right here on Startup Theory. Topics include: * Daniel explains his method of content creation inspired by Alan Watts. * How to make an impact on children through ‘vlogging'. * Cultivating mastery by leveraging your current skills. * Daniel and Tom's definition of hustle. * How intrapreneurial openings in a company can become opportunities for aspiring entrepreneurs. * Ways to avoid burning out. * How to grow a company culture through leading by example. * When to quit vs. when to keep going. * Fanning the flames of something you have interest in. * The number one thing Tom and Daniel wished they learned early in life. * and much more... Original air date: 9-23-17 SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS: Get 5 free AG1 Travel Packs and a FREE 1 year supply of Vitamin D with your first purchase at⁠ https://impacttheory.co/AG1pod.⁠ Secure your digital life with proactive protection for your assets, identity, family, and tech – Go to⁠ https://impacttheory.co/aurapod⁠ to start your free two-week trial. ********************************************************************** What's up, everybody? It's Tom Bilyeu here: If you want my help... 1. STARTING a business: JOIN ME HERE: ⁠https://tombilyeu.com/zero-to-founder?utm_campaign=Podcast%20Offer&utm_source=podca[%E2%80%A6]d%20end%20of%20show&utm_content=podcast%20ad%20end%20of%20show⁠ 2. SCALING a business: see if you qualify here: ⁠https://tombilyeu.com/call⁠ 3. Get my battle-tested strategies and insights delivered weekly to your inbox:⁠ https://tombilyeu.com/⁠ ********************************************************************** LISTEN TO IMPACT THEORY & MINDSET PLAYBOOK AD FREE + BONUS EPISODES on APPLE PODCASTS:⁠ apple.co/impacttheory⁠ ********************************************************************** FOLLOW TOM: Instagram:⁠ https://www.instagram.com/tombilyeu/⁠ Tik Tok:⁠ https://www.tiktok.com/@tombilyeu?lang=en⁠ Twitter:⁠ https://twitter.com/tombilyeu⁠ YouTube:⁠ https://www.youtube.com/@TomBilyeu⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We discuss some music based film ideas, along with a pretty out there theory for why Ed Sheeran is popular, and pitch another movie!

