Podcasts about universities

We return from our holidays with an indulgent episode that starts light and ends up very dark as we turn to the unavoidable Jason Arday discourse.The full episode is available to Patreon subscribers (Full Episode: 1hr 40 mins)Join us at: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingTheGurusSupplementary Material 5400:00 Pecan Pie Introduction04:10 Solar Punk Matt08:17 Ireland Trip Report15:24 Australian Burger Culture17:32 Manga Cafe Experiments24:10 Joe Rogan on AI Remote Viewing29:14 Parapsychology as a Research Field34:07 A One Man University Level Course in Bad Thinking36:58 The Young Info Turks40:53 More Credulity with Ryan Grim over Fauci42:14 Richard Ebright, Warning Signs, and Radicalisation Spirals48:28 Vinay Prasad jumping on the Anti-Fauci wagon for the Free Press52:31 The Jason Arday Affair54:28 The Surrounding Context58:18 Polemical Discourse Waves01:05:22 The Guru Factor01:08:25 A Realistic View of Universities as Imperfect Institutions01:12:17 Elite Prestige Bias01:21:33 Culture War Distortions01:25:04 The Ethics of Critical Journalism01:29:50 Inconsistent Standards01:38:36 OutroLinksThe Jack Nicholson Story from the Always Sunny PodcastThe Manga Cafes in QuestionDeposition of InfoWars Host Owen ShroyerAlex Jones And Roger Stone Interrupt The Young Turks Republican National Convention CoverageKen Klippenstein visits the War RoomAna Kasparian & Owen Shroyer: The UNEXPECTED Conversation on MAGA, DSA & the Uniparty!Bret Weinstein on InfoWarsRichard Ebright on one of his many Twitter spiralsJoe Rogan on AI Remote ViewingThe Free Press: Vinay Prasad- Anthony Fauci's Vaccine DeceptionsRyan Grim being credulous over Fauci and VaccinesThe Guardian: Playbooks, plagiarism and a pig's head: new claims surrounding a star Cambridge professor (Lanre Bakare)The Atlantic: The Jason Arday Truthers (Helen Lewis)Front Left: It sure looks like Jason Arday was horrifically wronged (based on citation data) (Jason Stanley)A Digital Lynching (Carol Cadwalladr)Tox Report: The Most Unfortunate Thing (Sarah Ditum)Byline Times: The Peter Thiel-Linked Race Science Network that Penetrated Cambridge University and Targeted Jason Arday (Nafeez Ahmed)The Good Law Project: Stand in Solidarity with Jason ArdayAmnesty UK supporting “Arday's Law”Simon Baron Cohen on BBC 4 Today talking about Jason ArdayNYT: A Top Scholar's Fall Shows That Universities Don't Get ItNYT: Professor's Death Leaves Behind Hard Questions for Cambridge on Race and HiringThe Emancipator: The Media Lynched Kason Arday (Ibram X. Kendi)Gideon M.K.: The Jason Arday Saga Is Terrible And Everyone Involved Should Be Ashamed Of ThemselvesWays to Change the World with Krishnan Guru-Murthy: Cambridge's youngest Black professor Jason Arday on Autism, racism, and learning to read at 18Open (supporting) letter on the suspension of Nathan Cofnas at Ghent UniversityBoard Member of Ghent University (Dries Bostyn) discussing the disciplinary case on TwitterNumb at the Lodge: The Carrion-Eaters (Sam Kriss)The Chronicle of Higher Education: Jason Arday & Me (Musa al-Gharbi)US Ambassador applies pressure to Ghent UniversityNathan Cofnas thanks the US Ambassador for interveningAcademia is Doing Fine, Actually (Nicholas Decker)Eric Turkheimer substack on Nathan Cofnas' viewsSasha Gusev thread on Nathan Cofnas' views

America Out Loud PULSE with Dr. Randall Bock – Cambridge's handling of Jason Arday raises difficult questions about academic standards, plagiarism, racial preferences, and institutional accountability. The debate examines whether universities compromise equal scrutiny in pursuit of diversity goals and argues that scholarship depends on consistent standards applied fairly to every academic without exception...

This week, Walter and Jeremy discuss challenges to Zelensky's power, the Pentagon's ultimatum to US universities with ties to China, the Turkish-Israeli standoff in Syria, and the fate of China's Christians. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We discussed a few things including: 1. His career journey 2. His research 3. Innovation at Princeton 4. Trends, opps and challenges relating to research/tech transfer in academia 5. Outlook for 2026-2027 As vice dean for innovation, Craig B. Arnold leads the Office of Innovation and oversees the University's efforts to grow Princeton's culture of innovation across disciplines. The role aims to strengthen the University's capacity to engage with entrepreneurs, alumni, industry, technology investors and other potential partners. The vice dean for innovation works closely with offices across campus and within the Office of the Dean for Research, including Technology Licensing and New Ventures, and Strategic Partnerships and Engagement. Arnold is Princeton's Susan Dod Brown Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. He leads a vibrant research program that ranges from basic science to applied technology aimed at developing a deeper understanding of materials synthesis and processing in areas including advanced manufacturing, energy storage and conversion, and optics and photonics. He served as the director of the Princeton Materials Institute from 2015 to 2022. In 2017, Arnold received an Edison Patent Award from the Research & Development Council of New Jersey for the creation of an adjustable lens that focuses light in response to sound waves. The tunable acoustic gradient (TAG) lens is now used in many industrial and research applications including robotics, machine vision, industrial metrology and ultra-high precision microscopy. Arnold holds 13 granted patents, and is the co-founder of two companies based on research conducted at Princeton. TAG Optics Inc. developed the TAG lens and was later acquired by a major precision instrument manufacturer. Invictis Technologies is working to create a safer and less painful automated intravenous injection device. Arnold is a preeminent researcher in the field of materials science; he and co-authors have published over 200 scientific papers and book chapters. He serves as a member of the National Research Council's National Materials and Manufacturing Board and is a fellow of the Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) and the Optical Society of America. Arnold was named a Knight of Laser Technology (2018) by the International Academy for Production Engineering (CIRP)-Photonic Technologies. He has received a number of prominent industry awards for his technology including R&D World magazine's R&D 100 award, the SPIE Prism Award for Photonics Innovation, and Vision Systems Design magazine's Innovators Award. Arnold has received prestigious federal awards and grants, including the National Science Foundation CAREER Award and the Office of Naval Research (ONR) Young Investigator Award. Recognized widely for his mentorship and teaching, Arnold has advised many undergraduates, graduate students and postdoctoral researchers. He has received the Princeton Undergraduate Engineering Council Teaching Award (2009, 2017 and 2022) and the School of Engineering and Applied Science Excellence in Teaching Award (2019 and 2021). Arnold is a member of the executive committee for Princeton's Entrepreneurship Certificate Program and the executive committee of the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment. Arnold holds a Ph.D. in experimental condensed matter physics from Harvard University and a B.S. from Haverford College. He was a postdoctoral researcher at the Naval Research Laboratory prior to joining the Princeton faculty in 2003. #podcast #AFewThingsPodcast

Join LaTangela as she chats with Mr. Curtis Symonds, President/Co-Founder of HBCU GO on the #TanLiine Curtis Symonds is a trailblazing media executive, cable television pioneer, and champion for representation whose four-decade career has reshaped how audiences experience sports, culture, and storytelling. As Co-Founder and President of HBCU GO, the nation’s leading digital platform for HBCU sports and entertainment, Symonds has built unprecedented visibility for the 107 Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Under his leadership, HBCU GO has expanded nationwide through major broadcast partnerships—creating a dynamic, inclusive platform that celebrates HBCU athletics, education, and excellence. Before revolutionizing HBCU media, Symonds was a key architect in the growth of Black Entertainment Television (BET). As Executive Vice President of Affiliate Distribution and Marketing, he helped increase BET’s national reach from 4% to 57%, fueling the network’s historic acquisition by Viacom. During his tenure, he also served as President & COO of BET Action Pay- Per-View, BET International, and BET on Jazz, leading multiple divisions that expanded BET’s global footprint. His career began at ESPN, where he played an integral role in the network’s early affiliate marketing and expansion efforts, contributing to its rise as a dominant force in sports media. Watch full episode HERE Chime in: www.LaTangela.com RADIO - WEMX- Baton Rouge, La. Mon-Fri 10a.m.-3p.m.CST KTCX - Beaumont, Tx. Mon-Fri 3-8 CST KMEZ - New Orleans, La. Mon-Fri 7p.m. - mid WEMX Sundays 6a.m. KSMB Sundays 6a.m WWO - YouTube - #LaTangelaFay Podcast - ALL digital platforms - #iTunes #Spotify #WEMX www.LaTangela.com www.TanTune.com www.TanCares.org Special Thank You - Gordon McKernan Injury Attorney - Official Partner #GordonGives #TanCares #225BulletinBoard TanTune POOF4 POWER OVER OBSTACLES FOREVER www.HBCU.tv GT Legacy Auto The Fiery Crab Hair Queen Beauty Super CenterSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Weekend Recap 08-22-26 Another bad weekend for leftism. Oh my goodness. Unbelievable. Look, I know woke is taking a beating, but the left is taking a beating on so many levels that I would tell you it's to call it embarrassing. Is it? It's so many things. I mean, it's on so many levels. I got a chuckle.  I mean, everything is about wokeism, whether you believe it or not is about wokeism. So the LGBT thing, black thing, the climate change, all it's wokeism, shots and viruses and all this stuff. And they're backing away from it all. But I got to tell you, it's taken a beating under Trump. You can see it everywhere. You can see it everywhere.  And the reason I'm bringing this up is because I heard something I'd never heard. It was called woke one. Well, DEI. dismantled.  The language is changing, right?  Corporations at once couldn't get through a board meeting without somebody mentioning diversity, equity, and inclusion are suddenly discovering the timeless beauty of merit. Well, we talk about it, Unified Solutions America, every single day and twice on Sundays. And now we have Democrats talking about this thing called Woke One. like Woke version 1.0, and I love it.  I absolutely, it sounds like a software release. Apparently, Woke 1 was the beta version, but they found out, you ready? There were bugs, bugs in the code, bugs that even AI couldn't fix. They had a system crash. The police department stopped functioning. People discovered that men and women were somehow both the same and different depending upon which sentence you were constructing. Universities became ideological pressure cookers. Americans were instructed to evaluate virtually everything through the lens of race and gender and identity and all other crazy things that the left could think of.  Welcome people. Kevin Jackson's who you're listening to, the Kevin Jackson Show, KJRadio.com. And then there was a small matter of telling people that, you ready? America's rotten.  How dare you want to grow up in this country that has given everything to everybody and saved the world multiple times? And it is the most loving, giving, caring, philanthropic, humanitarian nation on the face of the earth since God invented people. And they tell you we're bad. You're rotten. You're rotten to your rotten cores, you Americans. Well, that is, unless you're a leftist. But don't worry, folks, that was woke one. We're moving on. I have a question. How many times can you get woke? Because see, this is the part I don't buy. I don't think Democrats are ushering in a new woke. I think they're waking up from woke.  And you've heard me say this. I told you over the last four or five years, I told you Democrats are waking up from woke. And we used to say it when I was a kid, I mean, younger, Maybe not a kid. Like, man, you got to get woke. And it was always around black issues. Like, Kevin, you got to get with the program, man.  Kevin Jackson has been called, the "white-collar" Joe Rogan. Given their similar backgrounds in TV, comedy, and martial arts, it's easy to see why people enjoy Kevin's show so much. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

University of Akron President R.J. Nemer welcomes students into the Fall 2026 semester. Nemer also talks about the theme of "growth" and one of the ways that he does NOT want you to describe the university!IG: @rj_nemer

It's back to school season: new teachers, new classrooms, new bus routes, new friends. For today's guest, back to school season has always been an important time — but this year, it brings not only a new academic calendar, but a brand new professional role. Dr. Michele Murray has just begun her tenure as the president of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities — or, AJCU for short. She's the first lay person to lead the organization, which consists of the twenty-seven Jesuit institutions in the United States and one in Belize, along with three associate members in Canada. Dr. Murray brings a wealth of experience and insight to this role, having spent the previous three decades serving in Jesuit, Catholic higher education. She holds a Ph.D. in education policy from the University of Maryland and a Master's in education and student affairs administration from the University of Vermont. Her career has brought her from Loyola University Maryland to Seattle University to the College of the Holy Cross where she has most recently served as senior vice president for student development and mission. She began her work at the AJCU on June 1, 2026. Her new role has already brought her to Rome where she met the Superior General of the Society of Jesus — Fr. Arturo Sosa — and Pope Leo XIV. She talks with today's host Eric Clayton about her time in Rome, her discernment around starting a new role and the unique mission of Jesuit higher education and more in our conversation today. Today's episode is a great way to start off the new school year. Learn more about the AJCU: https://ajcunet.edu/

The U.S. Department of Labor wants to add more than 300,000 registered apprenticeship positions nationwide, part of a bigger push to expand this kind of on-the-job learning. So how should employers, and the schools that support them, actually get started?Today's guest is Jessica Desmond, the Regional Director of Career Services and Apprenticeships at ECPI University. Desmond tells host Jason Altmire how ECPI partners with employers to design registered apprenticeship programs across more than 1,000 approved occupations, beyond just the skilled trades that have been traditionally associated with apprenticeships. Fields like advanced manufacturing, IT, cybersecurity and software development are all in the mix. She explains how strategic apprenticeships can help students get placed in the field, while employers have the opportunity to train a pipeline of loyal, skilled workers.To learn more about Career Education Colleges & Universities, visit our website.

