Podcasts about universities

UA Alumnus Courtney Brown founded "Winners and Leaders" to help at-risk youth through mentoring and other organized services following trauma that plagued his own teen and young adult years. The organization is holding the third annual "Back2School" bash on August 16 with giveaways and other activities. winandlead911@yahoo.com330-760-7442

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

For many Nigerian students, graduation is a dream come true. But for many graduates, the excitement of earning a degree is quickly replaced by a new reality, the struggle to find a job.As technology, artificial intelligence, and the global workplace continue to evolve, employers are looking beyond certificates. They want practical skills, digital competence, critical thinking, and the ability to adapt.The question is: Are Nigerian universities keeping pace with these changes, or are they still preparing students for a job market that no longer exists?Join us in this episode of Nigeria Daily to find out.

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

What if the biggest battle of our time isn't political?What if it's psychological?In this wide-ranging conversation with journalist, author, researcher, Courtenay Turner, we connect the dots between technocracy, psychology, AI governance, education, propaganda, and the institutions shaping modern culture. From Tavistock and the evolution of psychology to AI voting, social engineering, transhumanism, and the regulatory infrastructure emerging around digital governance, we explore how systems of influence shape the way we think long before they shape the way we vote.We also dive into eugenics, the philosophical roots of modern psychology, education as behavioral conditioning, the promise—and peril—of artificial intelligence, and why discernment has become one of the most important survival skills of the 21st century.Watch on Odysee. Listen on podcast platforms everywhere.Part 2:danikatz.locals.comwww.patreon.com/danikatz All things Dani, including books, courses, coaching + consulting:www.danikatz.com Plus, schwag:danikatz.threadless.comFind Courtenay:Technocracy.news/store (book)Courtenay.show (link tree)Courtenayturner.substack.comGlowwithtallow.comShow NotesCourtenay's journey from actress and producer to investigative researcher.Why The Final Betrayal argues that technocracy is being built in real time.AI governance, digital identity, stablecoins, and the regulatory landscape.The CLARITY Act, the GENIUS Act, and concerns surrounding programmable money.Game B, technocracy, and cultural engineering.Tavistock Institute and the evolution of psychological influence.The historical relationship between psychology, occult traditions, and social engineering.Psychology, eugenics, and competing views of human nature.Universities, predictive modeling, and the rise of AI-driven governance.Why media literacy and discernment matter more than ever in an age of technological acceleration.