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers in America and around the world:What really gets AI optimists excited isn't the prospect of automating customer service departments or human resources. Imagine, rather, what might happen to the pace of scientific progress if AI becomes a super research assistant. Tom Davidson's new paper, How Quick and Big Would a Software Intelligence Explosion Be?, explores that very scenario.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk with Davidson about what it would mean for automated AI researchers to rapidly improve their own algorithms, thus creating a self-reinforcing loop of innovation. We talk about the economic effects of self-improving AI research and how close we are to that reality.Davidson is a senior research fellow at Forethought, where he explores AI and explosive growth. He was previously a senior research fellow at Open Philanthropy and a research scientist at the UK government's AI Security Institute.In This Episode* Making human minds (1:43)* Theory to reality (6:45)* The world with automated research (10:59)* Considering constraints (16:30)* Worries and what-ifs (19:07)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Making human minds (1:43). . . you don't have to build any more computer chips, you don't have to build any more fabs . . . In fact, you don't have to do anything at all in the physical world.Pethokoukis: A few years ago, you wrote a paper called “Could Advanced AI Drive Explosive Economic Growth?,” which argued that growth could accelerate dramatically if AI would start generating ideas the way human researchers once did. In your view, population growth historically powered kind of an ideas feedback loop. More people meant more researchers meant more ideas, rising incomes, but that loop broke after the demographic transition in the late-19th century but you suggest that AI could restart it: more ideas, more output, more AI, more ideas. Does this new paper in a way build upon that paper? “How quick and big would a software intelligence explosion be?”The first paper you referred to is about the biggest-picture dynamic of economic growth. As you said, throughout the long run history, when we produced more food, the population increased. That additional output transferred itself into more people, more workers. These days that doesn't happen. When GDP goes up, that doesn't mean people have more kids. In fact, the demographic transition, the richer people get, the fewer kids they have. So now we've got more output, we're getting even fewer people as a result, so that's been blocked.This first paper is basically saying, look, if we can manufacture human minds or human-equivalent minds in any way, be it by building more computer chips, or making better computer chips, or any way at all, then that feedback loop gets going again. Because if we can manufacture more human minds, then we can spend output again to create more workers. That's the first paper.The second paper double clicks on one specific way that we can use output to create more human minds. It's actually, in a way, the scariest way because it's the way of creating human minds which can happen the quickest. So this is the way where you don't have to build any more computer chips, you don't have to build any more fabs, as they're called, these big factories that make computer chips. In fact, you don't have to do anything at all in the physical world.It seems like most of the conversation has been about how much investment is going to go into building how many new data centers, and that seems like that is almost the entire conversation, in a way, at the moment. But you're not looking at compute, you're looking at software.Exactly, software. So the idea is you don't have to build anything. You've already got loads of computer chips and you just make the algorithms that run the AIs on those computer chips more efficient. This is already happening, but it isn't yet a big deal because AI isn't that capable. But already, one year out, Epoch, this AI forecasting organization, estimates that just in one year, it becomes 10 times to 1000 times cheaper to run the same AI system. Just wait 12 months, and suddenly, for the same budget, you are able to run 10 times as many AI systems, or maybe even 1000 times as many for their most aggressive estimate. As I said, not a big deal today, but if we then develop an AI system which is better than any human at doing research, then now, in 10 months, you haven't built anything, but you've got 10 times as many researchers that you can set to work or even more than that. So then we get this feedback loop where you make some research progress, you improve your algorithms, now you've got loads more researchers, you set them all to work again, finding even more algorithmic improvements. So today we've got maybe a few hundred people that are advancing state-of-the-art AI algorithms.I think they're all getting paid a billion dollars a person, too.Exactly. But maybe we can 10x that initially by having them replaced by AI researchers that do the same thing. But then those AI researchers improve their own algorithms. Now you have 10x as many again, you have them building more computer chips, you're just running them more efficiently, and then the cycle continues. You're throwing more and more of these AI researchers at AI progress itself, and the algorithms are improving in what might be a very powerful feedback loop.In this case, it seems me that you're not necessarily talking about artificial general intelligence. This is certainly a powerful intelligence, but it's narrow. It doesn't have to do everything, it doesn't have to play chess, it just has to be able to do research.It's certainly not fully general. You don't need it to be able to control a robot body. You don't need it to be able to solve the Riemann hypothesis. You don't need it to be able to even be very persuasive or charismatic to a human. It's not narrow, I wouldn't say, it has to be able to do literally anything that AI researchers do, and that's a wide range of tasks: They're coding, they're communicating with each other, they're managing people, they are planning out what to work on, they are thinking about reviewing the literature. There's a fairly wide range of stuff. It's extremely challenging. It's some of the hardest work in the world to do, so I wouldn't say it's now, but it's not everything. It's some kind of intermediate level of generality in between a mere chess algorithm that just does chess and the kind of AGI that can literally do anything.Theory to reality (6:45)I think it's a much smaller gap for AI research than it is for many other parts of the economy.I think people who are cautiously optimistic about AI will say something like, “Yeah, I could see the kind of intelligence you're referring to coming about within a decade, but it's going to take a couple of big breakthroughs to get there.” Is that true, or are we actually getting pretty close?Famously, predicting the future of technology is very, very difficult. Just a few years before people invented the nuclear bomb, famous, very well-respected physicists were saying, “It's impossible, this will never happen.” So my best guess is that we do need a couple of fairly non-trivial breakthroughs. So we had the start of RL training a couple of years ago, became a big deal within the language model paradigm. I think we'll probably need another couple of breakthroughs of that kind of size.We're not talking a completely new approach, throw everything out, but we're talking like, okay, we need to extend the current approach in a meaningfully different way. It's going to take some inventiveness, it's going to take some creativity, we're going to have to try out a few things. I think, probably, we'll need that to get to the researcher that can fully automate OpenAI, is a nice way of putting it — OpenAI doesn't employ any humans anymore, they've just got AIs there.There's a difference between what a model can do on some benchmark versus becoming actually productive in the real world. That's why, while all the benchmark stuff is interesting, the thing I pay attention to is: How are businesses beginning to use this technology? Because that's the leap. What is that gap like, in your scenario, versus an AI model that can do a theoretical version of the lab to actually be incorporated in a real laboratory?It's definitely a gap. I think it's a pretty big gap. I think it's a much smaller gap for AI research than it is for many other parts of the economy. Let's say we are talking about car manufacturing and you're trying to get an AI to do everything that happens there. Man, it's such a messy process. There's a million different parts of the supply chain. There's all this tacit knowledge and all the human workers' minds. It's going to be really tough. There's going to be a very big gap going from those benchmarks to actually fully automating the supply chain for cars.For automating what OpenAI does, there's still a gap, but it's much smaller, because firstly, all of the work is virtual. Everyone at OpenAI could, in principle, work remotely. Their top research scientists, they're just on a computer all day. They're not picking up bricks and doing stuff like that. So also that already means it's a lot less messy. You get a lot less of that kind of messy world reality stuff slowing down adoption. And also, a lot of it is coding, and coding is almost uniquely clean in that, for many coding tasks, you can define clearly defined metrics for success, and so that makes AI much better. You can just have a go. Did AI succeed in the test? If not, try something else or do a gradient set update.That said, there's still a lot of messiness here, as any coder will know, when you're writing good code, it's not just about whether it does the function that you've asked it to do, it needs to be well-designed, it needs to be modular, it needs to be maintainable. These things are much harder to evaluate, and so AIs often pass our benchmarks because they can do the function that you asked it to do, the code runs, but they kind of write really spaghetti code — code that no one wants to look at, that no one can understand, and so no company would want to use that.So there's still going to be a pretty big benchmark-to-reality gap, even for OpenAI, and I think that's one of the big uncertainties in terms of, will this happen in three years versus will this happen in 10 years, or even 15 years?Since you brought up the timeline, what's your guess? I didn't know whether to open with that question or conclude with that question — we'll stick it right in the middle of our chat.Great. Honestly, my best guess about this does change more often than I would like it to, which I think tells us, look, there's still a state of flux. This is just really something that's very hard to know about. Predicting the future is hard. My current best guess is it's about even odds that we're able to fully automate OpenAI within the next 10 years. So maybe that's a 50-50.The world with AI research automation (10:59). . . I'm talking about 30 percent growth every year. I think it gets faster than that. If you want to know how fast it eventually gets, you can think about the question of how fast can a kind of self-replicating system double itself?So then what really would be the impact of that kind of AI research automation? How would you go about quantifying that kind of acceleration? What does the world look like?Yeah, so many possibilities, but I think what strikes me is that there is a plausible world where it is just way, way faster than almost everyone is expecting it to be. So that's the world where you fully automate OpenAI, and then we get that feedback loop that I was talking about earlier where AIs make their algorithms way more efficient, now you've got way more of them, then they make their algorithms way more efficient again, now they're way smarter. Now they're thinking a hundred times faster. The feedback loop continues and maybe within six months you now have a billion superintelligent AIs running on this OpenAI data center. The combined cognitive abilities of all these AIs outstrips the whole of the United States, outstrips anything we've seen from any kind of company or entity before, and they can all potentially be put towards any goal that OpenAI wants to. And then there's, of course, the risk that OpenAI's lost control of these systems, often discussed, in which case these systems could all be working together to pursue a particular goal. And so what we're talking about here is really a huge amount of power. It's a threat to national security for any government in which this happens, potentially. It is a threat to everyone if we lose control of these systems, or if the company that develops them uses them for some kind of malicious end. And, in terms of economic impacts, I personally think that that again could happen much more quickly than people think, and we can get into that.In the first paper we mentioned, it was kind of a thought experiment, but you were really talking about moving the decimal point in GDP growth, instead of talking about two and three percent, 20 and 30 percent. Is that the kind of world we're talking about?I speak to economists a lot, and —They hate those kinds of predictions, by the way.Obviously, they think I'm crazy. Not all of them. There are economists that take it very seriously. I think it's taken more seriously than everyone else realizes. It's like it's a bit embarrassing, at the moment, to admit that you take it seriously, but there are a few really senior economists who absolutely know their stuff. They're like, “Yep, this checks out. I think that's what's going to happen.” And I've had conversation with them where they're like, “Yeah, I think this is going to happen.” But the really loud, dominant view where I think people are a little bit scared to speak out against is they're like, “Obviously this is sci-fi.”One analogy I like to give to people who are very, very confident that this is all sci-fi and it's rubbish is to imagine that we were sitting there in the year 1400, imagine we had an economics professor who'd been studying the rate of economic growth, and they've been like, “Yeah, we've always had 0.1 percent growth every single year throughout history. We've never seen anything higher.” And then there was some kind of futurist economist rogue that said, “Actually, I think that if I extrapolate the curves in this way and we get this kind of technology, maybe we could have one percent growth.” And then all the other economists laugh at them, tell them they're insane – that's what happened. In 1400, we'd never had growth that was at all fast, and then a few hundred years later, we developed industrial technology, we started that feedback loop, we were investing more and more resources in scientific progress and in physical capital, and we did see much faster growth.So I think it can be useful to try and challenge economists and say, “Okay, I know it sounds crazy, but history was crazy. This crazy thing happened where growth just got way, way faster. No one would've predicted it. You would not have predicted it.” And I think being in that mindset can encourage people to be like, “Yeah, okay. You know what? Maybe if we do get AI that's really that powerful, it can really do everything, and maybe it is possible.”But to answer your question, yeah, I'm talking about 30 percent growth every year. I think it gets faster than that. If you want to know how fast it eventually gets, you can think about the question of how fast can a kind of self-replicating system double itself? So ultimately, what the economy is going to be like is it's going to have robots and factories that are able to fully create new versions of themselves. Everything you need: the roads, the electricity, the robots, the buildings, all of that will be replicated. And so you can look at actually biology and say, do we have any examples of systems which fully replicate themselves? How long does it take? And if you look at rats, for example, they're able to double the number of rats by grabbing resources from the environment, and giving birth, and whatnot. The doubling time is about six weeks for some types of rats. So that's an example of here's a physical system — ultimately, everything's made of physics — a physical system that has some intelligence that's able to go out into the world, gather resources, replicate itself. The doubling time is six weeks.Now, who knows how long it'll take us to get to AI that's that good? But when we do, you could see the whole physical economy, maybe a part that humans aren't involved with, a whole automated city without any humans just doubling itself every few weeks. If that happens, and the amount of stuff we're able to reduce as a civilization is doubling again on the order of weeks. And, in fact, there are some animals that double faster still, in days, but that's the kind of level of craziness. Now we're talking about 1000 percent growth, at that point. We don't know how crazy it could get, but I think we should take even the really crazy possibilities, we shouldn't fully rule them out.Considering constraints (16:30)I really hope people work less. If we get this good future, and the benefits are shared between all . . . no one should work. But that doesn't stop growth . . .There's this great AI forecast chart put out by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, and I think its main forecast — the one most economists would probably agree with — has a line showing AI improving GDP by maybe two tenths of a percent. And then there are two other lines: one is more or less straight up, and the other one is straight down, because in the first, AI created a utopia, and in the second, AI gets out of control and starts killing us, and whatever. So those are your three possibilities.If we stick with the optimistic case for a moment, what constraints do you see as most plausible — reduced labor supply from rising incomes, social pushback against disruption, energy limits, or something else?Briefly, the ones you've mentioned, people not working, 100 percent. I really hope people work less. If we get this good future, and the benefits are shared between all — which isn't guaranteed — if we get that, then yeah, no one should work. But that doesn't stop growth, because when AI and robots can do everything that humans do, you don't need humans in the loop anymore. That whole thing is just going and kind of self-replicating itself and making as many goods as services as we want. Sure, if you want your clothes to be knitted by a human, you're in trouble, then your consumption is stuck. Bad luck. If you're happy to consume goods and services produced by AI systems or robots, fine if no one wants to work.Pushback: I think, for me, this is the biggest one. Obviously, the economy doubling every year is very scary as a thought. Tech progress will be going much faster. Imagine if you woke up and, over the course of the year, you go from not having any telephones at all in the world, to everyone's on their smartphones and social media and all the apps. That's a transition that took decades. If that happened in a year, that would be very disconcerting.Another example is the development of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons were developed over a number of years. If that happened in a month, or two months, that could be very dangerous. There'd be much less time for different countries, different actors to figure out how they're going to handle it. So I think pushback is the strongest one that we might as a society choose, “Actually, this is insane. We're going to go slower than we could.” That requires, potentially, coordination, but I think there would be broad support for some degree of coordination there.Worries and what-ifs (19:07)If suddenly no one has any jobs, what will we want to do with ourselves? That's a very, very consequential transition for the nature of human society.I imagine you certainly talk with people who are extremely gung-ho about this prospect. What is the common response you get from people who are less enthusiastic? Do they worry about a future with no jobs? Maybe they do worry about the existential kinds of issues. What's your response to those people? And how much do you worry about those things?I think there are loads of very worrying things that we're going to be facing. One class of pushback, which I think is very common, is worries about employment. It's a source of income for all of us, employment, but also, it's a source of pride, it's a source of meaning. If suddenly no one has any jobs, what will we want to do with ourselves? That's a very, very consequential transition for the nature of human society. I think people aren't just going to be down to just do it. I think people are scared about three AI companies literally now taking all the revenues that all of humanity used to be earning. It is naturally a very scary prospect. So that's one kind of pushback, and I'm sympathetic with it.I think that there are solutions, if we find a way to tax AI systems, which isn't necessarily easy, because it's very easy to move physical assets between countries. It's a lot easier to tax labor than capital already when rich people can move their assets around. We're going to have the same problem with AI, but if we can find a way to tax it, and we maintain a good democratic country, and we can just redistribute the wealth broadly, it can be solved. So I think it's a big problem, but it is doable.Then there's the problem of some people want to stop this now because they're worried about AI killing everyone. Their literally worry is that everyone will be dead because superintelligent AI will want that to happen. I think there's a real risk there. It's definitely above one percent, in my opinion. I wouldn't go above 10 percent, myself, but I think it's very scary, and that's a great reason to slow things down. I personally don't want to stop quite yet. I think you want to stop when the AI is a bit more powerful and a bit more useful than it is today so it can kind of help us figure out what to do about all of this crazy stuff that's coming.On what side of that line is AI as an AI researcher?That's a really great question. Should we stop? I think it's very hard to stop just after you've got the AI researcher AI, because that's when it's suddenly really easy to go very, very fast. So my out-of-the-box proposal here, which is probably very flawed, would be: When we're within a few spits distance — not spitting distance, but if you did that three times, and we can see we're almost at that AI automating OpenAI — then you pause, because you're not going to accidentally then go all the way. It is actually still a little bit a fair distance away, but it's actually still, at that point, probably a very powerful AI that can really help.Then you pause and do what?Great question. So then you pause, and you use your AI systems to help you firstly solve the problem of AI alignment, make extra, double sure that every time we increase the notch of AI capabilities, the AI is still loyal to humanity, not to its own kind of secret goals.Secondly, you solve the problem of, how are we going to make sure that no one person in government or no one CEO of an AI company ensures that this whole AI army is loyal to them, personally? How are we going to ensure that everyone, the whole world gets influenced over what this AI is ultimately programmed to do? That's the second problem.And then there's just a whole host of other things: unemployment that we've talked about, competition between different countries, US and China, there's a whole host of other things that I think you want to research on, figure out, get consensus on, and then slowly ratchet up the capabilities in what is now a very safe and controlled way.What else should we be working on? What are you working on next?One problem I'm excited about is people have historically worried about AI having its own goals. We need to make it loyal to humanity. But as we've got closer, it's become increasingly obvious, “loyalty to humanity” is very vague. What specifically do you want the AI to be programmed to do? I mean, it's not programmed, it's grown, but if it were programmed, if you're writing a rule book for AI, some organizations have employee handbooks: Here's the philosophy of the organization, here's how you should behave. Imagine you're doing that for the AI, but you're going super detailed, exactly how you want your AI assistant to behave in all kinds of situations. What should that be? Essentially, what should we align the AI to? Not any individual person, probably following the law, probably loads of other things. I think basically designing what is the character of this AI system is a really exciting question, and if we get that right, maybe the AI can then help us solve all these other problems.Maybe you have no interest in science fiction, but is there any film, TV, book that you think is useful for someone in your position to be aware of, or that you find useful in any way? Just wondering.I think there's this great post called “AI 2027,” which lays out a concrete scenario for how AI could go wrong or how maybe it could go right. I would recommend that. I think that's the only thing that's coming top of mind. I often read a lot of the stuff I read is I read a lot of LessWrong, to be honest. There's a lot of stuff from there that I don't love, but a lot of new ideas, interesting content there.Any fiction?I mean, I read fiction, but honestly, I don't really love the AI fiction that I've read because often it's quite unrealistic, and so I kind of get a bit overly nitpicky about it. But I mean, yeah, there's this book called Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality, which I read maybe 10 years ago, which I thought was pretty fun.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were Promised Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