In this episode of The PDB Afternoon Bulletin: Israel bombs a Syrian airbase near the Turkish border, raising fears that its campaign to prevent Syria's military revival could ignite a dangerous confrontation with Turkey. The Pentagon orders 30 American universities to investigate whether their foreign partnerships exposed sensitive research—or risk losing future federal funding. To listen to the show ad-free, become a premium member of The President's Daily Brief by visiting https://PDBPremium.com. Please remember to subscribe if you enjoyed this episode of The President's Daily Brief. YouTube: youtube.com/@presidentsdailybrief QUO: Make this the season where no opportunity slips away. Try QUO for free PLUS get 20% off your first 6 months when you go to https://Quo.com/PDB Thanks to today's sponsor, Spring Sleep: eXciteOSA is an FDA-cleared, prescription-only device for primary snoring and mild obstructive sleep apnea. Go to springsleep.com/PDB and unlock 20% off with the code PDB. Sundays for Dogs: Upgrade your dog's food without the hassle—try Sundays for Dogs and get 50% off your first order at https://sundaysfordogs.com/PDBor use code PDB at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tech giant Oracle is dropping its lawsuit against Wisconsin utility regulators over financial support requirements tied to data center. Also, Leaders of the Universities of Wisconsin System say they hope to freeze tuition for the next two years. At the same time, they plan to launch a new program to make school more affordable for the average family.

You can see it everywhere. DEI is getting dismantled. The language is changing. Corporations that once couldn't get through a board meeting without somebody mentioning diversity, equity and inclusion are suddenly discovering the timeless beauty of merit. And now we have Democrats talking about something called “Woke One.” Woke One. I love that. It sounds like a software release. Apparently Woke One was the beta version. There were some bugs. A few systems crashed. The police department stopped functioning. People discovered that men and women were somehow both the same and different depending upon which sentence you were constructing. Universities became ideological pressure cookers. Americans were instructed to evaluate virtually everything through the lens of race, gender and identity. And then there was the small matter of telling people that America itself was fundamentally rotten. But don't worry. That was Woke One. We're moving on. I have a question: How many times can you get woke? Because that's the part I don't buy. I don't think Democrats are ushering in a new woke. I think they're waking up from woke. And there's a difference. A very important difference. Because when you say “Woke One,” you are trying to make history sound like software. You are suggesting that there was an earlier version, perhaps with some excesses, and now the sophisticated people have moved on to a newer, improved operating system. Woke 2.0. Same ideology. New packaging. Maybe fewer pronouns in the installation instructions. But that's not what I think is happening. I think somebody finally pulled the fire alarm. And the wake-up call came from two directions. First, Democrats began destroying themselves. They took ideas that might have started with something relatively ordinary, like treating people fairly, and pushed them into increasingly bizarre territory. They turned identity into politics. They turned politics into morality. They turned disagreement into evidence of moral deficiency. And eventually they reached the point where ordinary Americans began looking at the Democratic Party and saying, essentially: What the hell happened to you people? Kevin Jackson has been called, the "white-collar" Joe Rogan. Given their similar backgrounds in TV, comedy, and martial arts, it's easy to see why people enjoy Kevin's show so much. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

John Maytham speaks to Professor Jonathan Jansen, Professor in Education at Stellenbosch University, about the broader issues raised by Arday’s death, including academic accountability, public criticism and the responsibilities of universities and the media when allegations involving academics become highly public. Afternoon Drive with John Maytham is the late afternoon show on CapeTalk. Presenter John Maytham is an actor and author-turned-talk radio veteran and seasoned journalist. His show serves a round-up of local and international news coupled with the latest in business, sport, traffic and weather. The host’s eclectic interests mean the program often surprises the audience with intriguing book reviews and inspiring interviews profiling artists. A daily highlight is Rapid Fire, just after 5:30 pm. CapeTalk fans call in to stump the presenter with their general knowledge questions. Another firm favourite is the humorous Thursday crossing with award-winning journalist Rebecca Davis, called “Plan B”. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Afternoon Drive with John Maytham Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 15:00 and 18:00 (SA Time) to Afternoon Drive with John Maytham broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show, go to https://buff.ly/BSFy4Cn or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/n8nWt4x Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hub Headlines features audio versions of the best commentaries and analysis published daily in The Hub. Enjoy listening to original and provocative takes on the issues that matter while you are on the go.0:20 - Our DEI-obsessed universities are all about protecting minorities—until it comes to Jews, by Stephen Staley5:35 - Does Canada have a patriotism problem?, by Ray PenningsThis program is narrated by automated voices. To get full-length editions of popular Hub podcasts and other great perks, subscribe to the Hub for only $2 a week: https://thehub.ca/join/hero/Subscribe to The Hub's podcast feed to get all our best content:https://tinyurl.com/3a7zpd7e (Apple)https://tinyurl.com/y8akmfn7 (Spotify)Watch The Hub on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheHubCanadaThe Hub on X: https://x.com/thehubcanada?lang=enCREDITS:Alisha Rao – Producer & Editor Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

William Moore is joined by The Spectator's associate editor Toby Young, commissioning editor Lara Brown and newsletter editor and restaurant critic Angus Colwell.This week: What has gone wrong with British universities? Lara unpacks the wider academic crisis in the wake of the Jason Arday scandal, from ‘surviving the apocalypse' courses at Warwick to maths departments promising to ‘decolonise' the subject. Has the sector lost its nerve?Also: Balding. Toby explains why he's trying to talk his three sons out of hair transplants, while Angus and Lara weigh in on whether men vastly overestimate the importance of their hair on the dating market.Plus: is Indian the best cuisine? Angus argues it's surprisingly hard to find a truly great curry in London, while the the panel ask whethe Indian food is unfairly low-status because it's too cheap.Produced by Henry Lloyd and Oscar Edmondson.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

HEADLINES: Thousands of high school and university students walked out of class yesterday, joining rallies across the country against One Nation. Sexual assault survivors in one state are being forced to wait up to twelve hours for forensic examinations, a delay campaigners say is failing victims. Whistleblower David McBride is a free man after being granted parole Thousands of jobs at Australia's largest aluminium smelter have been secured, after the federal and NSW governments agreed to split a $2.5 billion bailout. Telcos and the industry watchdog are calling for major reform, after a new report found rural Australians are still struggling with unreliable mobile and internet coverage. Universities using AI detection software to catch cheating could be doing more harm than good, according to new research from James Cook University. Convicted killer Chris Watts has reportedly applied to marry a woman he met while behind bars. Guy Sebastian's decade-long legal battle with his former manager is over. Perez Hilton's mother has filed for temporary custody of his three children. A Queensland woman's quick stop at the newsagent before work has delivered the shock of a lifetime. If this brings anything up for you, Lifeline is on 13 11 14, and Beyond Blue is on 1300 22 46 36.GET IN TOUCHGot a story, news tip-off, feedback or dilemma?Send us a voice note or email us at thequicky@mamamia.com.au CREDITSHost: Georgie Page Audio Producer: Scott Stronach Group Executive Producer: Georgie Page Check out The Quicky Instagram here and our TikTok here Discover more Mamamia podcasts here Did you know some of our shows are now in video on the Apple Podcast app? Make sure your phone is up to date and check it out here! Mamamia acknowledges the traditional owners of the land on which we have recorded this podcast.Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

William Moore is joined by The Spectator's associate editor Toby Young, commissioning editor Lara Brown and newsletter editor and restaurant critic Angus Colwell.This week: What has gone wrong with British universities? Lara unpacks the wider academic crisis in the wake of the Jason Arday scandal, from ‘surviving the apocalypse' courses at Warwick to maths departments promising to ‘decolonise' the subject. Has the sector lost its nerve?Also: Balding. Toby explains why he's trying to talk his three sons out of hair transplants, while Angus and Lara weigh in on whether men vastly overestimate the importance of their hair on the dating market.Plus: is Indian the best cuisine? Angus argues it's surprisingly hard to find a truly great curry in London, while the the panel ask whethe Indian food is unfairly low-status because it's too cheap.Produced by Henry Lloyd and Oscar Edmondson. Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts. Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As envelopes were ripped open up and down the country, university vice-chancellors were as eager to find out the results as hundreds of thousands of anxious students.So, a record number of undergraduates heading to campus this autumn might seem like good news for the higher education sector.But do frozen tuition frees, rising costs, and reduced investment for universities tell a different story?And with the prime minister encouraging more teenagers to take up vocational training, what does the future look like for universities?Niall Paterson is joined by Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute.Have you got a question for Niall? Email us: why@sky.uk

Universities have become breeding grounds for radical ideas, turning students against their own country and Christian faith. On today's edition of Family Talk, Gary Bauer continues his inspiring conversation with Brad and Laura Johnson about how the College of the Ozarks is fighting back. Hear how the school is reawakening a love of country, a knowledge of history, and a bold faith in Jesus Christ. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/707/29?v=20251111

Seth discusses the alarming trend of radicalized politicians entering the public sphere, citing the examples of Democrats Darializa Chevalier and Francesca Hong, who are running for office in New York and Wisconsin, respectively. They have expressed views that are far-Left and even blatantly Communist. Seth highlights the fact that many of these politicians are products of the university system. The discussion delves into the idea that universities are more about indoctrination than education, and that this has led to a generation of young people who are ill-equipped to think critically. Producer David Doll discusses his evening watching the Diamondbacks play. We’re joined by Don Spini from Sun Valley Wealth. Governor Katie Hobbs made it official today announcing her pick of ex-Republican former Mesa mayor John Giles as her running mate in the gubernatorial election this fall.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today from SDPB - state officials are trying to continue conversations around mental health in South Dakota, and the state's public universities are expanding new AI-focused fields.

Prize Director Michael Kelleher talks with 2026 Windham-Campbell Prize for Nonfiction recipient Kei Miller about Yuval Noah Harari's sprawling and sometimes controversial book Sapiens and about how humanity is fiction (and vice-versa). Kei Miller is a Jamaican poet, essayist, and novelist, shortlisted for the Costa Poetry Award and winner of the prestigious Forward poetry prize for his collection The Cartographer Tries to Map a Way to Zion. His most recent book is the essay collection Things I Have Withheld, out in 2021. His story collection Fear of Stones was shortlisted for the Commonwealth Writers' Prize for Best First Book, and his most recent novel, Augustown was a finalist for the PEN Open Book Award, and won the Bocas Prize for Caribbean Literature, the Prix Les Afriques, and the Prix Carbet de la Caraïbe et du Tout-Monde. In 2010, the Institute of Jamaica awarded him the Silver Musgrave medal for his contributions to Literature and in 2018 he was awarded the Anthony Sabga medal for Arts & Letters. He has taught at the Universities of Glasgow, Royal Holloway and Exeter and, in 2019, he was the Ida Beam Distinguished Visiting Professor to the University of Iowa.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this final episode of Ditch the Lab Coat, host Dr. Mark Bonta sits down with author, educator, and entrepreneur Livia Grujic to explore the delicate balance between ambition and personal fulfillment. Drawing from her book, Stop Searching for Next, Livia shares how a sudden ski injury forced her to pause, reflect, and reevaluate her definition of success. Together, they discuss the science of human flourishing, the pitfalls of perfectionism, and how simple, evidence-based habits can help us transition mindfully through different stages of life.As Dr. Bonta bids farewell to the podcast after three years of insightful conversations, this episode serves as a beautiful reflection on closing chapters with intention. Listeners will walk away with practical strategies for mental resets, such as deliberate breathing and cultivating deep relationships, to help them remain present and find meaning in the life directly in front of them.Episode TimestampsIntroducing Livia Grujic (00:02:03)Dr. Mark Bonta introduces guest Livia Grujic and announces that this will be the podcast's final episode.Defining "Stop Searching for Next" (00:05:08)Livia explains the meaning behind her book's title and the importance of giving oneself permission to pause.Navigating midlife transitions (00:09:28)The host and guest discuss how definitions of success naturally evolve during midlife and parental transitions.The power of a forced pause (00:15:36)Livia shares how a severe ski injury and subsequent surgery forced her to slow down and practice self-reflection.The analogy of the imperfect bowl (00:24:45)Livia uses a pottery analogy to illustrate why we should accept our imperfections instead of striving for constant perfection.Applying positive psychology (00:32:44)The conversation shifts to evidence-based practices of positive psychology, including deep breathing, gratitude, and nurturing deep relationships.A final farewell (00:45:30)Dr. Mark Bonta reflects on three years of hosting the podcast and shares his final thoughts on closing this chapter.Livia Grujich's Links:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/liviag/https://www.amazon.ca/STOP-SEARCHING-NEXT-chasing-already-ebook/dp/B0GYPSXG1PDISCLAMER >>>>>>    The Ditch Lab Coat podcast serves solely for general informational purposes and does not serve as a substitute for professional medical services such as medicine or nursing. It does not establish a doctor/patient relationship, and the use of information from the podcast or linked materials is at the user's own risk. The content does not aim to replace professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment, and users should promptly seek guidance from healthcare professionals for any medical conditions.   >>>>>> The expressed opinions belong solely to the hosts and guests, and they do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Hospitals, Clinics, Universities, or any other organization associated with the host or guests.    Disclosures: Ditch The Lab Coat podcast is produced by (soundsdebatable.com) and is independent of Dr. Bonta's teaching and research roles at McMaster University, Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Queens University.