Mark Rodgers and Brad Copeland are joined by Pat Strathman, who was on the call for last night’s Wichita St. and Kansas mele last night in the TBT. What are the ramifications of the event for the TBT, the teams, and the Universities of which these players are affiliated? Is all publicity good publicity? Should the Buccaneers end the negotiation and sign Baker Mayfield to a deal?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us Fan MailTwo university boards. One historic moment for Michigan.Amir Makled is running for the University of Michigan Board of Regents. Shereef Akeel is running for the Wayne State University Board of Governors. Together, they represent something Michigan has never seen — and the Arab and Muslim community can't afford to sleep on it.These aren't symbolic campaigns. The U of M Board of Regents and the WSU Board of Governors control billions of dollars, set university policy, shape hiring decisions, and determine the future of hundreds of thousands of students across Michigan. And for too long, the people sitting in those seats haven't looked anything like the community that built this state.That changes now.In this episode of the MotivateMe313 Podcast, Amir Makled and Shereef Akeel come inside the boardroom and hold nothing back — their origin stories, the moment they decided to run, the pressure to downplay their Muslim identity on the campaign trail, the campus tensions around Muslim students and free speech that a board member can actually address, and the real talk about what these seats can and cannot change.This is the episode every Arab, Muslim, and Michigan voter needs to hear before Election Day. IN THIS EPISODE:Why most Michigan voters don't even know these board races exist — and why that has to changeThe representation gap: what the absence of Arab and Muslim voices has COST U of M and Wayne StateNavigating Muslim identity, Palestine solidarity activism, and campus free speech from the candidate's seatWhat a board member can ACTUALLY do about tuition, student debt, and DEI — and where the limitations areThe solidarity between two campaigns running at the same time with one shared missionWhat the political process revealed about power in Michigan they didn't expectA direct message to every young Arab and Muslim kid in Dearborn, Hamtramck, and Detroit who thinks the boardroom wasn't built for them Subscribe to OZ Media for more real talk on politics, community, and the stories Michigan needs to hear. Like this video if you believe Arab and Muslim voices belong in every boardroom.  Drop a comment — who are you voting for and why?  More at Ozmedia313.comFollow us on social media:- Instagram: @motivateme313 or @ozmedia313- Website: ozmedia313.com- Facebook: ozmedia313-TikTok: @ozmedia313-Apple Podcast: ozmedia-Spotify Podcast: ozmediaThis show was sponsored by:-The Family Doc https://thefamilydocmi.com/-Juice Box Juiceboxblend.com-Holy Bowly http://www.myholybowly.com-Wingfellas thewingfellas.com-Hanley International Academy https://www.hanleyacademy.com-Malek Al-Kabob malekalkabob.com-Bayt Al Mocha https://baytalmocha.com/-Chill Box https://www.chillboxstore.com/-Royal Kabob https://www.royalkabob.com/-GEE Preparatory Academy https://www.gee-edu.com/schools/geepreparatory/index#MotivateMe313 #OZMedia #ArabAmericanPolitics #MuslimRepresentation #Michigan #UofM #WayneState #ArabDetroit #Dearborn #Hamtramck #MuslimPolitics #HigherEducation #BoardOfRegents #BoardOfGovernors #AmirMakled #ShereefAkeel #MichiganPolitics #RepresentationMatters #DetroitPolitics #MuslimAmericans

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

A recent poll shows 75 percent of Massachusetts voters want AI regulations, a Pittsfield hospital is sued after a deadly outbreak of Legionnaires' disease last summer, and a new Western Massachusetts network for alums and students of Historically Black Colleges and Universities kicks off in Springfield -- it's our Massachusetts news roundtable!

Lester Kiewit speaks to Joshua Cox, the CEO and founder of Fix Forward, a non-profit social enterprise that creates opportunities for entrepreneurs from low-income communities. They discuss the challenges facing young people looking to find employment, and how to make a difference. Good Morning Cape Town with Lester Kiewit is a podcast of the CapeTalk breakfast show. This programme is your authentic Cape Town wake-up call. Good Morning Cape Town with Lester Kiewit is informative, enlightening and accessible. The team’s ability to spot & share relevant and unusual stories make the programme inclusive and thought-provoking. Don’t miss the popular World View feature at 7:45am daily. Listen out for #LesterInYourLounge which is an outside broadcast – from the home of a listener in a different part of Cape Town - on the first Wednesday of every month. This show introduces you to interesting Capetonians as well as their favourite communities, habits, local personalities and neighbourhood news. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Good Morning Cape Town with Lester Kiewit. Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays between 06:00 and 09:00 (SA Time) to Good Morning CapeTalk with Lester Kiewit broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/xGkqLbT or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/f9Eeb7i 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/@CapeTalkSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In times of deep uncertainty, the university needs to transform itself into an entrepreneurial entity to maintain long-term evolutionary fitness. Dynamic Universities (Cambridge University Press, 2026) explores how strategic, entrepreneurial leadership can help US higher education institutions thrive amid unprecedented challenges. Drawing on the dynamic capabilities' framework, David J. Teece and Sohvi Heaton provide a strategic roadmap to help university leaders identify emerging opportunities and threats, take decisive action, and sustain competitiveness. Through compelling case studies including Stanford and Berkeley and interviews with global university leaders, this book offers practical insights into managing complexity, fostering innovation, and building resilient academic ecosystems. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In times of deep uncertainty, the university needs to transform itself into an entrepreneurial entity to maintain long-term evolutionary fitness. Dynamic Universities (Cambridge University Press, 2026) explores how strategic, entrepreneurial leadership can help US higher education institutions thrive amid unprecedented challenges. Drawing on the dynamic capabilities' framework, David J. Teece and Sohvi Heaton provide a strategic roadmap to help university leaders identify emerging opportunities and threats, take decisive action, and sustain competitiveness. Through compelling case studies including Stanford and Berkeley and interviews with global university leaders, this book offers practical insights into managing complexity, fostering innovation, and building resilient academic ecosystems. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In times of deep uncertainty, the university needs to transform itself into an entrepreneurial entity to maintain long-term evolutionary fitness. Dynamic Universities (Cambridge University Press, 2026) explores how strategic, entrepreneurial leadership can help US higher education institutions thrive amid unprecedented challenges. Drawing on the dynamic capabilities' framework, David J. Teece and Sohvi Heaton provide a strategic roadmap to help university leaders identify emerging opportunities and threats, take decisive action, and sustain competitiveness. Through compelling case studies including Stanford and Berkeley and interviews with global university leaders, this book offers practical insights into managing complexity, fostering innovation, and building resilient academic ecosystems.