In earlier reporting, much of the media framed the Jeffrey Epstein case largely as fuel for conspiracy theorists. The narrative around his death, the secretive networks, and the alleged “client list” often got labeled as fringe speculation, with the focus on odd memes and internet chatter rather than systemic investigation. The lack of transparency — the sealed records, the unanswered questions about his connections and how he died — created an environment where speculation thrived, and the mainstream coverage treated it as detached from serious journalism.More recently though, the tone has shifted. The piece acknowledges that what was once mostly dismissed as conspiracy talk is now being seen by some outlets as, at minimum, a reflection of genuine institutional failures — gaps in oversight, accountability and transparency that allowed the story to be mishandled or ignored. The reinterpretation means the media is slowly moving from “crazy fringe theory” toward “legitimate unanswered questions,” recognizing that the earlier dismissal may have been premature and that the conditions that spawned those theories often stemmed from real structural problems.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Lindsie and Kristen catch up on a chaotic week full of drama, Thanksgiving dinner prep, and a deep dive into the viral Bird Theory. They discuss a Facebook post proposing parents charge their adult children rent, they react to the controversial video of a woman ignoring the specific wish lists of Angel Tree children, and they also discuss the story of a woman who was arrested for aggravated battery after allegedly attacking her boyfriend over a $5 payment to another woman on a mobile app. Lindsie introduces Kristen to the Bird Theory, a relationship theory suggesting that healthy romantic relationships are built on small, micro-moments of connection.Thank you to our sponsors!Hers: Start your free online visit today at forhers.com/SOUTHERNTEA for your personalized weight loss treatment. Restrictions apply.HomeServe: Go to HomeServe.com to find the plan that's right for you.Honeylove: Save 20% Off Honeylove by going to honeylove.com/Southerntea! #honeylovepodNeuro: For a limited time, get 40% off your entire order! Go to GetSoul.com and use the code SOUTHERNTEANutrafol: Get $10 off your first month's subscription and free shipping when you go to Nutrafol.com and enter code SOUTHERNTEASoul: For a limited time, get 40% off your entire order! Go to GetSoul.com and use the code SOUTHERNTEATempo: Visit TempoMeals.com/SOUTHERNTEA for 60% OFF your first box!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

While Democrats recently scored some much-needed electoral wins, the party remains in crisis. Recent reports like Welcome PAC's “Deciding to Win” argue that the Democrats must drop unpopular cultural positions and recenter economic demands. Can a populist economic agenda shorn of unpopular identity politics get the party back on track? On this episode of Confronting Capitlism, Vivek Chibber evaluates these reports and examines the pros and cons of this approach. Based on recent polling data, working class voters have rejected elitist cultural demands but support social-democratic economic solutions. The latest issue of Catalyst Journal is out and you can subscribe for just $20 using the code CONFRONTINGCAPITALISM: https://catalyst-journal.com/subscribe/?code=CONFRONTINGCAPITALISM Have a question for us? Write to us by email: confronting.capitalism@jacobin.com Confronting Capitalism with Vivek Chibber is produced by Catalyst: A Journal of Theory and Strategy and published by Jacobin. Music by Zonkey.

In this exciting installment of the ongoing Ozark Mountain Bigfoot Conference series, Ryan “RPG” Golembeske returns for another deep dive into the world of cryptids—this time taking listeners on a journey from the depths of the ocean to the heart of the wilderness.With his signature blend of curiosity, experience, and adventurous storytelling, RPG explores the legendary creatures that continue to captivate researchers and enthusiasts alike. The discussion begins with iconic sea monsters such as the Kraken, examining whether sightings throughout history may point to encounters with massive cephalopods like giant octopuses. He then shifts to the mysterious waters of Loch Ness, highlighting the compelling scientific theory that Nessie could be a supersized eel—a hypothesis gaining traction through modern research.From there, the conversation moves into familiar terrain: Bigfoot. RPG presents a fascinating angle on Sasquatch biology and survival, proposing that these elusive beings may rely on naturally occurring hyperbaric environments—hidden geothermal systems, pressure-regulated cave networks, or unique atmospheric pockets—to maintain longevity, accelerate healing, and avoid detection. The talk expands into broader cryptid theory, asking whether such creatures are undiscovered animals, evolutionary holdovers, or manifestations of phenomena we have yet to understand. hrough a blend of science, speculation, anthropology, and field experience, RPG guides the audience through a dynamic exploration of the unknown.This session delivers another captivating chapter in the Ozark Mountain Bigfoot Conference series—an invitation to rethink what might still be hiding in our oceans, forests, and unexplored corners of the world.Get Our FREE NewsletterGet Brian's Books Leave Us A VoicemailVisit Our WebsiteSupport Our SponsorsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/sasquatch-odyssey--4839697/support.

 I heard you wanted to get creative, so here is my *almost painfully*detailed breakdown of that process. If you'd like my resume when it comes to creative thinking, Google my name.  (Before appearing too self-righteous to prospective listeners, we will be discussing the fundamental use of first person and first person possessive pronouns when it comes to creativity.) This is part one to my new mini-series on how to be more creative where we're exploring the fields of neuroscience, linguistics, metalinguistics, musculature, childhood development and much more! It's time to brace yourself because the communal Schauer this week is loosening some pretty big knots. Resources: What We Value: The Neuroscience of Choice and Change - Emily Falk A neurocomputational model of creative process https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763422001452 The Seven Functional Movement Patterns + Video Demonstrations https://www.opexfit.com/blog/seven-functional-movement-patterns Advertising: how it influences children and teenagers https://raisingchildren.net.au/toddlers/play-learning/screen-time-media/advertising-children#:~:text=At%207%2D11%20years%2C%20children,overstate%20how%20good%20products%20are. Describing Skeletal Muscles: A Review of Muscle Attachments and Actions https://www.visiblebody.com/learn/muscular/muscle-movements#:~:text=3.,muscles%20play%20in%20each%20movement.&text=The%20prime%20mover%2C%20sometimes%20called,are%20keeping%20your%20posture%20sturdy Behavioral energetics in human locomotion: how energy use influences how we move https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11993254/ “I” versus “the author”: The power of first-person voice when writing about science https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11145200/#:~:text=Writing%20in%20the%20first%20person,that's%20something%20most%20scientists%20want.  Using “I”: The First Person in Academic Writing https://www.brandeis.edu/writing-program/resources/faculty/handouts/first-person.html Please everyone read this to understand how to apply “I” statements in academic writing OR AT LEAST when studying and trying to retain the information - there is clearly a benefit to using 3rd person, but using first person *strategically and with nuanced understanding* will make knowledge more relative and rewarding to self, as well as make concepts easier to apply. Why Metalinguistic Awareness Matters https://www.gemmlearning.com/blog/learning-issues/why-are-metalinguistic-skills-important/#:~:text=Metalinguistic%20awareness%20is%20the%20ability%20to:%20*,your%20understanding%20as%20you%20listen%20and%20read  Epithelium  https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/22062-epithelium  Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development https://www.verywellmind.com/kohlbergs-theory-of-moral-development-2795071 For sources from a previous podcast episode, please visit that episode for the full source list in the caption! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Some academics go into the office every day; some are rarely ever seen on campus. Is one way better than the other? Who better to ask than the brilliant Ella Hafermalz who spent her career on the topic of remote work and its implications for belonging, community, collaboration, and performance. She points out that academia has always been a distributed and flexible profession. Researchers need flexibility and freedom to figure out their own best way of solving problems and doing their work, some of which may mean sitting at a desk, but maybe also involve lab or field work. On the other hand, pure freedom for individual academics makes a university nothing more than a collection of hired guns without a true community. How do we find the best balance and what is a good balance to begin with? Episode reading list Chang, S. (2025): China's unemployed young adults who are pretending to have jobs. BBC News, 11 August 2025, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdd3ep76g3go. Hafermalz, E., & Riemer, K. (2021). Productive and Connected While Working from Home: What Client-facing Remote Workers can Learn from Telenurses about 'Belonging Through Technology'. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(1), 89-99. Huysman, M. (2025). Studying AI in the Wild: Reflections from the AI@Work Research Group. Journal of Management Studies, https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.70021. The Professor and the Madman. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5932728/. Hafermalz, E. (2021). Out of the Panopticon and into Exile: Visibility and Control in Distributed New Culture Organizations. Organization Studies, 42(5), 697–717. Rovelli, C. (2022). Helgoland: The Strange and Beautiful Story of Quantum Physics. Penguin Books. Carroll, S. (2019). Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and the Emergence of Spacetime. Dutton. Sting, F. J., Tarakci, M., & Recker, J. (2024). Performance Implications of Digital Disruption in Strategic Competition. MIS Quarterly, 48(3), 1263-1278. Archive.org: Philosophy 185 Heidegger: Lectures from the course Philosophy 185 Heidegger by Hubert Dreyfus. https://fourble.co.uk/podcast/philosophy185heidegger. Baudrillard, J. (1981). Simulacra and Simulation. University of Michigan Press. Retkowsky, J., Hafermalz, E., & Huysman, M. (2024). Managing a ChatGPT-empowered Workforce: Understanding its Affordances and Side Effects. Business Horizons, 67(5), 511-523. Haubrich, G. F., Soekijad, M., & Hafermalz, E. (2025). 'What's Up with Work?'Bringing Screens into a Theory of Hybrid Working Situations. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.5465/AMPROC.2025.10670abstract. Tekeste, M. (2025). Under Pressure: Becoming the Good Enough Academic. Organization, https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084251383285. LinkedIn Community: The Digital Visibility Group: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/13346086/.