Researchers working in the university sector say their fixed term contracts are more like "Frankenjobs", pieced together with short term funding and limited hours.    

Some colleges and Universities are using competition based admittance. Corey DeAngelis from The Heritage Foundation talks with Rich.

Six months into a stage-four pancreatic cancer diagnosis that gave him 90 days to live, Ben Sasse sits down with EconTalk's Russ Roberts for a conversation that refuses easy comfort. The former U.S. senator and University of Florida president is candid about his physical challenges but the heart of this exchange is elsewhere: what actually matters when time is short. Sasse reflects on faith and mortality, the "shattering of idols" like his own workaholism, and his pride in his marriage. Along the way he offers sharp diagnoses of Congress's abdication of responsibility, the crisis inside American universities, and a republic distracted by the "digital casino" in its pocket. Funny, unflinching, and deeply human, it closes with a meditation on raging against the dying of the light while walking with your head bowed.

Prayer for Gospel Proclamation at Universities in the Buddhist WorldChristians Seeking Unbelievers on University Campuses: Pray that believers will actively seek out students who do not know Jesus, following His example of pursuing those who are far from God. (Luke 19:10)Boldness to Preach the Gospel: Pray that Christian students, campus workers, and local believers will boldly share the good news of Jesus, knowing that the gospel is the power of God for salvation. (Romans 1:16)Divine Connections: Pray that God will lead believers to students who are searching for truth, just as He sent Philip to the Ethiopian official who was reading the Scriptures and ready to hear about Jesus. (Acts 8:26–39)

Joyce talks about have many American universities often rally to defend marginalized students but failed to rally behind Jewish student who faced discrimination or who felt unprotected during pro- Palestinian protesters following the October 7th massacre and the war in Gaza. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Nathan Cofnas, the academic who recently drew widespread attention for exposing plagiarism allegations against Cambridge professor Jason Arday, returns to Brain in a Vat to discuss academic freedom, institutional conformity, and his own controversial departure from Cambridge.Cofnas argues that universities create incentives for academics to conform, particularly when scholarship challenges prevailing political and moral assumptions. He recounts the backlash to his writing on race and intelligence, including student petitions, protests, complaints, and the lengthy Cambridge investigation that followed.Can universities remain committed to free inquiry when students and administrators find certain conclusions offensive? Cofnas contends that academic institutions must distinguish between social norms and punishment, and that protecting truly open inquiry requires tolerating ideas many people find objectionable.Chapters:[00:00] Introduction to Nathan Cofnas[00:15] Philosophy Outside the University[04:40] Universities and the Limits of Free Inquiry[11:35] How Academia Selects for Conformity[13:30] Cofnas's Cambridge Free Speech Controversy[27:25] Student Veto Power in Academia[30:49] Race, IQ, and the Harm Objection[34:22] The Case for Discussing Offensive Truths[38:27] Race, Group Differences, and Wokeism[50:03] Academic Freedom and Social TaboosSubscribe on Substack: https://braininavat.substack.com/

Hub Headlines features audio versions of the best commentaries and analysis published daily in The Hub. Enjoy listening to original and provocative takes on the issues that matter while you are on the go.0:16 - Jason Arday's story is a morality tale for our universities, by Howard AnglinThis program is narrated by automated voices. To get full-length editions of popular Hub podcasts and other great perks, subscribe to the Hub for only $2 a week: https://thehub.ca/join/hero/Subscribe to The Hub's podcast feed to get all our best content:https://tinyurl.com/3a7zpd7e (Apple)https://tinyurl.com/y8akmfn7 (Spotify)xWatch The Hub on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheHubCanadaThe Hub on X: https://x.com/thehubcanada?lang=enCREDITS:Alisha Rao – Producer & Editor Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Every Wednesday and Friday in August we will publish some of our favourite audio long reads of 2026, in case you missed them, with an introduction from the editorial team to explain why we've chosen it. This week, from January: Universities in Britain rely on overseas applicants paying full fees, which has given rise to some unscrupulous recruiters and left many hopefuls and their families deep in debt By Samira Shackle. Read by Dinita Gohil. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/longreadpod

8/7/26, Co-Host Andy Bukowski Max Page, recent (term-limited) Mass Teachers Assoc President and Matthew Bach, new MTA President, on MTA's 2026-2027 goals & priorities, the strike in Andover that Matt led, and his history as a history teacher. Community Action Pioneer Valley Exec Dir Lev Ben Ezra and Family Center Director Kia Burton-King on joy in a backpack and wrap-around services for families. Astronomer Salman Hameed: the critically important and under-reported story of the Trump administration's combined attack on science, medicine, universities, and our future. Documentary Filmmaker Lexi Jamieson Marsh: the world premiere of “I Was a Hurricane” on the Amherst Common tomorrow evening -- the story of the 2003 Amherst High School National Champion Ultimate Frisbee Team, a story of belonging, friendship, and trust. ArtBeat with Donnabelle Casis and Ava Harper on Ava's new and moving solo exhibition at 33 Hawley, “Familial Bestiaries.”

What does behaviour analysis look like in Russia today? In this episode of Behaviour Speak, Ben welcomes Natalia Polikarpova, behaviour analyst, educator, supervisor, and leader in the Russian-speaking ABA community. Natalia shares her journey from engineering to behaviour analysis, discusses the early development of ABA in Russia, and reflects on the growth of professional training, supervision, and certification opportunities across Russian-speaking countries. She also explores the impact of the BACB's withdrawal from Russia, the emergence of local credentialing systems, and the importance of developing professional organizations that reflect local cultural and educational realities.  The conversation also examines autism services across Russia and neighbouring countries, including parent involvement, educational options, government-supported initiatives, and ongoing efforts to improve diagnostic pathways for families. Natalia highlights the growing influence of Practical Functional Assessment (PFA) and Skills-Based Treatment (SBT), as well as the broader movement toward compassionate, trauma-informed care.  Most importantly, Natalia challenges listeners to remember that every learner is first and foremost a child, deserving of dignity, flexibility, and compassionate support. In this episode, we discuss: How ABA first emerged in Russia Early misconceptions about ABA The growth of Russian-language BCBA training Certification changes following BACB withdrawal Development of local professional standards and ethics PFA and SBT implementation across Russia Autism services and school placement options Parent involvement in intervention Challenges facing adult autism services Compassionate and trauma-informed behavior analysis The future of ABA in Russian-speaking communities Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/tV9Ja9ziEZ8 Continuing Education Credits IBAO:  1.0 Cultural QABA: 1.0 Ethics CBA/CPD: 1.0 Cultural Diversity   Complete The Behaviour Speak CE Knowledge Check To Earn Your CEUs Enter your answers here:  (https://www.cbiconsultants.com/shop) Question 1 Natalia discussed one challenge with importing educational models into Russia. What concern did she raise? A. Teachers refused to use behaviour analysis B. Imported models sometimes require adaptation to local educational and cultural realities C. Families preferred residential treatment D. Universities prohibited ABA training Question 2 A. Government-funded universal ABA services B. Large numbers of university-based ABA doctoral programs C. Strong interest in learning new practices and professional development D. National licensing requirements for all therapists Question 3 Which statement best reflects Natalia's philosophy of practice? A. Compliance should always be prioritized before teaching anything else B. Standardized intervention plans are more effective than individualized approaches C. Every child should receive the same educational placement D. Practitioners should remember they are working with a child first and build interventions compassionately   Contact  Азбука АВА https://azbukaaba.com/ FTF Behavioral Consulting https://ftfbc.com/our-team/natalia-polikarpova/ https://ftfbc.com/natalia-polikarpova/ Explore More Global Perspectives on Behaviour Analysis Natalia's story is part of a broader series of conversations on Behaviour Speak that examines how behaviour analysis is developing across Eastern Europe and Central Asia. While each country faces unique cultural, educational, regulatory, and service-delivery challenges, a common theme emerges: dedicated professionals are building behaviour analytic communities, expanding access to services, and adapting evidence-based practices to meet local needs. Episode 184: Behaviour Analysis in Ukraine with Alla Moskalets  Learn how behaviour analysis developed in Ukraine, the challenges of expanding autism services, and the efforts of practitioners working to increase professional training, family support, and awareness of evidence-based practices. Episode 191: Behaviour Analysis in Belarus with Hanna Kalinouskaya, BCBA, IBA Explore the growth of behaviour analysis in Belarus, including the development of professional communities, service delivery models, and the ongoing work of creating accessible supports for autistic individuals and their families. Episode 229: Behaviour Analysis in Kyrgyzstan with Dr. Anastasiia Iun Discover how ABA is emerging in Kyrgyzstan, the barriers faced by families and professionals, and the innovative approaches being used to build capacity and expand access to quality services. Episode 251: Behaviour Analysis in Georgia with Madonna Bonny, MS, BCBA Hear about the evolution of behaviour analysis in Georgia, including workforce development, educational initiatives, and efforts to establish sustainable systems of support for autistic individuals and their caregivers. Together with Natalia Polikarpova's insights into Russia and Russian-speaking communities, these episodes provide a unique international perspective on the growth of behaviour analysis around the world. They highlight the importance of cultural responsiveness, collaboration, parent engagement, and the shared commitment of practitioners working to improve outcomes for individuals and families across diverse settings. Listen to the full international series at Behaviour Speak and discover how behaviour analysis is taking shape across different regions, cultures, and systems of care.

Across universities today, raw GPAs treat an A in advanced econometrics the same as an A in introductory film studies. Standard grading systems inadvertently penalize students who challenge themselves and reward those who course-shop. In this episode, we speak with Harvard Business School Professor Scott Kominers about his recent paper that looks at how mathematical market design and "eigengrades" can strip out course difficulty to measure actual student performance. The paper proposes a fixed-effects model—using student overlap across courses—to isolate true academic capability. We explore how this simple structural fix could end the strategic game of course-shopping. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

https://rumble.com/user/TheCultureWarshttps://x.com/NewsK365https://buymeacoffee.com/courtpresshttps://www.youtube.com/@NewsK365Email: newsk365@protonmail.com

After more than a decade in the U.S. Department of Labor, workforce development expert and the CEO/Founder of JOBS THAT WORK Solutions, Nick Beadle, has seen firsthand how billions of dollars in workforce funding gets allocated, and why those dollars don't always reach the people it's meant to help.Beadle tells host Jason Altmire about what he calls a "relatability gap" between policymakers and the workers and providers they're meant to serve. He unpacks the stigma surrounding skilled trades, what employers still misunderstand about apprenticeships, and how career ed providers can better position themselves for the funding landscape ahead.To learn more about Career Education Colleges & Universities, visit our website.