In times of deep uncertainty, the university needs to transform itself into an entrepreneurial entity to maintain long-term evolutionary fitness. Dynamic Universities (Cambridge University Press, 2026) explores how strategic, entrepreneurial leadership can help US higher education institutions thrive amid unprecedented challenges. Drawing on the dynamic capabilities' framework, David J. Teece and Sohvi Heaton provide a strategic roadmap to help university leaders identify emerging opportunities and threats, take decisive action, and sustain competitiveness. Through compelling case studies including Stanford and Berkeley and interviews with global university leaders, this book offers practical insights into managing complexity, fostering innovation, and building resilient academic ecosystems. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In times of deep uncertainty, the university needs to transform itself into an entrepreneurial entity to maintain long-term evolutionary fitness. Dynamic Universities (Cambridge University Press, 2026) explores how strategic, entrepreneurial leadership can help US higher education institutions thrive amid unprecedented challenges. Drawing on the dynamic capabilities' framework, David J. Teece and Sohvi Heaton provide a strategic roadmap to help university leaders identify emerging opportunities and threats, take decisive action, and sustain competitiveness. Through compelling case studies including Stanford and Berkeley and interviews with global university leaders, this book offers practical insights into managing complexity, fostering innovation, and building resilient academic ecosystems. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

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  

Universities are feeling hard-done-by, after government funding for in-school teacher training heavily favoured a new-comer headed at the time by the chair of the Teaching Council. The Teachers' Institute was allowed to triple its intake of school-based teacher trainees this year, while universities' attempts to grow were knocked back in what they say was a shambolic and messy process. Education correspondent John Gerritsen reports.

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

China's influence inside the United States may be far greater than most Americans realize. In this episode of The Tudor Dixon Podcast, Tudor Dixon sits down with Michael Lucci, Founder, CEO, and Chairman of State Armor, to examine how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is allegedly expanding its influence through election interference, higher education, critical infrastructure, birth tourism, and state-level infiltration. The conversation explores growing concerns over: China's alleged efforts to influence U.S. elections Birth tourism and the debate surrounding birthright citizenship CCP influence at American universities and research institutions National security risks involving data centers and critical infrastructure Chinese ownership near U.S. military installations Foreign influence in state governments and the judicial system Solar infrastructure, energy security, and cybersecurity vulnerabilities The Environmental Law Institute and environmental policy debates Media influence, propaganda, and America's response to China's global strategy Why state governments are becoming the front lines in protecting national security Tudor and Michael also discuss the broader geopolitical competition between the United States and China, the importance of safeguarding American institutions, and why many believe the country is entering a new era of strategic competition with the CCP.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

More than three years into the generative A.I. boom, higher education leaders are still asking the same question: how do we use this responsibly? Today's guest says it's time to shift from experimentation to practical implementation, and he revisits his own 2026 A.I. predictions to see how they're holding up.Cengage EVP & Chief Digital Officer, Darren Person, tells host Jason Altmire that A.I. for its own sake won't improve learning, measurable outcomes will. Person explains how human-in-the-loop tutoring tools are reshaping teaching, why he's skeptical of "AI can do everything" claims, and what schools should look for when vetting A.I. vendors.To learn more about Career Education Colleges & Universities, visit our website.