Welcome to a new episode of Impact Quantum! In today's show, host Frank La Vigne and co-host Candice Gillhoolley dive deep into the fascinating world of quantum chemistry with special guest Natasa Nadoveza, who recently completed her PhD in this cutting-edge field. Together, they unpack what nuclear quantum dynamics is, explore its significance in understanding molecular processes, and discuss how quantum-level simulation could revolutionize industries ranging from medicine and drug discovery to energy and materials science.Throughout the conversation, you'll hear about the very real challenges of translating theoretical breakthroughs into practical tools, especially when it comes to scaling simulations beyond simple molecules. Natasa Nadoveza shares her journey from chemistry student to quantum researcher, and reveals some of the surprising quirks and behaviors of molecules when you look at them through a quantum lens.Whether you're quantum-curious or a science enthusiast, this episode will ignite your imagination with stories about catalytic processes, energy transfer, and even the quantum mysteries behind everyday things like color, smell, and photosynthesis. If you've ever wondered what it takes to run a multi-step simulation on a supercomputer, or how science—especially quantum science—continues to challenge our understanding of the world, you'll find plenty to geek out over in this illuminating discussion!Time Stamps00:00 "Impact Quantum: Quantum Chemistry Insights"05:22 "Methane Study Challenges in Theory"07:45 Quantum Effects and Drug Discovery11:44 "Catalysts: Reducing Energy Barriers"14:46 Molecular Bond Simulation Insights18:31 Quantized Energy in Molecules24:01 Quantum Effects and Everyday Relevance25:16 Quantum Chemistry and Reactivity Essentials29:24 Heat and Electrical Conductivity Explained31:37 "Challenges of Running Simulations"36:30 "Challenges in Intuitively Learning Quantum"39:44 "Data Compression Challenges in Simulation"42:19 "Exploring Industry vs. Academia"

The Missing 411 and the FAE TheoryBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/missing-persons-mysteries--5624803/support.

Bruce & Gaydos explain a new relationship test that is taking TikTok by storm.

Today on "Don't@ME", IT'S A FIREABLE OFFENSE! Cleveland Browns head coach Kevin Stefanski doesn't want Shedeur Sanders to succeed. That's what is happening according to Cam Newton! On ESPN's First Take, Newton went off on Stefanski for what we all witnessed once Sanders entered the game on Sunday. Plus, NBA Analyst, Greg Anthony on Draymond and the Pelicans fan and how Greg evaluates the role of an NBA coach today vs. when he played? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week we're joined by very special guest, comic artist Harris Fishman AKA BeetleMoses as we discuss Roald Dahl's relationship to Tim Burton's 2005 adaptation of his book, how Wooly Mammoths helped propagate pumpkins in the Americas, and how the world's tallest man helped save some dolphins. A listener mail tells us about the GOAT of goats, the Christmas Gävle in Sweden.Episode Tabs:Charlie and the Chocolate Factoryhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_and_the_Chocolate_Factory_(film)Study reveals ancient link between mammoth dung and pumpkin piehttps://insider.si.edu/2015/11/dull-mastadon-taste-buds-once-helped-pumpkins-wild-ancestor-thrive/World's tallest man saves dolphinshttps://www.theguardian.com/news/blog/2006/dec/14/anotherdolphinListener Tabs:Gävle goathttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gävle_goat#Email your closed tab submissions to: 500opentabs@gmail.comSupport us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/500OpenTabs500 Open Tabs Wiki: https://500-open-tabs.fandom.com/wiki/500_Open_Tabs_Wiki500 Open Roads (Google Maps episode guide): https://maps.app.goo.gl/Tg9g2HcUaFAzXGbw7Continue the conversation by joining us on Discord! https://discord.gg/8px5RJHk7aGet 40% off an annual subscription to Nebula by going to nebula.tv/500opentabsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

System design interviews often focus on theoretical complexity, but how do Senior Engineers at GitHub actually approach scaling? In this episode, Bassem Dghaidi breaks down how to think about system design when real business impact is on the line.We discuss why "simple is complicated enough," the dangers of premature scaling, and why vertical scaling often beats complex distributed systems. If you want to bridge the gap between theory and practice, and understand how to design software that actually serves the business, this conversation is for you.In this episode, we cover:- The "Order of Magnitude" rule for scaling systems- Why GitHub often runs millions of requests on simple architecture- How to communicate technical constraints to non-technical stakeholders- Why 90% of Bassem's code is now written by AI agentsConnect with Bassem Dghaidi:https://www.linkedin.com/in/bassemdghaidyTimestamps:00:00:00 - Intro00:00:48 - Theory vs. Practice in System Design00:02:06 - The Startup That Almost Failed via Kubernetes00:03:33 - How GitHub Scales (It's Simpler Than You Think)00:05:20 - The Underrated Power of Vertical Scaling00:08:23 - Why Big Tech Interviews for Scale You Don't Need Yet00:10:39 - Software Evolves, It Isn't Just "Built"00:11:53 - Only Design for the Next Order of Magnitude00:15:39 - Stop Building Generic Frameworks00:18:17 - "Hacking" the System Design Interview00:21:29 - Translating Tech Problems to Business Risks00:27:37 - Layoffs & Engineering Efficiency00:29:41 - Proving Your Impact with Numbers00:31:00 - Professional Engineering vs. Hobby Coding00:32:19 - "Simple is Complicated Enough"00:35:03 - The Rise of AI Coding (The Motorcycle Analogy)00:37:30 - "90% of My Code is Written by AI Agents"00:41:04 - How to Become a Great Engineer#SystemDesign #SoftwareEngineering #GitHub

Back by popular demand is the Orriant Book Club. Join Orriant coaches, Shell & Chandra, who will bring to us a discussion about “The Let Them Theory” by New York Times Best Selling Author and Motivator, Mel Robbins. Just two simple words, Let Them, have the power to set us free from the opinions, drama, and judgments of others. This podcast episode will review this amazing book and teach us how we can stop wasting time on things we can't control.

You know that massive to-do list in your head? All those things you're "supposed" to do as a freelancer? New website. Social media content calendar. Cold outreach. Warm outreach. Lead magnets. Funnels. Pricing revamp. Recurring revenue package. Portfolio update. It's overwhelming as hell. And oh by the way, 99% of that list doesn't matter right now. Because your income isn't capped by all those things. It's capped by ONE thing. One bottleneck. This is something called the Theory of Constraints, and it's the simplest framework I've ever seen for giving yourself a raise as a freelancer. Your business has exactly ONE constraint holding you back right now. Maybe it's time (you're booked solid but can't take on more clients). Maybe it's lead generation (nobody knows you exist). Maybe it's sales (you get inquiries but can't close them). Maybe it's your average client value (everyone's worth $1,000 when they should be worth $5,000). Maybe it's fulfillment (clients leave unhappy and never refer you). Once you identify that ONE constraint and fix it, you get a raise. Sometimes a massive one, like 20%, 30%, even 50%+ in a year. Then a new constraint pops up. You fix that one. Yay, you just got another raise! It's literally whack-a-mole with your income, except every time you whack one you make more money. In this episode, I walk you through: The exact framework for identifying YOUR constraint The five core functions every freelancer needs to master (in order) The most common bottleneck for six-figure earners The "Hormozi Holy Trio" that holds most freelancers back How fixing one simple number can give yourself a 4x raise This is one of those episodes where if you actually apply what's in it, you'll look back in 6-12 months and realize it changed everything. For full show notes, visit https://6figurecreative.com/389

AI is coming for your job…or is it?Right now, boards and CEOs are being sold the dream that AI will replace thousands of people, slash costs, and magically boost profit. Meanwhile, leaders like you are stuck in the middle, trying to keep customers happy and deliver real results with tools that are still hallucinating and half-baked.So how do you cut through the hype and work out what is actually useful for your team, your customers, and your career?In this episode, I'm joined by AI strategist and product expert James Killick. James has been working with AI long before it was cool, helping businesses weave it into real products and real workflows, not just shiny demos.We get into questions that are front of mind for every modern leader:How reliable is AI really, and when should you absolutely keep a human in the loop?Why 80 to 90 percent of corporate AI initiatives are failing, and how to avoid being one of themWhat AI will automate first, and what will remain uniquely human for much longer than people thinkHow to become an AI orchestrator who manages both people and AI agents to get better results; andThe single biggest mindset shift you need if you want to stay relevant in the AI eraWe also talk about very practical stuff: Which parts of your business to tackle first…how to train your people without turning them into rogue prompt cowboys...and how to use AI to dramatically increase your speed and impact, without handing your brain over to the machine.If you are a leader who wants to use AI to amplify your edge rather than erase it, this episode is for you.****** James has put together an INSANELY valuable free resource for our listeners, which you can check out here! ******————————FREE QUIZ: I've developed a 3-question quiz that'll give you a free personalised podcast playlist tailored to where you are right now in your leadership career!Click here to take the 30-second quiz now to get your on-the-go playlist————————You can connect with me at:Website: https://www.yourceomentor.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/yourceomentorInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/yourceomentorLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/martin-moore-075b001/————————Our mission here at Your CEO Mentor is to improve the quality of leaders, globally.