Capital campaign terminology can be surprisingly confusing—and choosing the wrong campaign structure could make it harder for your board, donors, and staff to understand exactly what you are raising money for.In this episode of All About Capital Campaigns, hosts Amy Eisenstein and Andrea Kihlstedt untangle the differences among capital campaigns, capacity campaigns, combined campaigns, comprehensive campaigns, building campaigns, and endowment campaigns. They explain what these commonly used fundraising terms actually mean—and why the distinction matters when your nonprofit begins planning a transformational fundraising initiative.At its broadest, “capital campaign” is an umbrella term describing a specific kind of fundraising: a concentrated, top-heavy effort in which a significant portion of the campaign goal is raised through leadership gifts from a relatively small group of donors. Although capital campaigns are often associated with new buildings or major renovations, a campaign can fund much more than construction. It may also include new equipment, program expansion, additional staff, endowment funding, maintenance reserves, and other investments that increase an organization's long-term capacity.Amy and Andrea explain how these components can be combined into a single campaign goal—and why “capacity campaign” may sometimes be the most accurate description, even if it is not the term most organizations use.The conversation then turns to one of the most important decisions nonprofit leaders must make: Should annual fundraising be counted as part of the campaign goal?Universities and other large institutions often conduct comprehensive campaigns that count nearly every dollar raised during a defined period. A multiyear university campaign might include annual giving, facilities, scholarships, faculty positions, programs, and endowment contributions in one enormous fundraising goal.For most community-based nonprofits, however, that approach may create more confusion than clarity. A food pantry, theater, human services organization, or environmental nonprofit typically has an ongoing annual fund that supports day-to-day operations. At the same time, it may be raising special campaign gifts for a major expansion or another one-time investment. Keeping those goals separate helps donors understand that the organization needs both their continued annual support and an additional, above-and-beyond campaign commitment.Amy offers a useful household analogy: If your home needs a new roof, you cannot stop buying groceries or paying the electric bill to fund it. The roof is a special capital expense, while groceries and utilities remain essential ongoing costs. Your nonprofit's annual fund and campaign goal work much the same way.The hosts also address a common fear: Will a capital campaign cannibalize annual giving? Their experience suggests the opposite. During a well-run campaign, nonprofits communicate more frequently, strengthen donor relationships, generate excitement, and become more visible in their communities. As a result, annual giving can increase—even while many of the same donors make substantially larger campaign commitments.The essential distinction is not whether you discuss annual and campaign giving with the same donors. You can, should, and often must ask for both. The question is whether annual fundraising is included in the official campaign goal or tracked separately.This episode will help nonprofit executives, development directors, board members, and campaign leaders establish a shared vocabulary, select the right campaign structure, and communicate their funding needs clearly and confidently.For more free capital campaign resources, visit https://capitalcampaignpro.com/campaign-resources.

The real crisis isn't the Declaration—it's what we've stopped teaching. Peter Berkowitz, Tad and Dianne Taube Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, contends that universities have failed at liberal education—the cultivation of citizens prepared to exercise freedom and responsibility. He attributes the breakdown to politicized classrooms, overreliance on narrow “scientistic” approaches in the social sciences, and a professional culture that trains future scholars instead of educating future citizens—leaving graduates with little serious exposure to the Declaration, the Constitution, and the moral logic of self-government. Stephen Haber, Stanford Professor of Political Science, History, and Economics, presses the discussion toward causes and incentives, setting up a debate about who is responsible for the drift and what reforms could realistically restore civic learning. Connect: Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast Website Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn Page Stanford Constitutional Law Center >> Website Stanford Law School >>> Twitter/X Stanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X Chapters:[00:00:26 – 00:04:11] Chapter 1: Setting the stakes—The Declaration at 250 and today's critiques Michael McConnell frames the episode around renewed skepticism of the Declaration's natural-rights claims—from progressive critiques focused on slavery and domination to post-liberal arguments against “abstract” rights.[00:04:11 – 00:06:54] Chapter 2: Berkowitz's opening—What the Declaration claims and why critics converge Peter Berkowitz restates the Declaration's core logic (equality, unalienable rights, consent, and the right to alter/abolish destructive government) and argues that left/right critiques increasingly overlap in their indictment of universal rights.[00:06:54 – 00:17:47] Chapter 3: Universities and the erosion of liberal education Berkowitz contends civic understanding is collapsing because colleges no longer ensure a shared, rigorous education in founding principles, constitutional traditions, and the broader intellectual inheritance needed for citizenship.[00:17:47 – 00:31:00] Chapter 4: From “critical” to “generous” thinking—Mapping the modern critiques Berkowitz argues that criticism without charitable interpretation becomes a “rage to criticize,” then traces postmodern progressive and post-liberal arguments (including Deneen and Vermeule) that reject the Declaration's rights framework and flirt with radical alternatives.[00:31:00 – 01:04:12] Chapter 5: Human rights, diplomacy, and reform—The Commission and a debate about university governance Berkowitz ties the Declaration to U.S. foreign policy via the UDHR and the Commission on Unalienable Rights, including its aims and controversies; Stephen Haber responds that boards, presidents, and provosts shape campus ideology and that governance-level changes could enable a revival of civic education. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Siyabonga Motha, standing in for Aubrey Masango, speaks to Brad Latilla-Campbell, Country Manager at Crimson Education, on why universities across the world are dropping AI detection tools. They also touch on the future of higher education that now incorporates artificial intelligence and how that will work in industry. You’re listening to The Aubrey Masango Show with Aubrey Masango, where real conversations meet expert insights – from politics to life, personal finance, and more. Thanks for listening. Listen live on 702 weekdays from 8 pm to midnight, or on CapeTalk from 8 pm to 9 pm (South African time) https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show and catch-up podcasts, visit Primedia+ here https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Keep the conversation going online: 702 on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/capetalkza/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of the What's Wrong with Our Field? series, I tackle what I believe is one of the greatest shortcomings in graduate mental health education: the lack of meaningful preparation for working with children. I share why so many counseling, social work, psychology, and marriage and family therapy programs treat children as an afterthought, expose students to modified adult interventions instead of developmentally appropriate models, or fail to address pediatric therapy altogether. The result is that new therapists often graduate feeling completely unprepared when they're assigned their first child clients. I also explain why this isn't just a training issue—it's an ethical one. As the demand for children's mental health services continues to grow, graduate programs have a responsibility to prepare clinicians to competently serve young clients. I encourage therapists to become advocates for change by engaging their universities, professors, and training programs in conversations about the need for play therapy—and specifically child-centered play therapy—to become a foundational part of graduate education. New Live Training Events Announced: Indiana, New Jersey & Tampa dates are locked in and registration is open for Indiana. Go to iamccpt.live for more information. Podcast Meetups! Come hang out with me. I'm hosting casual Play Therapy Podcast listener meetups in Denver and Seattle on Aug. 4th and 6th. I'd love to connect with you in person! Learn more and RSVP at https://www.playtherapypodcast.com/meetup/ New Resource for Play Therapists: The Parent Companion for Play Therapy is now available at author pricing for therapists. Created specifically to help parents better understand the child-centered play therapy process, this book is designed to support parent engagement, improve buy-in, and reduce attrition throughout the therapeutic journey. As a listener of the Play Therapy Podcast, you can order a copy for just $8 (our cost plus shipping). Click here to order your author-priced copy. ** Limit 1 per therapist, offer valid in the Continental U.S. only. Order copies for your practice and save with discounted bulk pricing. Bulk ordering makes it easy to place Parent Companion for Play Therapy directly into the hands of the parents you serve. PlayTherapyNow.com is my HUB for everything I do! playtherapynow.com. Sign up for my email newsletter, stay ahead with the latest CCPT CEU courses, personalized coaching opportunities and other opportunities you need to thrive in your CCPT practice. If you click one link in these show notes, this is the one to click! Topical Playlists! All of the podcasts are now grouped into topical playlists on YouTube. Please go to https://www.youtube.com/kidcounselorbrenna/playlists to view them. If you would like to ask me questions directly, check out www.ccptcollective.com, where I host two weekly Zoom calls filled with advanced CCPT case studies and session reviews, as well as member Q&A. You can take advantage of the two-week free trial to see if the CCPT Collective is right for you. Ask Me Questions: Call ‪(813) 812-5525‬, or email: brenna@thekidcounselor.com Brenna's CCPT Hub: https://www.playtherapynow.com CCPT Collective (online community exclusively for CCPTs): https://www.ccptcollective.com Podcast HQ: https://www.playtherapypodcast.com APT Approved Play Therapy CE courses: https://childcenteredtraining.com Facebook: https://facebook.com/playtherapypodcast Common References: Cochran, N., Nordling, W., & Cochran, J. (2010). Child-Centered Play Therapy (1st ed.). Wiley. VanFleet, R., Sywulak, A. E., & Sniscak, C. C. (2010). Child-centered play therapy. Guilford Press. Landreth, G.L. (2023). Play Therapy: The Art of the Relationship (4th ed.). Routledge. Landreth, G.L., & Bratton, S.C. (2019). Child-Parent Relationship Therapy (CPRT): An Evidence-Based 10-Session Filial Therapy Model (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315537948 Benedict, Helen. Themes in Play Therapy. Used with permission to Heartland Play Therapy Institute.

Arthur Herman credits Vannevar Bush's "The Endless Frontier" manifesto with persuading FDR to fund basic scientific research through universities, laying the groundwork for Silicon Valley. This federal support enabled discoveries in information theory and microchip development, transforming the American economy. The evolution from massive mainframes like the IBM 360 to modern microchips illustrates the imaginative leap of founders who see opportunities where others see only current technology. (15)