Editor-in-Chief of Campus Reform, Dr. Zach Marshall, talks with Gary about why more colleges and universities should change to three year degrees.

What does it take to build behaviour analysis in the middle of economic collapse, political instability, and war? In this episode of Behaviour Speak, Ben Reiman speaks with Christine Der Sarkissian, President of the Association for Behavior Analysis in Lebanon (ABAL), about the remarkable growth of ABA in Lebanon. They discuss parent advocacy, professional certification, culturally responsive practice, inclusion, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the challenges of delivering autism services during ongoing crisis. Whether you're interested in global behaviour analysis, autism services, cultural responsiveness, or systems change, this conversation offers valuable lessons in resilience and leadership. Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/x9mYHLNXy6c Continuing Education Credits BACB: 1.0 Ethics 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 According to Christine, what factor played the most foundational role in establishing ABA services in Lebanon? A. Government funding initiatives B. Universities creating ABA programs C. Parent advocacy and initiatives D. International insurance companies Question 2 Which challenge did Christine identify as one of the greatest barriers to expanding high-quality ABA services throughout Lebanon? A. A lack of interest from families B. Too many certified supervisors C. A shortage of supervisory-level behaviour analysts D. Excessive government regulation Question 3 Which practice best reflects the culturally responsive approach to ABA described by Christine? A. Using identical intervention procedures regardless of family culture B. Adapting intervention goals to align with family values, culture, and meaningful daily life C. Prioritizing standardized protocols over family preferences D. Limiting family involvement to reduce treatment interference Contact Christine LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/christine-der-sarkissian-6a667750/ Links: ABA Lebanon http://abalebanon.com/ https://www.instagram.com/abalebanon/ https://www.facebook.com/abalebanon/ Learn more about some of the great work being done by Lebanese Behaviour Analysts in these interviews: Behaviour Analysis in Lebanon and Qatar with Rola El Annan https://www.behaviourspeak.com/e/ep-94-behaviour-analysis-in-lebanon-and-qatar-with-rola-el-annan-med-bcba/ Threads Of Hope: Addressing Trauma Amid War and Civil Discord with Sawsan Razzouk https://www.behaviourspeak.com/e/episode-139threads-of-hope-addressing-trauma-amid-war-and-civil-discord-with-sawsan-razzouk-ma-bcba/ Safeguarding Vulnerable Children In The Arab World With Dr. Asmahan Saleh Khalil https://www.behaviourspeak.com/e/episode-200-safeguarding-vulnerable-children-in-the-arab-world-with-dr-asmahan-saleh-khalil/  

Bongani Bingwa speaks to Yusuf Cassim, Deputy Minister of Higher Education, about ongoing NSFAS funding delays, unpaid student allowances, and government's plans to build the next generation of South African academics. 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station. Bongani makes sense of the news, interviews the key newsmakers of the day, and holds those in power to account on your behalf. The team bring you all you need to know to start your day Thank you for listening to a podcast from 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 06:00 and 09:00 (SA Time) to Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa broadcast on 702: https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/36edSLV or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/zEcM35T Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 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/@radio7See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In case you missed it, this episode is a re-release of an amazing conversation with Dr. Christina Grant.Andre 3000 told us the South has something to say, and Dr. Christina Greer wants us to heed the lessons that Black women political leaders from the South are teaching us. Dr. Greer stops by the class to talk about her latest publication, “How to Build a Democracy. From Fannie Lou Hamer and Barbara Jordan to Stacey Abrams,” and what it means to grow beyond fear, to build upon foundations established by our ancestors, being prepared to thrive at Historically White Colleges and Universities, the importance of political tithing and not waiting for America to grow up fully–she may never.  How to Build a Democracy. From Fannie Lou Hamer and Barbara Jordan to Stacey Abrams https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/how-to-build-a-democracy/F34AB82F40A6FFD835D39C8AF46DA530 Instagram: @dr_cmgreerBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/teach-the-babies-w-dr-david-j-johns--6173854/support.