In earlier reporting, much of the media framed the Jeffrey Epstein case largely as fuel for conspiracy theorists. The narrative around his death, the secretive networks, and the alleged “client list” often got labeled as fringe speculation, with the focus on odd memes and internet chatter rather than systemic investigation. The lack of transparency — the sealed records, the unanswered questions about his connections and how he died — created an environment where speculation thrived, and the mainstream coverage treated it as detached from serious journalism.More recently though, the tone has shifted. The piece acknowledges that what was once mostly dismissed as conspiracy talk is now being seen by some outlets as, at minimum, a reflection of genuine institutional failures — gaps in oversight, accountability and transparency that allowed the story to be mishandled or ignored. The reinterpretation means the media is slowly moving from “crazy fringe theory” toward “legitimate unanswered questions,” recognizing that the earlier dismissal may have been premature and that the conditions that spawned those theories often stemmed from real structural problems.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In this episode of the Winning Hand podcast, the hosts dive deep into the 3-cost upgrade, Frozen Solid. They engage in a pop quiz with guest Villain Theory, revisit favorite heroes, and discuss listener emails about deck building strategies. The conversation also explores the new Wonder Man character and recent gameplay experiences with various heroes. The episode concludes with an in-depth discussion of the card of the day, Frozen Solid, highlighting its mechanics and potential strategies. The conversation also touches on deck-building strategies and personal experiences with Iceman. VillainTheory's deck: https://marvelcdb.com/decklist/view/56446/niceman-multiplayer-minion-slayer-1.0 Boomguy's deck: https://marvelcdb.com/decklist/view/45086/doctor-icelove-3.0 Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Winning Hand Podcast 02:22 Deep Dive into Iceman and Frozen Solid 05:13 Pop Quiz with Villain Theory 08:10 Revisiting Villain Theory's Favorite Heroes 10:46 Listener Email Discussion on Wonder Man 13:44 Recent Gameplay Experiences 16:34 Exploring X23 and Sidekick Decks 27:46 Exploring Hero Mechanics: X23 and Drax 29:23 Deck Strategies: Silk and Shuri 34:01 Card of the Day: Frozen Solid 42:21 Power Dynamics: Evaluating Frozen Solid 45:50 Exploring Frozen Solid's Mechanics 47:04 Defensive Strategies with Iceman 49:21 The Value of Frostbites 50:25 Comparing Cards: Frozen Solid vs. Ice Wall 51:58 Ranking Iceman's Cards 54:23 Final Thoughts on Frozen Solid 58:47 Fun Factor of Frozen Solid 01:04:06 Comparing Frozen Solid to Webbed Up 01:07:37 Final Ratings and Thoughts on Iceman 01:12:34 Deck Strategies and Experiences 01:29:34 Outro  

"Dean's Chat hosts, Drs. Jensen and Richey, welcome Dr. Glazer to the podcast! Edward Glaser, DPM Podiatrist • Foot Biomechanist • Inventor of MASS Posture Theory • Founder & CEO, Sole Supports, Inc. Dr. Ed Glaser holds a doctorate from the New York College of Podiatric Medicine and began his journey with a foundation in mechanical engineering from SUNY Stony Brook.  He spent 13 years in private practice before dedicating his energies to developing a new paradigm in foot biomechanics. Ed is the creator of MASS Posture Theory, which views foot biomechanics through an engineering lens, using an all-axis model based on an individual's ideal gait.  He is also the inventor of Relax, Release, Relief (RRR) — a method of interrupting neurological feedback loops that contribute to chronic pain. As founder and CEO of Sole Supports, Inc., Dr. Glaser has built a reputation for reimagining orthotic design, focusing on calibrated full-arch support to prevent postural collapse and optimize function. Over decades, he has lectured at medical conferences worldwide, published his work (including in the Foot & Ankle Online Journal), and taught his methodology in podiatry and chiropractic programs.

DescriptionStep into a deeper understanding of who you truly are. This episode explores how to awaken your higher self and access the power of divine energy for healing, balance, and transformation. Through guided wisdom and practical insight, you'll discover how energy, awareness, and intention can reshape your inner and outer world.✨ In this session, you'll experience:How to connect with your higher consciousnessTechniques to channel divine healing energyThe truth about spiritual awakening and ego releaseUsing vibration and thought to create harmonyAligning your energy with divine flowThe journey toward self-realization and purposeThis is your guide to spiritual transformation — filled with light, wisdom, and energy activation for those seeking healing and divine connection.

In this solo episode, I dive into Peter Wessel Zapffe's haunting “existential elk” theory of consciousness — the idea that our self-awareness is both magnificent and unbearably heavy, like oversized antlers we were never built to carry. The topic resurfaced after my friend Aaron Inkrott recently shared the metaphor with me, and it immediately brought me back to when I first encountered it years ago in Thomas Ligotti's The Conspiracy Against the Human Race.As a psychotherapist who spends my days sitting with people's despair, loneliness, and deep existential pain, I find myself drawn to these darker currents of thought. But I'm equally interested in how we can work creatively and hopefully within them. In this episode, I reflect on how Zapffe's theory shows up in therapy — especially with teens and neurodivergent young adults — and how the metaphor of “the elk with oversized antlers” can help us understand both the burden and the possibility of consciousness.I invite you to explore your own antlers, the weight you carry, and the ways therapy can help us hold our awareness with more courage, imagination, and maybe even meaning.

In this episode, I discuss seven flaws of Attachment Style Theory as it pertains to marriage counseling.

Jump in with Carlos Juico and Gavin Ruta on episode 261 of Jumpers Jump. This episode we discuss: Funny Club stories, Manifestation theory, Reward after hardwork, Vacations, Jumpers Ghost Hunting, Wife gets possessed vid, Our Stranger Things songs, The Wild West Ghost story, Nagoro Ghost Village, Spirits theory, The Boy and the Beast, Anime, 911 Ghost call, 67 is Demonic theory, Mexican Ouija Board story, The Ghost Church, Recurring Dreams, Tsukiyomi, Parasocial game, 6ix9ine is Undercover theory, Dying Rapper theory, Predicting new media, Simulation theories, Awkward Funny humor, Laugh track theory, Ai, Sarah Grace Tiktok Murder case and much more! -Download the DraftKings app today! New players get 500 spins when you wager $5 -Sign up for a $1 per month trial at https://www.shopify.com/jumpers Follow the podcast: @JumpersPodcast Follow Carlos: @CarlosJuico Follow Gavin: @GavinRutaa Check out the podcast on YouTube: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://bit.ly/JumpersJumpYT⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode Toby sits down with hardcore manager and ex-Backtrack vocalist James Vitalo! He talks about the Long Island scene and venues, getting kicked out of school, gambling in high school for record money, underground poker rooms, hockey, being in different bands, the 90's, managing and touring, learning life through hardcore, putting tours together, Backtrack, Terror, the trajectory of his career, the current scene, collecting T-shirts and more! Please remember to rate, review and subscribe and visit us at https://www.youtube.com/tobymorseonelifeonechance Please visit our sponsors! Rockabilia- use code OLOC10 Rockabilia Athletic Greens https://athleticgreens.com/oloc Removery- code TOBYH2O https://removery.com  Liquid Death https://liquiddeath.com/toby Refine Recovery https://www.instagram.com/refinerecoverycenter/  

Today's wrestling news, including...Backstage Update On MISSING WWE Star!Je'Von Evans On John Cena!TNA TV Deal Update!AEW Conspiracy Theory Debunked?!ENJOY!Follow us on Twitter:@AdamWilbourn@AndyHMurray@WhatCultureWWE Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sponsor Details:This episode of Space Nuts is brought to you with the support of NordVPN. To get our special Space Nuts listener discounts and four months free bonus, all with a 30 day money back guarantee, simply visit wwwnordvpn.com/spacenuts or use the coupon code SPACENUTS at checkout.Show NotesCosmic Queries: Expanding Universe, Space Elevators, and TOI 6894BIn this enlightening Q&A episode of Space Nuts, hosts Andrew Dunkley and Professor Jonti Horner tackle a variety of intriguing questions from listeners, diving deep into the mysteries of the universe. From the nuances of cosmic expansion to the potential of space elevators and the peculiarities of exoplanets, this episode is packed with cosmic curiosities and insightful discussions that will expand your understanding of the cosmos.Episode Highlights:- The Acceleration of Cosmic Expansion: Rusty from Western Australia asks about the terminology for the increasing acceleration of the universe's expansion. Andrew and Jonti discuss the complexities of this concept, the implications of dark energy, and the evolving nature of cosmological theories.- Space Elevators Explained: Barry's inquiry about the gravitational effects of a hypothetical space elevator prompts a detailed exploration of how gravity would be felt at various altitudes. The hosts discuss the feasibility of such a structure and the science behind gravity in different orbital scenarios.- Understanding TOI 6894B: Casey from Colorado wants to know why TOI 6894B is significant. Andrew and Jonti delve into the characteristics of this unusual exoplanet, its relationship with its low-mass star, and what its discovery means for our understanding of planet formation and the diversity of planetary systems.- Life in Gale Crater: A whimsical question from Philip McCrackpipe leads to a serious discussion about the potential for ancient life in Gale Crater on Mars. The hosts reflect on Mars' wet past and the types of life that may have thrived there, emphasizing the importance of ongoing exploration and research.For more Space Nuts, including our continuously updating newsfeed and to listen to all our episodes, visit our website. Follow us on social media at SpaceNutsPod on Facebook, X, YouTube Music Music, Tumblr, Instagram, and TikTok. We love engaging with our community, so be sure to drop us a message or comment on your favorite platform.If you'd like to help support Space Nuts and join our growing family of insiders for commercial-free episodes and more, visit spacenutspodcast.com/about.Stay curious, keep looking up, and join us next time for more stellar insights and cosmic wonders. Until then, clear skies and happy stargazing.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/space-nuts-astronomy-insights-cosmic-discoveries--2631155/support.