Competing in a Future World of Infinite Intelligence Navigation: Intro From Knowledge Workers to Judgment Workers The AI-Native Company: Org, Hiring, Culture The Human Element: Are We Underestimating It? Scenarios Our Take Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show:   Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Introduction Welcome to episode 79 of Tech DECIPHERED. Today, we take a leap into the big unknown. This is a thesis episode, not your classic analysis, in-depth sharing episode. The big idea for this episode is that we may be approaching the cognitive age, and how would one, or how would a company compete in a world of infinite intelligence? The big idea, again, is that intelligence, which has been mostly scarce and expensive for all of human history, might become abundant and cheap. If that happens, what happens to work, what happens to companies, what happens to society? This episode will be really framing a lot of these discussions. From knowledge workers to judgment workers, addressing the AI native company and how does that change, going into the human element and whether or not we’re underestimating it, and finally, ending up going into scenarios, feasible scenarios of a future where, well, intelligence is abundant. Intelligence is quasi-infinite or infinite itself.Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Big questions for this episode 79. From Knowledge Workers to Judgment Workers We can start with from knowledge workers to judgment workers. Let’s go back first to how came the knowledge worker. It’s a 20th-century invention from Peter Drucker in 1959. The idea here is that that category might be splitting. The production of knowledge itself is on its way to being commoditized by AI. However, our perspective is that judgment around production of knowledge is not disappearing and is staying for a bit control managed by humans. What’s your take on this, Nuno? Do you agree with this split?Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think it’s a little bit more profound than that. It’s not just judgment. Definitely, human judgment will be needed. We’ve seen agents perform all sorts of funny things in the wrong way when left alone to their own devices. Even some very well-known AI researchers coming forward and saying, “Hey, I tried to use this myself, and actually I messed up some of my systems,” or “I messed some of my code. I messed up some of my flows for a period of time.” I think just having human-in-the-loop from a judgment standpoint will be needed for a significant amount of time. That is something you can’t just delegate into machines, into algorithms, et cetera. The second part is, ultimately, there needs to be contextualization, and that contextualization, I think, comes from two forms. One from actual data, where the machine, I think, at some point will catch up, or the machines will catch up. The algorithms, at some point, on the data analysis will get better and better and have probably the closest to the truth that you can get, minus all the biases that are in the data, just to be clear, because data has a ton of biases. We’ve looked at this in the past and discussed it at prior episodes. But maybe on that, I think the machine has a chance to catch up, or the machines have a chance to catch up, so there’s less of distinctiveness from the human standpoint. But then, on just the attributes, the ability when you’re judging some situation, you’re in the middle of the situation. You’re judging the person and how it’s acting, in some ways, a lot of the things that end up happening, end up happening because there’s human interaction. There’s someone on the other side. I see how they’re delivering the message, how they’re implicating. We’ll talk about it later in the context of the organization and what changes in companies. I don’t think it’s just judgment. I think there’s a little bit more than that. One of the reasons I went to the dark side of management early on in my career from being an engineer was Peter Drucker and this notion of the knowledge worker, which he later on reemphasized with the publishing of his book, which for me was seminal and defined a lot of my career in life, the post-capitalist society, which is this notion that information rich and information poor is going to be the key distinctiveness that will happen in the world. The two big camps, information rich, information poor, which links back to this invention of the term knowledge worker, that knowledge is going to be key in some ways. I think that’s what we’ve seen for the last decades. Again, I think judgment is not going anywhere, but I think it’s beyond judgment. There’s elements of humanity and involvement that won’t go away anytime soon, where human-in-the-loop are particularly critical. We’ll discuss later some scenarios, but for me, that’s my stick in the ground. I think human-in-the-loop is going to be critical for many decades to come.Bertrand Schmitt While we are talking about all of this, and we share some possible scenarios, there is always that question. This is moving so fast right now. If you think about AI 10 years ago, AI 5 years ago, AI with the launch of ChatGPT 3, and then AI the past 2 years, now we have agents that are running at scale. Things are moving very fast. I can tell you, me in 6 months, the change has been pretty dramatic in terms of what I can use AI for. There is always that question that whatever we are thinking about cannot just be connected to what we were able to do 6 months ago or even today, we have to think and project ourselves at least in the next 6–12 months. Of course, we can go beyond that, and we will do that with some future scenarios, but it’s a very fast-moving, and it’s not clear yet where are the limits.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think that’s a very fair point. Let me try to analyze things that I don’t think will change anytime soon for the next few years. Agreed with you that many things will change, and we’ll have a lot better tools, platforms out there. That will be difficult to predict what exactly won’t change. I think there’s elements of humanity, and some of them do relate to judgment, like having good or bad taste, having a view on it, on whether something looks good or bad. Obviously, all of this sometimes is subjective, but some of it may not be as subjective as people think it is. The elements of contextualization. I think a little bit going back to what we did at Chamaeleon ourselves, where we built this platform, Mantis, and the objective of building Mantis was not really to replace us, was that it was a core augmentation layer in some ways that we would use investment or investor judgment as humans in the loop to systematize pattern recognition and a variety of other things, but that Mantis would really elevate all that judgment, not just in terms of timing, us being more productive, but also in terms of the quality of the decisions we’re making. Think of it as a little bit like having our human judgment in the context of operating Chamaeleon at a higher altitude, where we are more aware of the things that are happening and how they actually happen. The ability to really get to the data pieces and then make decisions on top of that that generate the needed alpha in our case for investors. What I mean by this is I think there’s always going to be core elements of humanity that I do think are going to be difficult for the machines to replace. For example, the taste piece people are like, “I can figure out what’s the taste in the market.” Yeah, but that’s mainstream. That doesn’t identify what’s the next big thing, which normally doesn’t start from mainstream. It starts from something else. It could start from opinion leaders and influencers. It could start by someone having a different way of addressing a problem and having a solution that hasn’t been thought through. For example, elements of creativity, I think, in human judgment and in human operations is something that I feel the machine will still have difficulty to replace.Bertrand Schmitt Let’s not forget how today current algorithms are working by feeding them enormous quantity of data, actually as much data as we can find. Finding more data is becoming a limitation these days. What it means is that it’s very hard for AI to think beyond its training data. There is some level of logic that’s being added, but at the same time, take the launch of the iPhone. What was the opinion before launch? Is that no, it doesn’t make sense. Not enough battery life, no keyboard, no this, no that. If you just base your analysis on what’s written out there, what’s being sold out there, you would just say, “It’s going to fail.” AI might really follow that more generic advice and perspective because that’s what in the training data and that’s what they’re in volume. It’s, of course, raising a lot of questions of, how do you improve the quality of the training data? How do you separate the weed from the chaff? There are a lot of questions there, and obviously, it will get better over time. But it’s still a critical part of how it’s working today. It won’t be that easy to change. I really like your point regarding Mantis, and I will say in general, platforms that you build with AI or leveraging AI capacity. Because when we say knowledge production is going to disappear, but we’ll keep judgment, it will be a different type of judgment because the quantity and quality of knowledge we will have in front of us to build our judgment will be very different. If suddenly we have for free the work of 10 interns or 5 junior analysts or whatever, and you can run that on nearly anything you do in life or at work, it’s completely dramatic. Your judgment was not used to be exercised so often because often you were missing quality data to have a judgment. Before it was a lot of finger in the wind and trying to smell something, but you didn’t have enough to make a serious analysis. Except if you are working as a strategy consultant, as you used to do, Nuno. That part is actually quite interesting. That the judgment itself will be exercised much more often and hopefully on the base of much more in-depth analysis for a lot of things. We will work very differently.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro We will go in-depth, faster and more fact-based, more data-based along the way. The question some of you might have right now is, is there some judgment that’s going to go away? Is there some judgment? We seem to be defining that there’s this organization, we’ll talk about it later, that goes from doers more into deciders. I think there’s some nuances to that, so I’ll just hit pause on that. In terms of judgment, obviously, there’s judgment that has been hidden over the years under the pretense of being wisdom, but it’s actually not wisdom. It’s just repetitive tasking, and it’s rules-based for the most. There’s a lot of judgment done, in particular in the white-collar space, that you could say it’s just reps. People have been doing it all along like that, and so therefore to say, “I’ve done it before like this, so I’ll do it the same way.” There’s actually no best in class, no analysis, no nothing. It’s just, “I’ve done it like that before.” I think that type of judgment will disappear because, again, algorithms will be as good, if not much better at that. They’ll be better at figuring out, actually, this would be the better way to do this. That’s how you play it forward. Then the question is, if there are fundamental, wise people in the organization, people that can really take that more complex elements of judgment, how do you go from the world we have today, which is a world of apprenticeship, where people come out of college, they go and work, and they learn their way, and therefore, hopefully over time, some of them, not all of them, we know that, but some of them will develop that wisdom to be great decision makers 15, 20 years down the road? How do we do that in a world that now is saying, “I don’t need people out of college because I can do it myself, and I can do individual contributor, and I can have agents doing the work that would require some manifestation of management in the middle.” Basically, “I don’t need this stuff. I don’t need you.” It’s a little bit the story we’re in. How do you create then this apprenticeship? How do we create then wisdom? My two cents on that is that wisdom, because of what we were just discussing and what, for example, myself and Bertrand was just saying, because of more often interactions with more data-stressed information and insights, what will happen is people will get better through their own reps in whatever form they’re doing, in day-to-day life, in internships, et cetera. In some ways, that will create the accelerated growth. It’s a little bit the interactions with agents and the interactions with our beloved AI algorithms that will create that growth over time and maybe not as much with other people. That still leaves the question around social interactions, but that’s probably the way this gets sorted. Apprenticeship gets sorted through the machine and the human having more interactions in effect.Bertrand Schmitt I agree with you because when we talk about apprenticeship, in some ways a lot of time was wasted on stuff that were not that important. But in a way, that was the price you had to pay in order to be there when people make the big decision to try to get some wisdom from that one hour of interactions that’s really useful and make a difference out of your full week. But the rest of your full week was just basic stuff that you had to do like a machine in a way. Why not let a machine do that? That, for me, is a big question. You could argue there is a transition period where it could be hard. For instance, if you can work hand in hand with AI smartly while you are doing your 4, 5 years of universities, you could graduate with a very different knowledge, perspective, judgment, skill set than anyone who graduated 5 years ago. I think that part will require a question around, “How do you change education?” You see what I mean? If you keep education the same way, expecting that the output is someone that should go now into 5 years of apprenticeship, that’s not going to work because companies will be, “No apprenticeship anymore.” On the contrary, you have to come much more knowledgeable and ready to use the tools. The tools are so efficient that the bar pretty high. You need to come already very well-grounded. If the education is not doing their job, that will be trouble. That part for me, I think is often forgotten. In some ways, the new-found importance of universities as a place to, and not just universities, the trade to really deliver people who are ready for the workforce. If on the business side, the expectation can change, of course, you have to change the education on the other side. My worry probably right now is that it doesn’t look like universities are in touch with what businesses are looking for, businesses are working on. Of course, that’s very worrisome because the cost of university has increased very significantly. It’s not clear quality of education has improved at all. If anything, it could be the opposite. It’s pretty scary. Of course, it’s going to raise a lot of questions. How much is education worth in that type of situation? Maybe another point because we talk a lot about apprenticeship, how this stuff was useful, but at the same time, if we go back in time, not long ago in the ’50s, if you wanted to be a developer, for instance, ’50s, ’60s, the job was very different. There was barely any programmation language out there. You had to use punch cards. Your time truly spent doing the coding was very limited. Once you had your stuff working, then, the debugging was a total nightmare. My point is that no one is looking back to that time saying, “You know what? It was great. It was a great way to learn and to do an apprenticeship for 5 years. To do that crappy job of punching cards for the boss.” There was little value in this. Guess what? Everyone is happy it’s not being done anymore by anyone. I think we also have to see what AI is bringing in a similar way is that everyone’s job is going to become quite different. There are a lot of big parts of the job who are not going to look back with fondness. Just looking back as, “Wow, that was very machine-like type of job. I’m glad I’m done with it.” People will want to jump directly to the next step. You don’t need to go to the punch card phase to be able to be a good developer for the past 40 years. I guess it will be the same with AI.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think so. The difficulty we have as humans is to also visualize dramatically different scenarios and landscapes, professionally. It’s difficult for us to anticipate what are the jobs of the future. Jobs have changed a lot in the last few decades, not even the last century. What people do, the migration initially from the agricultural society to then the industrial society to then the services society, and in some ways, the shift within the services industry, and now we’re seeing another shift, so we can’t really anticipate what those jobs look like. Back to your point on education, because I think that’s a very important point. If you’re right now an undergraduate student or a postgraduate student, for that matter, and you’re not figuring out your own mechanisms of learning outside of your syllabus, outside of what your professors are telling you, et cetera, you’re going to face very difficult times. If you’re not right now using all these AI tools proficiently, all these cycles of vibe coding, co-working, et cetera, with agents in the mix, you’re going to have a really tough time. If you’re not at this point in time as proficient as someone like myself or Bertrand, and given that we’re nerds, we’re relatively proficient with a lot of these tools that are out there. On top of it, some of us have our own platforms in-house. If you’re not as proficient as we are with those tools, you’re going to have a very difficult time because then people like us won’t need you. I think that’s the sad truth. It’s like at some point, if you’re not needed, you’re not needed. Then again, you may find something else that’s more interesting for you to do. Start your own company, go join a new exciting job doing whatever it is that you need to do next, et cetera. But again, I think the bar is very high. If you’re in college right now, again, undergrad, postgraduate, this is the time of transition. This is the worst time. It’s not the best time, it’s the worst time. Because education and all these institutions haven’t adapted to it yet. You need to adapt. You need to adapt. You need to adapt. If you don’t, you’re going to pay for it, not just in the loans you need to repay, but also in terms of actually having difficulty finding your career path in those first few critical years.Bertrand Schmitt You need to be especially proactive when you’re facing this type of period where businesses are adapting as fast as they can because they all know it’s going to be survival of the fittest very quickly. Universities typically are working on a very different pace, and it’s pretty guaranteed they are not going to have adapted as fast as businesses. In time of big dramatic change, it will be trouble. It will be trouble. Yes, you will have not fun. Not saying it was part of the deal when you sign up for that loan and decided to go for university. But that’s life. There has been issues before. It’s not the first time. You have to do something about it. You talk about your perspective about, “Hey, why do we need you if you are not already fluent and very efficient with these tools and stuff?” The truth, in some ways, it’s even worse than that. Each time we spend with someone who is not efficient with all of this is less time we spend with the tools that are already providing magic for us.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Exactly.Bertrand Schmitt It’s a very big choice of, “Hey, do I spend more time training this person?” Do I just… there is an opportunity cost. Or, do I spend more time staying at light speed? Why do I slow down to do something else in the hope that maybe I will get to return versus the light speed I’m already on? It’s a lot of tension. Again, it’s certainly new. But if we want to look back, I think you talk about the switch from agriculture and society, industrial society, and now the service industry. The reality is that, yes, we have made dramatic changes in the past before. 140 years ago, we were 90% agricultural society in Europe, in the US, 90% of us. Today, it’s what? 2%. So my point is that that’s a normal evolution. There is no progress without change. Sometimes the rate of change is soft, and sometimes you have a step function. Now it’s a step function, and it’s also a pretty fast step function. Before, it could take decades to get new stuff being put in place, to have electricity come up, this or that. Now we see that the rate of investment in AI is insane, way beyond anything we have seen before. Two, in a way, a lot of the architecture behind the scene was already there to support an even faster transition. What’s new might be the pace of the transition, how unnatural it might look. But at the same time, if you put yourself in the shoes of someone who lived 150 years ago, I mean, this was also a dramatic change for them. From horses to cars to planes to rockets, pretty big change, maybe even bigger change.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe the silver lining, just to bookend this section, is one, there will be new roles. There are a lot of things we can’t anticipate. There will be new roles, there will be new jobs being created, and new things that we can’t really quite grasp yet. The second part is that the rules are changing, and they’re changing, I would say, in general, for the better. If you are a decision-maker or an organization, and you still have your job, you’re probably making more important decisions with more data, with more tooling around you, with less red tape, hopefully over time. I know that will not hold true for all the big corporations out there that are listening to us, but it is starting to happen. Things are making an impact on how decision-making is made. There’s less and less red tape along the way in certain organizations. There are more and more fact-based discussions happening as we move along. The silver lining is better jobs, more jobs, different jobs in the future, hopefully as well. Secondly, the second part of the silver line is that the jobs that exist today, hopefully, will be more interesting, certainly on the knowledge space and on this judgment space that we’re now introducing as part of this episode. The AI-Native Company: Org, Hiring, Culture Switching gears, maybe to how does that shift? How does the company of the future look like? How does an AI native company look like? I feel there are a lot of discussions on, “Oh, you only need one person to run everything.” Let’s not go to that level. We’ve had a couple of episodes where we focused on AI as your co-founder and a couple of other elements that you guys can go back to. Let’s focus on a more evolutionary view of what’s happening to organizations, and maybe start with the org structure. In general, we should see more flat organizations where mid-level managers have to justify their pay in some ways because middle management are routers. They are normally routing tasks. It’s sometimes aggregating it, synthesizing it, and pulling it back up. Guess what? AI and agents in general are very good at that. The synthesis piece, et cetera, is not as well needed. One could say there are several elements of middle management that are valuable, like the coaching of people, the creation of apprentices, and the accountability that comes with some of middle management. But lo and behold, most of middle management is seen as a little bit of a thin line that doesn’t need to necessarily exist. I feel we’re moving into a world of smaller teams, more senior teams, where there’s more judgment at the top, where you’ll have people that both do a mix of what we used to call management in its new form, but also a lot of individual contribution. If you’re not used to that, if you’re not used anymore to be an individual in the future, again, and if you’re a very senior in an organization, maybe this is the right time to either reinvent yourself, find some other job that doesn’t require as much of that, which we’ll have plenty of those jobs for the next few decades, or maybe retire. I’ve actually, shockingly enough, seen people who have said, “You know what? This thing is changing too fast, too dramatically. My industry is changing quite aggressively right now. I’m about to retire in a couple of years. I’m just going to retire now.” I’ve literally met two people who have done that. Again, there’s nothing wrong about it. I think we’re, again, going through a step function and a huge shift, but figuring out where you fit in this new model of organizations, more senior at the top, smaller teams, more of a mix of individual contribution with management than ever was done before.Bertrand Schmitt I agree with you. In some ways, I’m not surprised that some people might say, “You know what? It’s now time to retire.” I feel a bit sad, maybe because it means you don’t like to keep reinventing yourself and changing your habits and thinking about new stuff. You were a creature of habits, I would say, if that’s your conclusion. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion, obviously, and a way of life. I guess that’s what happened, again, at regular times in the past in terms of big change. What I can see is that the rise of, you can call it the full-stack individual, someone who will have multiple roles inside the team. Before, you had to really separate the role. Especially in the US, there is such a clear separation between every role you can have in a company. Let’s take a tech company. You will have people doing design, people doing different types of designs, people doing front-end development, back-end development, and operations. You see step-by-step hyper-specialization. I have seen that, and it’s true that the level of complexity you had to deal with at some point requires some level of hyper-specialization because it will take you 6, 12 months in order to be really, really strong on a specific topic, a specific language. God forbid, trying to go deep into something that you had no real experience into. But I feel with AI, it’s a big change, actually. It’s the opportunity to go beyond that. It’s the opportunity to do more, to touch more. You can combine designing and shipping code, product managing and shipping code, being an analyst and deploying. Of course, we have to think how it works because putting a marketer shipping code to production, maybe that will get you into trouble. But I think that there must be some change. We see it changing dramatically, how fast we can get into something, something different from what we are used to. I think it would be crazy not to take that opportunity to dramatically change the scope of many positions and put an end to that hyper-specialization. I think for me, in some ways, hyper-specialization was bad. There is only so much you want to be a specialist in because a lot of things, a lot of opportunities are actually coming from the mixing of many different ideas, many different perspectives, and you lose if you go to hyper-specialization.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I don’t think the age that is coming is the age of the generalist. I think it’s going to be the age of the multispecialist. We’re going to go into an age of multispecialization, which is a little bit, we’ve mentioned it as well in the past, what Amazon defines as an athlete or T-shaped or pie-shaped people, people that have on top an amazing ability to do general management, strategy, managing teams, et cetera, then have spikes. Spikes into business development, corporate development, product management, whatever it is. With AI and with agents, the development of those spikes, as we’ve been discussing in this episode, will actually be easier. It’s almost like a given. If you want to go deeper and deeper into a certain area, you can go much faster. I think that level of multispecialization is going to be really cool to observe. I’m not sure we’ve had an age of multispecialization over the years. Maybe people would point out, well, the Da Vinci example, people that are great across very different areas. Maybe that’s an example of multispecialization. But honestly, from my perspective, this is going to be an exciting time because of that, because you’ll have people who, instead of being just focused on this area of sales, and I only do that, they can actually and should actually do a lot of other things. So the work, as we were talking before, can be more interesting. More demanding as well, because the judgments you need to make are more complex. The context you need to actually gain needs to be gained much faster. At a level of magnitude, you haven’t been able to do it before. Talk about information overload. But actually, ultimately, the roles can be a lot more interesting, a lot more exciting, because I can jump around. If I’m an investor, in this case, we have two investors on this conversation. But if I’m an investor, one of the things that we start looking at is actually not just looking at a startup as, is this startup doing something in AI or not? Is it AI-enabled or not? Is it an AI platform or not? But actually, more fundamentally, is this an AI native startup? Meaning, organizationally, culturally, is this the company that’s already in the AI age? How is the team working? How are they defining things? It’s not just that they only have two or three people. It’s like, what are those two or three people doing? How are they doing it? What cadence are they doing it on? What tools are they using? How are they making decisions? I feel we’re still actually relatively early on that track. It’s very interesting because we’ve had all these companies raising mega rounds. First round out, we invested in one of them, but there have been many frontier labs out there raising a ton of money. But a lot of them don’t have a fundamentally different way of doing business. Of organizing themselves, of how they do the day-to-day. Although they’re working on cutting-edge stuff, with very notable exceptions, they’re actually not using it themselves. They’re not actually shifting how they do stuff themselves.Bertrand Schmitt For me, that’s very interesting because in the past, I used to be quite conservative on how you manage and run a company in the sense that if you’re already in tech, if you are already on the cutting edge of what technology can deliver, and this and that, don’t waste time trying to invent a new org structure. Just focus on delivering something great, amazing, and be great at technologies. That’s already your huge differentiator. At the time, there was no real reason to innovate on the team organization. I have seen so many teams that tried to innovate, and it was just catastrophic because there was not much to innovate on, because we had decades of optimization that we could leverage. There was no reason to invent. But here it’s very different. There is a dramatic shift in how you can organize differently a company. I don’t think there are any blueprints yet on what’s the best way to do it because it’s too new. But at the same time, I would feel very bad to invest or support a company that first is not focused on AI or AI-enabled, but at the same time is not trying to innovate on the team itself. Because if you don’t do that, you’re going to get killed by someone who is going to innovate better than you on not just the product, but on the org as well.