On today's episode we discuss the ins and outs of the European Union and how it structurally, institutionally and ideologically reinforces its own legitimacy through “civil society” within current and prospective member states.Our guest is Thomas Fazi.Fazi is the author of the book The European Propaganda Machine: The Dark Side of NGOs, Media and Universities (2026) - (published in Italian).Book description:A topic no one talks about: for the first time, the apparatus through which the European Union has built, financed, and implemented a widespread system of control over public discourse is dismantled piece by piece. Through a documented analysis of the flows of money to NGOs, media, and universities, the text shows how European public resources are being used to generate artificial consensus, marginalize dissent, and promote an integrationist ideology presented as neutral and inevitable. What emerges is a portrait of a largely co-opted “civil society,” a structurally dependent media, and an academia transformed into a vehicle for political legitimacy. This investigation raises fundamental questions about the state of democracy in Europe and the increasingly blurred lines between information, activism, and propaganda.Thomas Fazi is a critically-acclaimed writer and journalist. His books include The Battle for Europe: How an Elite Hijacked a Continent — and How We Can Take It Back (Pluto Press, 2014), Reclaiming the State: A Progressive Vision of Sovereignty for a Post-Neoliberal World (co-authored with Bill Mitchell; Pluto Press, 2017) and The Covid Consensus: The Global Assault on Democracy and the Poor — A Critique from the Left (co-authored with Toby Green; 2023). His latest book, published in Italian, is The European Propaganda Machine: The Dark Side of NGOs, Media and Universities (2026). His articles have appeared in numerous online and printed publications. He is a columnist for the British magazine UnHerd and the American magazine Compact.Episode music:”სმა” - მინდა და ვთხრი

Do the universities have a future (and why does the tech sector hate them?)? For info, link and to support us: https://culturepowerpolitics.org/2026/07/16/universities-in-crisis-part-1/

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?

[X] SB – Elon Musk on America's record US could have taken over the world   Media. Universities. Government. Corporations. Medicine. [SEGMENT 2-2] Lack of Trust 2 [X] SB – Pres Trump 4 Part 1 CCP 2020 CCP largest compromise of election data 220M US voter files Lots of data of voters.    Once trust falls below a critical threshold, people begin questioning everything. Even true statements. That's why institutional credibility is so difficult to rebuild. Trust doesn't disappear because of one lie.   Rather than trying to prove every allegation, organize the discussion around five investigative buckets. Foreign intelligence. Federal agencies. Election administration. Technology vulnerabilities. Media behavior. Whether listeners agree or disagree with Trump's conclusions, each category raises different questions. Foreign influence is different from domestic fraud. Data access is different from vote manipulation. Institutional bias is different from criminal conspiracy. Perhaps the funniest aspect of modern politics isn't the scandal. It's the speed. Within minutes of Trump's announcement... Commentators already knew. They knew the documents were meaningless. They knew the conclusions were false. They knew the speech was dangerous. Remarkable. Most Americans can't finish reading IKEA instructions before admitting defeat. Cable news apparently reviews classified intelligence at warp speed. It's less journalism than psychic hotline. They skipped the investigation and went straight to the verdict. Imagine a detective arriving at a crime scene saying, "I don't need fingerprints. I've already tweeted who did it." That has become our political culture. Segment One "Hunter Becomes Hunted" One of history's favorite plot twists. The hunter becomes the prey. For nearly a decade Trump was investigated by nearly everyone. Special counsels. Congress. State prosecutors. District attorneys. Leaks. Anonymous officials. Television panels. It was like watching one man chased by every goose in America. Now imagine the psychological adjustment if investigators themselves become subjects of investigation. Whether or not wrongdoing is ultimately established, the reversal alone changes the political dynamic. That's fertile ground for comedy. The same people who loved investigations suddenly discover privacy. 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.