Best Of 2GG: BIrd Theory PART 1 by Two Girls and a Guy

Best Of 2GG: BIrd Theory PART 2 by Two Girls and a Guy

Ever wondered what Dr. Deming really meant by "profound knowledge" — and how it can still transform your work today? In this conversation, Bill Scherkenbach shares with host Andrew Stotz lessons from Dr. W. Edwards Deming on profound knowledge, systems thinking, and why "knowledge without action is useless, and action without knowledge is dangerous." Tune in for wisdom, humor, and practical insights on learning, leadership, and finding joy in work. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.2 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Scherkenbach, a dedicated protege of Dr. Deming since 1972. Bill met with Dr. Deming more than a thousand times and later led statistical methods and process improvement at Ford and GM at Deming's recommendation. He authored the Deming Route to Quality and Productivity at Deming's behest, and at 79, still champions his mentor's message, learn, have fun, and make a difference. Bill, how are you doing?   0:00:36.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Doing great, Andrew. How about you?   0:00:38.6 Andrew Stotz: I'm good. It's been a while since we talked. I took a little holiday to Italy, which was. I was out for a bit, but I'm happy to be back in the saddle.   0:00:48.9 Bill Scherkenbach: Dove in Italia?   0:00:51.3 Andrew Stotz: Yes.   0:00:52.5 Bill Scherkenbach: Where in Italy?   0:00:53.6 Andrew Stotz: Well, I went to Milan for a trade show in the coffee industry, and then I went to Lake Como and relaxed and oh, what a paradise.   0:01:03.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Beautiful. Beautiful. Yep.   0:01:05.0 Andrew Stotz: And, of course, always great food.   0:01:09.4 Bill Scherkenbach: Yep, yep, yep. Well, you have a chance to use the PDSA on improving your mood there.   0:01:16.6 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, it was just... The resort I stayed at was a tiny little place on the side of a hill, and the food at this tiny little place was fantastic. We just didn't want to leave. Every single meal was great. So I love that. Who doesn't love that?   0:01:34.4 Bill Scherkenbach: They didn't have a food cart in the background.   0:01:38.0 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. In fact, they didn't really open for lunch.   0:01:39.8 Bill Scherkenbach: Like what they do over here.   0:01:41.3 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, they didn't open for lunch. They only served sandwiches at 2pm so we had to hold out. But we still, the sandwich was so good. We just thought yeah, just wait.   0:01:51.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Early lunch. Yep.   0:01:53.3 Andrew Stotz: Well, you've got some interesting stuff to talk about today, and I'm gonna share the screen, and then I think we can kick it off from there. So let me see if I can get that up straight here. One second in. All right, so hopefully, you see a white screen that says profound knowledge. You see that, Bill?   0:02:16.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Yes, I do.   0:02:17.2 Andrew Stotz: All right, well, let's... Yeah, let's. Let's get into it.   0:02:23.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Oh, okay. I'll go from the bullets that I've got, and we'll hear from Dr. Deming and how he couched it in a little bit, in a few minutes, but he recognized that leaders would say they had the knowledge. Oh, yeah, we do SPC. We follow Deming's philosophy, we do that. But they really only knew the buzzwords. And to an extent, and I don't know how he came up with the word profound, but I do know in speaking with him that he intended it to be a degree of expertise that was beyond the buzzwords. Now, he said you didn't have to be an expert in it, but you had to know enough to be able to understand it and in fact, use it, as we'll talk about in a little bit. And knowledge obviously includes, as he said, an appreciation for a system and variation and knowledge and psychology. And as we'll hear in the audio, he also didn't really limited to that when he said there was there... His point, main point was that there are a whole bunch of interrelated subject matters that are very, very useful in managing your business or managing any organization.   0:04:17.1 Andrew Stotz: You know, I was thinking about that word profound. It's oftentimes wondering exactly what is meant by that. This is helpful to help us understand. It's, number one, about expertise. And I think the thing that I've always also felt is like, when you understand appreciation for a system, knowledge about variation, theory of knowledge and psychology, it, like things click, like it comes together, it's a whole. And that's the way I've thought about it. But that's interesting about the expertise aspect.   0:04:51.8 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. And that's something Don Peterson at Ford spoke about. He gave a very good talk to our leaders with Dr. Deming in attendance. And he said that a lot of you have said, "Oh, yeah, we already do this at Ford, " but you have to come to grips with a lot of you have been promoted for perhaps the wrong reason throughout your career, and you're gonna have to change. The change starts with us. So that was very impactful for Dr. Deming to listen to that.   0:05:32.7 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. And I just thought about the idea of profound action. Like, once you get this knowledge, does that mean that you're going to also, you know, the way that you do things is going to change substantially.   0:05:47.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. I mean, that's been a philosophical question. In one of the slides, I quote Confucius. About 2500 years ago, essentially saying knowledge without action is useless and the action without knowledge is pretty dangerous. But that's been consistent with Eastern and Western. Aristotle did the same thing, and Mid Eastern folks did it as well. Philosophers dealing with, yeah, we've got knowledge, but everyone agrees, at least in the good thinker role, that, that you've got to take action, otherwise it's useless. Okay, so we've got, and the subject matters, as I said, are not new. And he coalesced on four, but the general thought was that. And you've got to remember Dr. Deming was a classically trained physicist in the 1920s. And because of that a lot of, although it had been a few years, but they were very aware that everything started in the both, the eastern philosophies and western philosophies. Everything started with philosophy. Science wasn't a separate subject matter. And so everything was connected on how people should live, on how the stars move, a whole bunch of stuff. It all was philosophy. And these various subject matters evolved over the years.   0:07:50.6 Bill Scherkenbach: So even though he stopped it for his general intent was that a whole bunch of things are interconnected. If you go study these various subject matters.   0:08:05.1 Andrew Stotz: It's interesting because I attended the seminars in 1990, 1992 and then I went to Thailand and then I did other things and I didn't really keep up with it because I was in the financial world and doing my thing. And then I got The New Economics years later and there was this discussion about System of Profound Knowledge. And then I think about also going back to your previous discussions of what it was like being in a classroom with Dr. Deming when you first met him and studied with him. You know, that these things were going on. Obviously he had a deep understanding of variation. He definitely understood about the theory of knowledge from his scientific background. But I'm just curious, as you... It's interesting what you said, these things are not new. It's the way he brought them together. I just find that, that fascinating. How do you see that journey for him going from when you first met him to a very full formed concept or theory of profound knowledge at his later years?   0:09:15.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah, I think things just solidified or codified. I mean, when I first met him in '72 at New York University Graduate School of Business, he didn't have 14 Points. He didn't have the Deadly Diseases. So none of the stuff that were codified as he progressed. I mean the one thing that I've mentioned it a number of times, the most important thing I learned from him is that you never stop learning. And he epitomized that sense of continual learning in improving oneself. So he tried to learn from everyone. But, but yes, for instance, as I mentioned, he was a degreed physicist and ended up doing a whole bunch of. And that transitioned into statistics which was a relatively. Well, I'm going to say everything is relative. But new in operationalizing the use of statistics besides counting people and the experiments at Rothamstead for agriculture. I mean, that really was some of the... But the earlier stuff, yeah. Was helping their patrons gamble better.   0:11:02.0 Andrew Stotz: And so I often take comfort in your descriptions in the first episodes about how he hadn't put all of these things in place at the age of 72. And I think there's still hope for me, Bill, to figure it out and put together my grand thinking.   0:11:22.7 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. Oh, no, I understand. I mean, I'll be 80 in less than six months. But he really, he started out getting his foot in the water here anyway when he was 79 also. So there's a chance. There's a chance.   0:11:46.4 Andrew Stotz: There's a chance. All right, well, the next slide, you're talking about the connections.   0:11:51.6 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. Again, all the subject matters are, again, evolve from philosophy and they all are interconnected in many, many ways. So, yeah, if you could play what Dr. Deming's introducing, that might set the stage.   0:12:14.0 Andrew Stotz: Okay, let me play this audio. Hopefully it comes across. Okay.   [video playback] Dr. Deming: Let us begin our study of Profound Knowledge. Profound Knowledge. Provides a roadmap to transformation, not just change, but a roadmap to transformation. Nothing else will satisfy our needs. Not just change, a roadmap to transformation into a new state. The System of Profound Knowledge, appears here in four parts, all related to each other: first, Appreciation for a System. Which we shall study, we shall study a system, and soon, I won't keep you waiting. And Theory of variation and theory of knowledge and knowledge of psychology and add anything you please, sociology, anthropology, whatever you please. I present these four parts to Profound Knowledge. They are interdependent, they cannot be separated. One need not be imminent in any part of Profound Knowledge in order to make it, in order to understand it and apply it.   0:13:30.9 Andrew Stotz: That's quite a mouthful.   0:13:33.1 Bill Scherkenbach: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. What I've got to do is go back to the tapes and get the lead in and follow on to that. But yeah, that's how he introduced profound knowledge in his later seminars.   0:13:56.2 Andrew Stotz: So what would this have been? What, 1990, 1991, 1992?   0:14:03.8 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, probably, I would say, yeah, maybe '89.   0:14:10.6 Andrew Stotz: Okay.   0:14:11.9 Bill Scherkenbach: In there. Yeah.   0:14:13.8 Andrew Stotz: So I took out a little transcript of that and I want to just go through a couple quick points, if you don't mind. He starts off by talking about it's a roadmap to transformation, not just change. Why would he say transformation rather than just change?   0:14:38.6 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, he changed really, transformation. And he thought a metamorphosis would be better. There's a butterfly in there somewhere, but it needs change. And it's not just, I know he mentioned the western style of management, but in my travels, Eastern style of management is just as bad. And again, knowledge is, is literally encompasses space and time. Looking at the past, projecting or predicting the future, little space, great space. And when you look at Western philosophies or western style management, we have emphasized the individual. So restricted space and short term. And the eastern philosophy of management took a longer term viewpoint of things. And they said it's not the individual, it's the team, the family. In my opinion, you have to, everyone, no matter where you live in the world has to balance those two, being able to take joy in your work as an individual. To be able to take joy in your work as a member of the team. And, I mean, I've been asked years ago, how long would it take? And I would say, "Well, Deming says it'll take 30 years." So over here in the US it's going to take a long time, but it's not going to take a long time in Asia, it's only going to take them 30 years. So time is relative, so is space.   0:16:53.2 Andrew Stotz: And there's something else he said in here that if you could try to help me understand and help the listener understand it. He talks about, you know, he gives a summary, theory of variation, theory of knowledge, knowledge of psychology. And then he adds in this line, "add anything you please, sociology, anthropology, whatever you please." What does he mean by that?   0:17:16.6 Bill Scherkenbach: That's what I said before he came from the the school that everything started with philosophy and things broke off science and all of these various disciplines. What he's saying is he's gone to, his theory of profound knowledge is included these four. But the general message is any discipline is interconnected with each other. So you don't have to be restricted to these four. And you're going back to how knowledge was developed in the first place. And perhaps it could be full circle, although I'm not going to get bogged down with the potential of AI contributions. But you need to, you need to recognize that many, many subject matter are interrelated because they were spawned from the original Eastern philosophy and Western philosophy.   0:18:37.5 Andrew Stotz: And one last thing on this, he wraps it up with this statement that also, you know, particularly given his depth of knowledge of the subject, he said, "One need not be imminent in any part of profound knowledge in order to make it, nor to understand it and to apply it." Why do you think he had this need to explain that you don't really have to know this in super deep detail?   0:19:02.7 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, I think he was being off a little bit. The word profound scares a lot of people. And so there's again a balance. You need to go far beyond the buzzwords, but you don't need to be an expert in any of those fields in order to grasp and be able to in some cases, I think, contribute to them. So he's saying that he's trying to better explain or define the word profound.   0:19:48.8 Andrew Stotz: Yep. Okay, now the next slide is incredible. A lot of different things on here that you're showing. Maybe you can explain what you're getting across in this one.   0:19:57.9 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah, this is a MEGO chart. My Eyes Glaze Over. What I tried and I'm. I'm continually updating it. The different colors are from the fields of statistics, the fields of epistemology, psychology and systems thinking. And I'm linking a whole bunch of them together to show that there are similar thoughts in all four of these fields that contribute to a better understanding and use of all of them. Now the next slide, hopefully is more visible. It should be. I'm focusing on a stable process, which is statistical concept. Stable process means you've got by definition of Shewhart. There's a... Deming would call them common causes. When common causes are... When a process is stable, you're able to do design of experiments. Some of the enumerative methods work very, very well or with some degree of belief with a stable process. The red bead experiment was stable. Rule one and two of The Funnel. Stable process. Common causes in theory of knowledge. There's comment, well, I've seen that before or no, jeepers, I've never seen that that hooks up to some other special causes and statistics. There's a concept in theory of knowledge where you're talking about general providence or specific providence that the storm just, it hit everyone and pick out anyone in systems thinking you can only have a stable process if you have negative feedback loops and negative feedback.   0:22:40.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Again, I think I had mentioned in a previous discussion with you, negative doesn't mean it's bad. It just means it closes the loop and it seeks a stasis so, and that's the only way you're going to get. I'll simplify just about the only way you're going to get a stable process. There's a negative feedback loop in there somewhere. Stable process leads to long term thinking versus short term thinking, the theory of knowledge, empirical knowledge is never complete. Knowledge is theory applied over time. Stable process over and over and over again. The theory matches the data or what you predict, you then have knowledge. So the point is that, that there are a number of specific learnings. Well, for instance, let me see here, what's on. I have to adjust this. Okay. From psychology you've got what the psychologists call a fundamental attribution error. And that is mistaking who, as Dr. Deming says, who, who did it, who did it, did the people do it? Or did the system do it? Did the process do it? And in psychology, although it's in a different place, you've got following Rule 3 of The Funnel is a psychological term called complementary schismogenesis.   0:24:42.3 Bill Scherkenbach: And that's easy for me to say, going back to the Greek schism of split in genesis of a birth of a split. What that means is in psychology it's two people trying to one-up another. I've got this example. Well, I can do it. I mean, who, yeah, and the move or the musical Annie Oakley. Anything you can do, I can do better. So, psychology has observations and subject matters that they didn't have a clue. That was rule 3 of The Funnel. So my point in looking at all of these is that as you dig into things, they are interrelated. Now I haven't dug through anthropology or started. I've just restricted it to the four things Dr. Deming spoke about. But that would be a challenge to our listeners. If you really know some of these sciences, some of these bodies of knowledge, how are they connected? Okay. The aim of profound knowledge, he says, has to have an aim. Confucius in the East, Aristotle in the West, and in the Mid east, someone essentially said knowledge without action is useless and action without knowledge is dangerous.   