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Indeed. The shifts are pretty substantial. If you look, for example, just at hiring, what do you hire for? Certainly, there’s this element of the multispecialized orchestrator, which normally will be someone with quite a lot of wisdom and expertise. It doesn’t necessarily mean someone who’s old, but someone who has the ability to work with all the AI tooling and platforms out there and be an orchestrator of agents. Why do they make judgments, make decisions, move stuff forward really, really, really quickly? Again, those jobs are going to be the best jobs. The second part, I think that is very interesting, around hiring, is you’re going to skew towards the elements that are potentially either very aligned with the use of AI tooling and platform, AI expertise, or being AI native, or someone who’s used to using AI. That’s one side of the fence. On the other side, you’re going to actually be optimizing to hire people that have the characteristics that will be difficult for AI to replace immediately, like taste and the notion of fundamental accountability and notion of implications, the notion of how you affect change in organizations, how you affect change in individuals, the elements of coaching, and beyond coaching. You’ll be optimizing for those kinds of hires as well. Then, last but not least, for me, I feel that there is a momentum already happening. I think it will happen even more, which is the tendency to under-hire rather than over-hire. The moment of the good old days of blitz scaling, “Oh, let me go and hire 300 people to scale my go-to-market and just land grab market.” Now, that’s not how it’s going to work. People are going to try and first get the efficiencies in-house with top talent and see if there’s, at the end, the need to hire more people or not, rather than the other way around. I think the issue here is a little bit of what we alluded to before in this episode. There is a tax on individuals. If you hire more people, you’ll have to manage people, you’ll have to work with them, et cetera. If I don’t need to, I might as well work with the agents that the tools and platforms that I use give me access to. Because that’s a world that’s much more efficient, right?Bertrand Schmitt I’m in total agreement with you on this. It’s definitely raising way more questions than before because, again, on one side, you have the product, the technology used to build products that are completely different. At the same time, all of this is also enabling new ways to design organizations and to scale differently, especially in a world where, as we have seen in 3, 6, and 12 months, stuff that you thought were impossible are suddenly becoming possible. So you’re, “Hey, I’m going to scale and burn a shitload of money for 6 months before I know if there is any return.” Versus, “You know what? Maybe I just wait 6 months. The AI has improved enough so that we don’t need this new team. We don’t need these people to do stuff.” Because actually, if you just wait 6 months, we will have stuff coming for free from either new AI models or new AI tools or this or that. If you remember, we used to say that in mobile, things were going three times as fast as on the web in terms of pace of innovation and speed of development and stuff. I mean, with AI, it’s 5X mobile.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe even more. Yes, well.Bertrand Schmitt Maybe even more, maybe 10X. Every assumption around blitz scaling or scaling in general was based on past assumptions. It’s not based on how is the industry evolving today. Might make more sense for you to really grow your agents and spend more money on more tokens. I remember, of course, Jensen is selling his business interest, but he was saying, “Hey, for each one of my 450K engineers, he better spend 250K in tokens a year.” I’m not saying it’s the right way to say it, but I think there is some truth in it, and that would be something to think about. Have we maxed out the token usage per employee? I’m not talking in a stupid way because token maxing and wasting money has no value and is as stupid as it gets. But if you are truly getting a return on these tokens, can you use more? Can you generate more? Can you create more loops so that one engineer manages not just 10 agents, but 50 agents, but 200 agents? I think that’s the big question. We’re trying to add more people. More people means more management, more issues, more this, more that. That would be a fair question. Another piece of the puzzle is how do you build in a way your… I don’t know if it’s a digital twin, but more like the digital version of your companies represented by agents. How do you make sure that everything you do as a business is truly captured, is truly leveraged so that your agents are getting better and better? Not just because the model gets better, but because you are putting more data into it, because it has more opportunity to learn, and as a result, gets better at your specific business.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro The next big thing is culture. How does culture change? I think the biggest shift that I see is, why would you do meetings all the time?Bertrand Schmitt Yes.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro At least at Chamaeleon, we have a very small team, just by the way. We have a very small team at Chamaeleon. We’ve reduced by way more than 50% the time we spend on meetings between each other across the board, one-on-ones, partner meetings, et cetera. I think we’re really pushing to be more and more asynchronous. There’s stuff you can process via message. I was just asking one of my colleagues, “Can you just send me that prompt for that so I can just do that on CoWork?” Or “Can I just go on Mantis and do this? Can you tell me the cycle?” Or vice versa. Basically, it’s a little bit like you’re just going to do it. I don’t need to meet. I don’t need to meet all the time. There are some things where we still need to meet and interact, and we need to brainstorm at times, and we need to go to a different level of abstraction on the top end. Then on the lower end, there might be things that are a little bit more specific and governance-related and operational-related that we need to agree on that are more sticky. But otherwise, the culture is going to be biased towards build. “Go and do it,” rather than, “Let’s do a meeting.”Bertrand Schmitt Yes.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Async is the thing. I’m more and more like we have a couple of interns this summer. “Can we async this?” They’re like, “What does that mean?” “Can we make this interaction asynchronous?” Because synchronous interactions for me are very expensive. Can you send me something that I can process, and then I can send it back to you? We don’t waste time on you giving me context and whatever. Then I’m not ready quite yet because I need to process it. Maybe I’m in between two meetings that I’m actually thinking about other things in my mind.” Again, I feel that shifts how stuff is done. One, build rather than meeting. Two, asynchronous versus synchronous. In some way, millennials had it right when they shifted a lot to messaging and stuff like that. Let’s do more asynchronous rather than synchronous, those two elements from just an operating model of the company are significant. Maybe this is a good time for me just to put one parenthesis because there’s this thing that’s bugging me as we’re talking here. Everyone who is listening to us at this point in time might be saying, “Cool, but I work for this large organization. We’re just now…” Everything we’re saying here is contextualized by time. We’re giving you extreme situations. We’re looking into the future. Some companies that we’re talking about might be doing this already as we speak. Some of them might be in the process of doing this and might in the next couple of months be doing it like we are describing it here. Some of them might take years to get there. Then again, some of the companies that might take years might actually be destroyed in between or meanwhile, and be disrupted. Some of them might not because they’re in very legacy businesses, and it’s fine, and it’s okay. Again, don’t take everything that Bertrand and I are saying today as this is gospel, and it’s going to happen tomorrow, and why the hell are we not doing it? We think that aspirationally, this is where you should be moving to as an organization, whatever size you’re at. Speed will matter, as we discussed before, but not everyone, obviously, is going to move as fast as we’re describing it here.Bertrand Schmitt Yes. Me, for instance, take inspiration often with what some of the AI labs, frontier AI labs, are doing, the way they are working, especially in OpenAI and Anthropic. They are clearly at the top of the spear in terms of what is it that you can do because they have access to models we don’t have access to, because they have unlimited tokens they can use for tasks. They hire people who are, of course, 100% on AI. They are the best example of what is achievable if you have the top minds, if you have the latest models, if you have unlimited tokens. From there, you can take that for our needs and for our situation, and others in industries that are not as advanced. Definitely, you have some time. But as you say, things are moving fast, things are changing. Wall Street is going to expect better returns because when we discuss all of this, the conclusion is that you should be able to do more with less. That’s as real as it gets at some point. By the way, that’s what you see. You see better performance, a better business performance right now. So even if you might not get disrupted, you’d better start there. For some, it might take more time, and they might still be fine.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Maybe to bookend this section, clearly what we’re saying is organizations are going to change. Their MOs are going to change, the structures are going to change. There are elements of what we discussed before in terms of judgment that are fundamental to this. The ability that in some ways, one would say a lot of the technique of getting solutions out there, even in brainstorming or problem-solving, is going to get democratized. The algorithms are able to do that. On the other hand, having points of view and having wisdom is not necessarily democratized, necessarily by the machines. It can be facilitated, it can be more productive in achieving that level of wisdom, but wisdom still will matter at the end of the day. We’re not saying that’s out of the question. Actually, that’s going to be the asset. People who have fundamental wisdom that can come to the table and frame things. We see this even today in prompt engineering, on just creating prompts. The better your prompt is, the better the outcome is going to be, the result that you get from the algorithms. That’s not going to change, in my opinion, anytime soon. That UI interaction piece is not going to change anytime soon. Again, if you’re an organization thinking through organizational structure, culture, if you’re thinking through hiring, these are some of the elements that we think will give you an opportunity, but I would actually go one step further. On the positive side, I would say, they give you arbitrage. If you’re able to move faster than your competitors and really adapt your org faster, you’ll reap the benefits faster as well. That’s what many still say and relate to as the word innovation. That’s how innovation gets accelerated. I think there’s a huge opportunity right now for arbitrage. If you move fast, experiment, experiment on new org structures, experiment with talent, you’ll know that some of them will work well, some of them will fail miserably, so you can’t experiment on literally everything. On the other side, I think the doomsday scenario is if you don’t, if you’re on the other side and your competitor is outpacing you on trying these different organizational models, structure, hiring models, and operating models, they’ll potentially just disrupt you. They’ll do stuff that you thought you had the moat on, and lo and behold, you don’t anymore. Sometimes it comes just from org, just from injection of people with a different MRO, different operating model.Bertrand Schmitt The Human Element: Are We Underestimating It? Maybe we can move to our next section about the human elements. Are we underestimating it or are we overestimating it? The three things that are a big part of the human elements, emotion, creativity, and synthesis. Is it just soft skills, replaceable part? On the contrary, is it the durable part now that we have automated intelligence?Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I’ll start with emotion first because I think it’s probably the easiest of all the ones you’ve mentioned. Emotion is key. Many of you listening to us will know this. The way you deliver a certain message, the emotion that you have when you deliver it, just in and of itself, this could be a sentence, it’s something verbal, et cetera. Makes a difference between the person or the people on the other side actually adopting it or actually just resisting it. Emotion is critical. It’s what runs the world. Everyone talks about a bunch of things, but emotion is a currency that is still naturally human. It will be, I feel, difficult for these AI tools and platforms to recreate it fully until there’s some literally very high-definition manifestation of them as avatars or some physical manifestation of them as robots and all that stuff. It will take a while for that emotion to be manifested. Emotion, I think, is still something that we as humans have as a moat, and it’s critical. As you mentioned before, I was a strategy management consultant at McKinsey, and getting people to action is actually 80% about the delivery, communication, the emotion that you surround the project itself, more than sometimes the truth. It’s great to have the truth and to have something that is similar to the truth in terms of analysis, but in some ways, that’s not what really moves change. Change is moved by, I would argue, a significant amount of emotion and alignment on emotions.Bertrand Schmitt You could argue that’s something that most politicians have perfectly understood. If you look at most campaigns these days, everything on emotions, maybe the tagline might be one word. It’s interesting when you see from that perspective that actually it’s very little on facts, very little on all of this, but more about emotion. You could argue it’s the same for businesses in the future? That’s a fair question. I think creativity is another one that’s quite important. At the same time, it’s not so easy because I must say I’m quite amazed when I’m looking for creativity from AI, either to generate the image, to generate video, to generate audio, or to generate text. AI can be pretty creative. I still think you need to control its creativity; you need to understand what’s good, what’s bad, what’s quality, but at the same time, I can see even in creative tasks, AI can be a very strong partner. I’m talking about any creative task, like invent a name for a product, let’s brainstorm the mission for the company. AI can actually be doing a pretty impressive job. That’s the type of job where you will hire experts, where you will use some of the best people in your team to help you for days. We say, “You can do quite a lot.” It’s an interesting one because I think there is some unique human creativity, and at the same time, AI can be pretty strong at creative task as well.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I agree. In particular, if it represents benchmarking, if it represents repetition, if it represents seeing the world and then coming up with something that presents itself as creative, to be honest, it can actually outpace humans. If it’s like genuine light bulb moments of creativity, angles that haven’t been tried before, certainly not in the same way, I think humans still have the advantage. To your point, I agree. This is not a humans-win situation. On the previous one, on emotion, still, part of it is because, also on emotion, there are exchanges. You and I might be looking at each other, and from the facial expressions and the reactions, where you judge that for AI to get there, it’s going to take a long time. There’s going to be a lot of very complex algorithmic stuff put into that for AI to be able to create synthetic emotional behaviors, but creativity, I agree with you. There are a lot more nuances to it today, where AI does have significant advantages at the end of the day. Synthesis depends. Synthesis, I feel, if we’re talking about holding a bunch of messy assumptions, contextualized inputs with different layers of data adjacent to them and then trying to create and form one coherent, fully accountable point of view that you stake something on, like a decision, a company, a business unit, whatever, I think humans have the advantage. Part of it is the complexity of what we have today with generative, pre-trained transformers, today with GPTs, where the hallucination comes through, where it’s really more statistical analysis. Over time, maybe synthesis will be a forte for AI. Right now, I think we still have that ability to really be the ultimate decision-makers and judge-makers and have that wisdom put at the table to make those decisions. Honestly, models are very good on balancing both sides, so ended up, as we say in Portuguese, neither fish nor meat. It’s to balance both sides’ answers. That’s not helpful in most cases. When you’re in a difficult position where, for example, the future of a company, company is almost dying, what do you do? I’m not sure your AI algorithms that are going to give you a great solution. Because it will give you a median or average solution, which likely will lead you to a median or average outcome, which in this case would be failure. Again, on synthesis, there are some areas of advantage for human beings. If you are looking for clearly synthesized perspectives on certain elements that are maybe less edge-focused, they’re more than the normal part of the normal distribution, then probably AI agents are brilliant at that. All the tools we have today are pretty good at that, and I think they’ll just get better over time. That’s how I see synthesis.Bertrand Schmitt I think a lot of improvements will come with a better fine-tuning of agents to what’s special about your company. Because if you just take a general agent, there is only so much. It can understand your industry, your company, and your way of working. I think that part of making sure your agents are finely trained, finely tuned on your own business, so that they can give you a really well-calibrated feedback, will have a lot of importance.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro I think that’s absolutely spot on. Maybe to end it, what is definitely different about humanity? Definitely, emotion, as we discussed, some pieces of synthesis. Creativity, maybe the light bulb creativity, not the more repeatable creativity, the one that you can put and encapsulate into processes in some ways. There are elements of us being physical, which robots can’t still recreate. That’s definitely an advantage. The embodied, we’re embodied. That’s obviously a huge advantage. With that also comes advantages because we have to interpret each other, and we have to see the complexities in physicality that land to it. Is human and the human element categorical difference? If we’re having a more philosophical discussion around this, I think it is. I think it will be for at least the foreseeable future and maybe decades to come, even in whatever scenarios we’ll discuss, which is our next section, scenarios.Bertrand Schmitt I would say projecting beyond 10 years is always pretty hard on this because, again, some of the improvements we are talking about we can imagine based on how it has evolved, but at the same time, there will be disruptions in AI. Stuff that we take for granted in terms of weakness, especially, might not be there in a few years from now. Either because it has been solved through brute force or because the field will have made significant change and improvements and discoveries, making some of our points moot. If we talk about embodiment, obviously, robots are coming. How fast, how cheap? That will be a big question. Right now, they’re not very smart. They’re usually very specialized. The more we move to a more general form factor, humanoid form factor, the more I think it will change. Also, another piece of the puzzle is that we have the assumption of agents having trouble to convince humans and stuff. At some point, we keep assuming that humans in the loop. If we’re talking about agents convincing another agent, not having embodiment might be even more efficient. That will be another perspective. Going forward, we will have not just agents we control who are doing a job and scanning the job, but agents truly interacting with other agents. You have agents controlled by one person, one team in your company, working either together or maybe not confrontationally, but trying to think and having different perspectives with another agent, controlled by other teams. I don’t think we have seen much of that now. We have seen mostly agents that are controlled by one team doing one job in one direction. Not multiple teams agents working together, or against or in parallel with another team agent. I think we will see some interesting things coming out of that.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Scenarios Switching to scenarios, we love our two-by-twos. We haven’t done one in a while. This time it’s a two by two. We have four scenarios. I think on one axis, we would have potentially the capabilities of AI. One side would be more incremental. The other side would be the extreme full AGI. I’ll define it in a bit so that we can at least have a little bit of a definitional view on what the AGI is. Then the other axis would be how gains are distributed, concentrated versus broad. Obviously, if they’re very concentrated, it’s more unequal. It only goes to a few companies, a few people, a few individuals. If it’s broad, it’s much more dispersed through society, et cetera. AGI, just to try to define it, the formal definition of it is that it’s a hypothetical AI that matches or exceeds human capabilities across virtually all cognitive and practical tasks. In some ways, AGI can learn, reason, and adapt to novel situations across any domain. Then there are several mutations on this, but there’s one notion, or rather, there are three notions that normally are across a lot of these definitions. One is generalization, ability to seamlessly transfer knowledge from one domain to another without needing retraining, which is a very impressive skill that we humans still seemingly have. Autonomy in agency, the capacity to operate independently, set goals, plan and execute complex tasks. I think AI is their issue with agents to a lot of that extent. Then, last but not least, human parity, performing economically valuable work at or above the level of a typical human knowledge worker. If you listen to one of our last episodes, you’ll realize that Bertrand and I have slightly different views on AGI, and if it’s already here or not. I think, definitionally, maybe we have slightly different views on what the definition actually is. For me, maybe AGI is a little bit more what some would call superintelligence and generalized superintelligence. Strict to census, Bertrand is more connecting to AGI as in its prime definition. It behaves as well or better than a human thing. Maybe that’s what’s leading us to differences on whether AGI has arrived or not.Bertrand Schmitt Personally, I will have a different scale where I will put AGI, as you just said, in some ways, relatively similar in performance to your average human being. On top of it, it’s able to touch different domains that most humans are not able to do. Usually, there is some level of specializations where in AI, it can be more generic. I will put ASI, Artificial Superintelligence, as clearly the step beyond. Something that, on any dimension you pick, it’s able to beat a human expert. From my perspective, I think we already discussed that, but we are at AGI already. We have AI that can do way better, not just way better, but at least as well as humans on many topics, sometimes better. Yes, there are some topics that are not for AI yet. Embodiment, for instance, to flock with your humanoid robot in 2026. For me, we are partially there or fully there in AGI. If we take the stricter definition, ASI, we are definitely not there, but my guess is that it’s moving quite fast. We might be there in a few years from now. I don’t think we are talking about multi-decades. It’s 5 years, maybe 10. Of course, there are questions because people will say, for instance, “Hey, how do you become truly super-intelligent when all your training is based on human data?” That’s not an easy one because how do you train on that? To be way better, not just a bit better, but way better. Maybe I’m going on a tangent, but some are looking at AI learning from AI, AI being taught from AI, AI fighting with AI, AI challenging AI. The same way we saw this AlphaGo moment where AI was not trained anymore, like in chess with human moves, but has been trained to play against itself. That’s when it reached superintelligence in Go. It reached superintelligence by playing against itself and basically letting go of that human baggage, if you want, and going to the next level. What I found interesting in that, actually, first, that’s what happened, but two, there was some analysis that the average level of Go players and the top players went up after AlphaGo because AlphaGo, in a way, opened doors that humans didn’t believe were open in front of them, or they didn’t see them. They didn’t see these doors, so they didn’t bother to open them. AI opened new doors, but interestingly enough, humans improved after that, thanks to AI. You see what I mean? It was an interesting, okay, that self-learning from AI was the way to go beyond the current level of human knowledge and human expertise, but at the same time, humans were able to follow up. It was not like suddenly humans are totally useless crap. They improved. Did they still beat AI? Maybe not, but it was definitely also helpful.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Back to our scenarios. We’re going to take the definitional extreme just for argument’s sake for scenarios. We’re going to talk about maybe what you were saying, ASI rather than full AGI, but like ASI. Again, artificial superintelligence as the extreme on the one hand. Let me talk about maybe the first scenario that would come to mind. Maybe we can call it the plateau scenario. All of this was great, but it was all smoke and mirrors. They were great at some cognition stuff. They’re a great tool. At some point, they’re going to hit a wall. Hallucinations are never going to be a thing of the past. We can’t fully trust them on really hardcore stuff. We’ll gain productivity enhancements. We’ll keep gaining those productivity enhancements, but at some point in time, we really won’t reach ASI. We really will be stuck with what we have. It’s a little bit like we get the next big thing, the next big spreadsheet, the next big internet, but it’s not going to change the whole world beyond just productivity, enhancements, and amazing tools that we have available to us that makes us much better. In that scenario, the winners will continue being fast adopters, probably small and medium businesses, because there won’t be a push for maximum speed either, so they’ll catch up at some point. Then AI native companies will be better companies than other companies, but not necessarily overall disruptors across the board. It’s not necessarily a new species of companies. It’s just companies that are a little bit better at doing stuff, which we also saw during the internet phenomenon and that first big push forward and then bubble, where we had some companies that were fundamentally different on how they operated. It took us another couple of decades for companies to be more and more digitally native along the way. Basically interesting, but it’s boring. It’s like, cool, we got tools, we got promised the world. What are the implications? All these companies that are worth trillions and trillions of dollars are not worth trillions and trillions of dollars. Because at some point we’ll face competition, commoditization. It will just be tools and platforms. They will not unlock that next stage. Therefore, this will have been a bubble, and likely it would be a hard landing to that bubble. That’s the implication.Bertrand Schmitt I would just say that, yes, I agree with you, but I would just say overall, even if it stopped today in terms of quality improvement, speed or stuff, or it barely improves, I still think we will have 10 years of madness just to leverage everything that we have today.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Understood, Bertrand. This is a scenario. I understand, but maybe we’re going to hit a wall, and we’re going to hit that wall next year, or we’re going to hit that wall in 2 years or whatever.Bertrand Schmitt Possibly. I’m just saying we still have 10 years of goodness from that big push in AI we experienced the past few years.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro Absolutely. Agreed, but it’s boring.Bertrand Schmitt It’s boring. It’s a plateau.Nuno Gonçalves Pedro It’s a plateau. The second one is more of something that we have AI, but humans in the loop are going to be critical along the way. The judgment work that we described earlier in the episode is going to be critical to everything that happens. It’s, I would call it the augmentation scenario. The AI will be a great augmentation tool for humans, but humans will never really quite stop being in the loop. Some of the gains that AI has are broadly distributed in society and in the startup, big corporation and small medium business world. Everyone will have access to them. We humans, are still very important. We have all these augmentation things, and AI is mostly benign. There will be a couple of issues, but honestly, at the end of the day, we’re just better. We’re better, faster, more data-driven, more factually current. We’re doing stuff faster, but humans

In this episode of the Behind the Knife Global Surgery Series, we take a closer look at the real-world complexity of global surgery partnerships between high-income institutions and partners in the Global South. Words like equity, bidirectionality, partnership, and decolonization are used often in global surgery—but what do they actually mean when funding, mobility, research access, publication opportunities, and institutional power are unequally distributed?Host Mike Mallah is joined by Dr. Hugo Stark from George Hospital in South Africa and Dr. Sydney Bertram from Emory for a candid discussion about the benefits and tensions of collaborations in an unequal world. Together, they explore how global surgery partnerships can create meaningful educational and clinical value, how good intentions can still reproduce unequal systems, and how surgeons can build partnerships that are locally useful, honest about power, and ultimately centered on better surgical care for patients.Hosts/Guests:- Mike M. Mallah, MD, FACS, FICSDirector of Global Surgery at Medical University of South Carolina@MikeMMallahMD@MUSCGlobalSurgmallahm@musc.edu- Hugo Stark, MDHead of Department - Surgery, George Hospital, Western Cape, South AfricaHead of Surgical Services, Central Karoo RegionSydney Bertram, MDGeneral Surgery Resident, Emory UniversityTrainee Advisory Council, Consortium of Universities for Global Health@Sydney_Bertram Learning objectives:• Describe how global surgery partnerships can provide educational, clinical, professional, and research value for both high-income and Global South partners.• Identify how asymmetries in funding, mobility, publication access, and institutional agenda-setting can create inequity within otherwise well-intentioned global surgery partnerships.• Discuss practical principles for ethical global surgery engagement, including centering local needs, avoiding extraction, building durable partnerships, and focusing on patient access to surgical decision-making.Please visit https://behindtheknife.org to access other high-yield surgical education podcasts, videos and more.  If you liked this episode, check out our recent episodes here: https://behindtheknife.org/listenBehind the Knife Premium: https://behindtheknife.org/premiumOral Board Review: https://behindtheknife.org/oral-boardOral Board Simulator: https://behindtheknife.org/oral-board/simulatorGeneral Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/general-surgery-oral-board-reviewTrauma Surgery Video Atlas: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/trauma-surgery-video-atlasDominate Surgery: A High-Yield Guide to Your Surgery Clerkship: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/dominate-surgery-a-high-yield-guide-to-your-surgery-clerkshipDominate Surgery for APPs: A High-Yield Guide to Your Surgery Rotation: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/dominate-surgery-for-apps-a-high-yield-guide-to-your-surgery-rotationVascular Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/vascular-surgery-oral-board-reviewColorectal Surgery Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/colorectal-surgery-oral-board-reviewSurgical Oncology Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/surgical-oncology-oral-board-reviewCardiothoracic Oral Board Review Course: https://behindtheknife.org/premium/cardiothoracic-surgery-oral-board-reviewOBGYN Oral Board Review Coures: https://behindtheknife.org/course/obgyn-oral-board-reviewEPA Playbook: https://behindtheknife.org/course/epa-playbookSurgical Instrument Flashcards: https://behindtheknife.org/course/surgical-instrument-flashcardsABSITE Review: https://behindtheknife.org/course/absite-2026-exam-reviewDownload our App:Apple App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/behind-the-knife/id1672420049Android/Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.btk.app&hl=en_US