0:26:51.0 Bill Scherkenbach: And Deming said the aim of a system, of his System of Profound Knowledge is action. And as we discussed previously, it's a transformation of Western, I think it's a transformation of Eastern and Western style of management. And he, the way he pronounced it was metamorphosis. And I will have to check the OED, Oxford English Dictionary. I haven't done that yet. But he has been 100% right in his pronunciation and usage of the English language. So as I said, there's got to be a butterfly in there somewhere. But he's talking about a major, major shift, major rebirth if you will, management. Systems theory. A lot of this is obvious and these are what he mentioned in his, not Out of the Crisis, but The New Economics. A network of interdependent components that work together to try and accomplish its aim. And, and he, and this I had mentioned earlier, I think that in his work. Well, I've got... Going back to some things, this is a 1954 speech he gave in Rome and this is a 1940 speech he gave. And because he was a Renaissance scholar, they were talking about a Systems View before it was popular.   0:29:06.5 Bill Scherkenbach: Everyone knows that he introduced the improvement on the old: design it or spec it, make it, try to sell it. And he introduced his expertise, sampling theory to be able to check on the customers and see what they think about stuff and be able to create a system of production instead of just one way through. Now. And I'm sure anyone who has read any of his books knows he spoke about the interdependence. He said in the example he gave was bowling. You just add up the scores. In the orchestra, you don't use a bunch of soloists, but they have to work together to be able to make sure that the result is what the composer, well, we don't know, I don't think what modes are intended.   0:30:28.9 Andrew Stotz: One of the things that's interesting about that orchestra concept is even, you know, it's a relatively complex system, but there's a score, there's a rule book, there's a play guide, here's what we're going to play. But sometimes with business there is no guide particularly, you know, you're running your own business relative, you know, you're focused on your own development of your own business. And it's not like you wake up every morning and there's a manual that says, "Here's what you do, here's what you play today." Which makes it that interdependence even more difficult and the need for communication and cooperation even more challenging. I have a client of mine that they've struggled to get the team to work together. But what I've also found is that they never sat down as a team and really had honest discussions consistently to try to break down the barriers and figure out how we're going to work together for this aim. So I'm curious about how do you look at business compared to, let's say, that orchestra example?   0:31:36.9 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, yeah, and Deming made that exact same point, at the far end of complexity or just about is business. They are far more complex and require far more interaction than the orchestra. Now, in trying to operationalize Dr. Deming's philosophy, I've tried to emphasize. And we've got a process to be able to create a vision and it obviously is followed by mission, values and question. We covered the physical, logical, emotional a few talks ago. But, but you have to... Top management has to have that vision that will include everyone in its and all sorts of voices in its creation. And then you have to have a way to be able to master that vision or make sure that that vision is operationalized. And that requires a whole bunch of feedback loops, if you will, systems thinking, a whole bunch of being able to work with people. And so it literally needs the application of profound knowledge from the management's perspective. You need to be able to operationalize your vision, not just come up with the vision and put it on the bookshelf.   0:33:34.5 Andrew Stotz: And the final bullet, says "the obligation of any component is to contribute its best to the system, not to maximize its own production, profit or sales, nor any other competitive measure." Oftentimes in the world of finance where I teach and I work, a lot of stuff, people think that the objective is to maximize profit, but the reality is the objective is to maximize value. And so when we look at, for instance, the value of a business, it's two components. Number one, the profit, which you could consider is kind of in the numerator. And then we reduce the profit by the denominator, which is risk. So think about it. If you were to invest money in two projects. One, you invest $100 in two projects, and one is very proven and you're very confident that this is going to work, and the other one is brand new, very possible it doesn't work. We would reduce the second cash flow and say, "Well, yeah, the amount we're investing is $100, but the reality is the cash flows may or may not hit." So we would reduce the value by the risk. And I try to help my young students particularly understand that it's an intricate balance of profit and risk. And if you overemphasize profit, you could be increasing the risk, which actually doesn't increase the value of the company.   0:35:07.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. And Dr. Deming had a similar statement saying that the cost of something doesn't mean anything. It's the value of what you get for the cost and value is determined by the quality. My look at systems theory, especially the obligation this last one is to contribute its best to the system. What many people forget is as I mentioned in the beginning, everything is defined as in space and time. And Bill Ouchi who wrote the book Theory Z stated that... And this is an eastern management concept that you have to have, I guess, corporate knowledge because in order for someone to say, "Okay, this department, I'm going to..." Well, for instance, lunches, the corporate lunch room will lose money so that the corporation can make. So the people would stay on site and be able to contribute more work. But that's in the longer term. And so if someone steps aside today to let someone else get the kudos or the credit, the corporation needs to remember that. He called it societal knowledge or memory. And if you ended up being saying, "Screw you, I'm taking what's owed to me, " that also will be remembered. So you have to introduce the dimension of time to any systems theory view. Time and space.   0:37:36.3 Andrew Stotz: You mentioned about... Oh, go ahead.   0:37:40.5 Bill Scherkenbach: No, it's a statistician's attempt at humor before Einstein. Yeah.   0:37:49.6 Andrew Stotz: You mentioned about metamorphosis and you mentioned about transformation and I was just looking it up and let me maybe if I'll read out what I found. "Metamorphosis is a biological stage based change. Like a caterpillar turning into a butterfly. It implies a natural structured process. Transformation is a broad change in form, character or condition. It can be physical, emotional or organizational. In short, every metamorphosis is a transformation. But not every transformation is a metamorphosis."   0:38:26.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Good point. Understand.   0:38:30.7 Andrew Stotz: So let's continue.   0:38:35.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Okay. Variation. I think the first noble truth of Buddhism is "life is suffering." And Deming equated variation with suffering. So when I presented similar slides to my friends in Asia, I... Life is variation.   0:39:02.2 Andrew Stotz: That's great.   0:39:03.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Now there are two extremes in taking action on variation. Well, in taking action, I know this is in front of us, but Dr. Deming spoke about Shewhart's contribution. And that is the two mistakes that people can make with variation, while in taking appropriate action on variation. And one is mistaking common cause for special causes or special causes for common causes. And that's really the primary view. But Deming seminars showed that if you're going to take action, there also are two extremes in taking action. And one was every action taken tends to make things worse, which he used The Funnel experiment. And the other extreme is every action taken has no effect on the variation. And that's obviously the red bead experiment. And so he, those were the two extremes that he wanted to show and demonstrate to people in order to solidify the folks learning. Theory of knowledge. Okay, Management is prediction, temporal spread, space and time absolutely required, knowledge is built on theory.   0:40:50.5 Bill Scherkenbach: He got that from Shewhart and indirectly through C.I. Lewis and on knowledge being built on theory. And with that, that jogged my mind as far as coming up with my theory-question-data-action cycle, which is a bit different than the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. But in knowledge development knowledge is built on theory. So anytime any data that you see you and he asked, he told people, by what method did these data get to me? If you see data you have to ask that. If you see data you have to say what was the question that was asked? If you're a question asker, questions come from theory. They're connections of concepts in your mind. And so theory could be a guess or it could be as proven as scientific law, but everything, and that scares people away, but everything really starts with theory. Given a theory you can ask a question. You can tell people when you ask the question what I'm going to do with the data so they have a better idea of how to collect the data and what data to collect. And then you take the action and go back and revisit the theory. So theory, question, data, action over time generates knowledge. And with some other emotional and physical constraints and consistencies, you're going to gain wisdom.   0:42:58.8 Andrew Stotz: There's something...   0:43:00.4 Bill Scherkenbach: Go ahead.   0:43:01.5 Andrew Stotz: There's something that I always, I've questioned, I think you can probably clear it up in this part of our discussion is that Dr. Deming used to say something along the lines of without prediction or without theory there is no knowledge. Something along that line as I recall. And sometimes I understood that clearly and other times I question that. What would you say about that? How should I understand that?   0:43:33.1 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, it's something that he and Shewhart spoke about a lot. And let's see, in his 1939 book The Statistical Methods from the Viewpoint of Quality Control by Shewhart and edited and commented on by Dr. Deming, they speak about that, as far as. And again Shewhart was influenced by C.I. Lewis. And as an aside, when, when I was at Ford and we had a speaker who had studied under CI Lewis. I had to get Dr. Deming to speak with them. And I've put part of a video of their conversation on LinkedIn, YouTube, I guess. But knowledge is built on theory. Now can you explain it again? I might be able to...   0:45:03.0 Andrew Stotz: So let me get a quote from New Economics. He said "experience by itself teaches nothing. Without theory, experience has no meaning. Without theory, one has no question to ask. Hence without theory there is no learning."   0:45:19.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. Yeah, okay. He was getting to, and he had all sorts of examples on the, on the first statement that experience teaches nothing. If you're, you might have an experience that perhaps you were, you, you were picked on. And what are you going to do about it? Well, your theory could have been: well, they don't like me. It could have been that: well, that person was a bully. Could be a whole bunch of things. But without the theory, what are you going to do in the future to make that experience more to your liking? And so you have to go beyond the experience and look at what is the thoughts and motivations behind that, which is theory. And now I don't know why I mentioned that, but I mean a number of the way... Well, I'll leave it at that.   0:47:02.8 Andrew Stotz: Yeah.   0:47:04.3 Bill Scherkenbach: As the left and right dukes it out based on their own theories. Okay. Psychology, it's incomplete without knowledge of variation. You mention that if you know the red beads, you won't make the fundamental attribution error. I had mentioned schismagenesis earlier, which is rule three of The Funnel. It invites, it says helps us understand people as different individuals. In, again, my take on this part of psychology. And again Dr. Deming saying everyone is entitled to take joy in their work. And he spoke about extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Well, I have looked at it for many years as each one of us has an internal voice of the customer. We are the customer. And what makes me take joy would make another person perhaps take despair. And so it's management's responsibility who manages the people, materials, methods, equipment, environment to know me as a customer and be able to, if this works for me, then the management would try to arrange things that would help me take joy because it's more congruent with my internal voice of the customer. Deming used a number of examples that I gather some psychologists call it overjustification. But it in fact says the description was he tried to tip someone and it was an insult.   0:49:30.8 Bill Scherkenbach: And so instead of a thank you. He talked, he talked about the letter he sent to a surgeon of his, meant more than adding $500 to the bill. And the surgeon would carry the letter from Dr. Deming because he was, Deming was thankful for it. But it takes an astute manager to be able to understand all of the individual voices of the customers, their employees, and be able to construct a system that is going to be more congruent with each of them. And if you know that money doesn't influence or isn't congruent with someone, maybe it's retirement point, maybe it's a day off, maybe it's a variety of things managers would know that works for one person pisses off another. So that's where I stand on that, on the overjustification. And the obvious: fear invites wrong figures. Yeah. Although I think I had mentioned that in my work over in Asia, in China. So we don't have fear. It's called respect. So.   0:51:09.0 Andrew Stotz: I've just been reading a book about the Gaokao, the exam that students have to take in China to get into the elite university system. And it really makes you, it definitely gives you all kinds of both sides of the thinking on that. It really has got me thinking about this, one measure, everybody's ranked and they go through the pros and cons of it, which is challenging, it's good to go through that and think about that. So, fascinating. Well, that's been a great discussion for me, the idea of transformation, the concept of metamorphosis was interesting to me also the stuff related to having, you know, that how do we acquire knowledge? I think sometimes when in research, let's say in financial research that I've done all my life, I come up with a vague hypothesis and then I just start playing with numbers to see what I find. And so I'm kind of fiddling around. I wouldn't say that I have...   0:52:18.7 Bill Scherkenbach: What's the vague hypothesis? Give an example of...   0:52:22.7 Andrew Stotz: So, one observation that I've been able to make is that a particular ratio has fallen consistently across the world for the last 30 years, and that is the amount of revenue that assets generate out of companies. And I looked at 10,000 companies across the world. So the first thing I thought, okay, well, maybe it's a particular sector that's causing this. And I broke down that those 10,000 companies into 10 different sectors, and I saw they all had almost the same pattern. So that kind of showed me yeah, it's probably not that. And then I went through. I came up with kind of five different ideas of what it could be. And I could test that because I had a lot of data to be able to test it, but I couldn't find an answer to it. Now, I guess what you could say is that my fiddling around was based on some type of theory or guess or prediction. It wasn't until I came up to one final one, which was, could interest rates have a relationship with this? We have been through a period of time of very, very low interest rates.   0:53:39.7 Andrew Stotz: So could that decline have been caused by or related to interest rates? So I looked at the average interest rate that these 10,000 companies were paying over the past 30 years, and I saw it was going down, down, down, down, down, down very low. And I would say that that was the most plausible explanation I could find was that low interest rates incentivize companies to invest in projects that generated less revenue than previous projects.   0:54:13.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Okay. Yeah. I would think that the system. Well, you have to take into account the lag in response to lower and lower. Okay, am I going to wait for the next one? Whatever. And what's the lag in decision-making on the thing? But you need to codify, what's your theory? Okay, if X, then Y, then collect, ask the questions, make sure you understand how you got the data. And then try to take action there. But, yeah, everything starts with theory. Yeah. So it'll be good to be specific about it. What do you think it is?   0:55:09.8 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, that's, that's helpful. Well, let's wrap this up. How would you, if you were to, to bring this into a very condensed takeaway of what you want people to get from this discussion, what would you say is the core takeaway you want them to remember.   0:55:25.7 Bill Scherkenbach: Space and time. And I have done my best. Dr. Deming ended all of his lectures.   0:55:38.9 Andrew Stotz: I have done my best. Well, I love that. And let me wrap it up, Bill, by saying, on behalf of everybody at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion, another one that I've enjoyed immensely and for listeners remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And of course, you can find bill on LinkedIn in particular, where he's posting a lot of these cool discussions and thoughts and all of that. So this is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it relates to what we were just talking about. And that is "people are entitled to joy in work."