Modern education ignores debate and instead relies upon indoctrination. This is a problem at universities across the world.https://mcclanahanacademy.comhttps://patreon.com/thebrionmcclanahanshowhttps://brionmcclanahan.com/supporthttp://learntruehistory.com

In part two of Red Eye Radio with Gary McNamara and Eric Harley, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development will “aggressively” crack down on colleges and universities that continue to offer race-based “affinity” housing. Often referred to as “affinity” housing, some universities offer special residence areas for students of specific racial or ethnic identities. Universities often tout these specialized housing options as a way to promote diversity, community, and belonging. Also the latest on the war with Iran as Houthi terrorists in Yemen claimed responsibility for the strikes on two Saudi oil tankers that were moving through the Red Sea on Wednesday. The U.S. and Iran have been trading attacks for more than a week, fueling instability in the Strait of Hormuz and driving Brent crude to nearly $99 a barrel after a roughly 16% gain last week. For more talk on the issues that matter to you, listen on radio stations across America Monday-Friday 12am-5am CT (1am-6am ET and 10pm-3am PT), download the RED EYE RADIO SHOW app, asking your smart speaker, or listening at RedEyeRadioShow.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

 Public and private universities alike are facing increasing financial strain with rising costs, limited funding and tuition already unaffordable for many. Now two of Oregon’s private universities have decided to merge, in large part to save money. Willamette University and Pacific University are the oldest colleges in Oregon and the entire Western U.S., predating Oregon statehood. Leaders of both universities say their institutions’ mission and values are aligned. They also say the merger won’t just save money but will “expand academic offerings, broaden access, and deepen the opportunities for students across the region.”    The structure Willamette and Pacific are pursuing is what’s known as a collegiate model, where multiple universities exist as part of a larger institution. The two universities will retain their names and campuses as part of what will likely be named the University of the Northwest. Pacific University President Jenny Coyle and Willamette University President Steve Thorsett join us to discuss the merger and  

Over the last decade, college football has undergone a dramatic transformation. Universities now have a growing financial stake in the game, blurring the line between college athletics and professional sports. Few people embody that shift better than Lane Kiffin. Read Nicole Auerbach's work: http://www.nauerbach.com/aboutFor a transcript of this episode: https://bit.ly/campusfiles-transcripts

In this episode, Dave and Jamison answer these questions: I stayed too long at my first company and now my career is ruined? Hi both, long time listener. (Since I graduated university 4 years ago actually and felt I could never find a job but listening to you guys made me feel not like such an outcast in our field.) I graduated in 2022. Didn't really apply around much and almost immediately accepted the full time offer from the company I did my internship with during my degree. And fast forward to middle of 2026… I am still here. I've long stopped growing as an engineer and have actually been stuck on a simple CLI tool for almost 4 years now with little to no cloud/backend/etcetera experience to show in my 5 year career. I don't feel I am desirable in the job market at all due to this and waited way too long to look for a job because I was comfortable and happy. I feel paralyzed (no need to put on your space therapist hats BUT some career advice would be wonderful!) (Also did I mention I am in Canada and want to move to Europe and live the rest of my life there but visa sponsorship with my level of experience is impossible? Maybe that'll be for my next question…) Thanks for all you do, cheers! I have a non-CS engineering degree, and am looking to transition into Software Engineering. I have the option of pursuing a degree with Tuition Reimbursement from my job, but am in a bit of a strange situation deciding which degree. Basically, I've figured that with my current Engineering background I could pursue either a second Bachelor's degree through Universities offering a “Post-Baccalaureate” program in Computer Science, or a Master's degree, with maybe only a slightly longer program to get the Master's as opposed to the Bachelor's. Otherwise the total length/cost of the programs would be roughly the same. I have heard though that it might not be a great idea to go into a Master's program unless you know what specifically you want to study. I am curious what you think would be more “hire-able” between the two options for someone pursuing the career change into Software Engineering?

AI is changing education, but are students relying on it too much? The University of Chicago Law School and Brown University are pushing back against AI-driven learning shortcuts, raising questions about cheating, critical thinking, and the future of higher education.

Dartmouth president Sian Beilock, a psychologist by training, made her name studying why people choke. Now she's applying those insights to one of the most scrutinized jobs in America. No pressure!   SOURCES: Sian Beilock, president of Dartmouth College.   RESOURCES: "Growing share of Americans say the U.S. higher education system is headed in the wrong direction," by Kim Parker (Pew Research Center, 2025). "Standardized Test Scores and Academic Performance at Ivy-Plus Colleges," by John N. Friedman, Bruce Sacerdote, Douglas O. Staiger, and Michele Tine (NBER, 2025). "Americans' Trust in One Another," by Laura Silver, Scott Keeter, Stephanie Kramer, Jordan Lippert, Sofia Hernandez Ramones, Alan Cooperman, Chris Baronavski, and Bill Webster (Pew Research Center, 2025). Choke: What the Secrets of the Brain Reveal About Getting It Right When You Have To, by Sian Beilock (2011)   EXTRAS: "Why Does Vanderbilt Keep Winning?" by Freakonomics Radio (2026). "'A Low Moment in Higher Education,'" by Freakonomics Radio (2024). "'If We're All in It for Ourselves, Who Are We?'" by Freakonomics Radio (2024). "Why We Choke Under Pressure (and How Not To)," by Freakonomics Radio (2018). Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.