Is your team pushing back? Uncover upward bullying and take control as stronger leader.We hear a lot these days about work-related anxiety, which can easily lead to claims of bullying and harassment. But we rarely hear about the impact this has on leaders like you, who bear the brunt of people's personal problems in the workplace.For many companies, the explosion in stress-related claims has pushed them to pursue more conservative HR policies, playing right into the hands of the small but powerful minority who are happy to engage in upward bullying.If you want to go deeper on how to deal with passive aggressive resistance from below, have a listen to Ep.345: Upward Bullying.————————FREE QUIZ: I've developed a 3-question quiz that'll give you a free personalized podcast playlist tailored to where you are right now in your leadership career!Click here to take the 30-second quiz now to get your on-the-go playlist————————You can connect with me at:Website: https://www.yourceomentor.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/yourceomentorInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/yourceomentorLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/martin-moore-075b001/————————Our mission here at Your CEO Mentor is to improve the quality of leaders, globally.

Unveiling the Army football uniforms for the upcoming Army-Navy game. What's your favorite conspiracy theory? Did Hitler escape to South America? Did aliens crash in New Mexico? Did a torpedo sink the Titanic? Is Elvis Presley still alive? Did a Secret Service agent kill JFK? Is Adam Walsh still alive? 00:00 Pat Gray UNLEASHED! 00:32 BYU Football Update 02:51 1775 Army Uniforms for Football 07:13 Free Think Friday: Conspiracies that we Believe 15:11 Caller Tim (Indiana) 19:45 Caller Scotia 21:14 Caller Don (Texas) 23:17 Caller Tessa 26:04 Caller David 27:42 Caller Larry 32:04 Caller Mark 33:45 Caller Robert 35:17 Caller Sam 41:30 Caller Julie 43:54 Caller Rick 51:42 Caller Kim 53:32 Caller Steve 55:24 Caller Chris 59:13 Caller Kevin 1:04:40 Caller Bob 1:08:21 Caller Tim (Michigan) 1:12:26 Caller Don (Oklahoma) 1:23:10 Caller Lianne 1:28:39 Caller Kara 1:31:04 Caller John 1:32:58 Caller Aaron Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mel Robbins (The Let Them Theory, The High 5 Habit, The 5 Second Rule) is a podcast host, entrepreneur, and best-selling author. Mel joins the Armchair Expert to discuss feeling every day in college like the only one who couldn't make it work, how the human brain is wired to avoid what's hard, and all the attributions kids make growing up in an unsafe environment. Mel and Dax talk about the reason getting out of bed when you don't feel like it is a skill, why we are one decision away from a different life, and the fact that there's always an excuse not to do something. Mel explains when she began course correcting her life one five-second interval at a time, the reality that there's no amount of talking yourself out of what's meant for you, and The Let Them Theory.Follow Armchair Expert on the Wondery App or wherever you get your podcasts. Watch new content on YouTube or listen to Armchair Expert early and ad-free by joining Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Start your free trial by visiting wondery.com/links/armchair-expert-with-dax-shepard/ now.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Lessons from Jennifer Aniston's love life. PLUS: A Public Ponytail Announcement and I need YOUR THOUGHTS on sex.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.