The disruption isn't coming. It arrived with dates attached. July 1 brought the USMCA review, and Canada got left in the cold. July 20 marks the end of the Section 301 investigations. July 24 is when the Section 122 tariffs, currently capped at 10% and set to expire, have no automatic renewal. Q2 wasn't a quarter to review. It was a quarter to survive.In this host-only Q2 review, Jan Griffiths and Tom Roberts trade the guest chair for a hard look at a quarter that refused to sit still. Trade policy moved. Commodity prices moved. The talent question moved. And underneath all of it sits the problem QAD has named for years: manufacturers don't have a data problem, they have an execution problem.The trade math keeps splitting into smaller pieces. Companies may soon have to separate US and Canadian content, then carry that split through every tier of the chain, where country-of-origin data was already hard to trust. Commodities pull the same thread. With the Strait of Hormuz closed at the time of recording, oil spiked, and aluminum, resin, and plastics moved with it. Tom describes tier ones already using AI to catch index swings against exploded BOMs and recover costs that were once hidden in one analyst's spreadsheet. The data was always there. The speed wasn't.Then there's resiliency, the word every leader defines differently. Jan and Tom settle on a working one: know where your risk sits, and be ready when something breaks. The Novelis fire, a single Nylon 12 plant, an earthquake that takes out paint for the F-150, none of these are hypothetical, and AI now lets a team model that exposure across a region before it lands. The quarter closed on the people who inherit it all. Universities call AI cheating. The employers hiring those same graduates expect it on day one. That gap is real, and it starts to close on a plant floor, not behind a screen.Q2 proved the old playbook can't keep pace. The leaders who win the back half won't wait for stability that isn't coming. They'll have built the data, the scenarios, and the bench before the next headline makes the decision for them.Themes Discussed in This EpisodeUSMCA and the cost of a 10-year breakupSection 301 and Section 122: the tariff deadlines that matterSplitting US and Canadian content across every tierWhy do what-if scenarios decide who holds the marginCommodity volatility and index-based cost recoveryUsing AI to model geopolitical risk in real timeResiliency: knowing where the risk actually sitsPreparing the next generation for an AI-first plant floorThis podcast is powered by QAD RedZone.About Your HostsJan GriffithsJan is the host and producer of the Auto Supply Chain Champions Podcast and The Automotive Leaders Podcast. A former automotive manufacturing and supply chain executive, Jan is recognized as a Champion for Culture Change in the automotive industry. She brings direct, grounded conversations to leaders navigating execution, disruption, and transformation across the global automotive ecosystem.Tom Roberts (Co-host)Tom is Co-host of the Auto Supply Chain Champions Podcast and Vice President of Strategic Industry Development at QAD. He works closely with automotive and industrial manufacturers to close the gap between insight and execution, helping leaders move from visibility to systems of action that drive real operational outcomes.Mentioned in the Episode:Building the Next Generation of Supply Chain Leaders with Professor Leah Wolf Episode Highlights[02:15] The USMCA Cold Shoulder: The July 1 review signaled the US has little interest in keeping Canada and Mexico together, and this breakup will be bumpy.[03:33] The Dates That Decide Q3: July 20 and July 24 bring Section 301 and Section 122 to a head, with 12.5% duties on 46 countries in play.[05:23] Splitting Content Across the Tiers: Separating US and Canadian content means multiplying already-hard country-of-origin data through every supplier tier.[06:52] What ETL Actually Means: Tom breaks down extract, transform, load in plain terms, and why clean data decides your tariff exposure.[11:00] The Spreadsheet Nobody Can Read: AI can flag index movements for cost recovery instead of trusting the one analyst who understands the file.[12:10] Resiliency Starts With Risk: Know where your exposure sits and have a plan ready before the next plant fire, earthquake, or closed strait.[14:51] From Failed Pilots to Real Wins: AI pilots succeed when they start with a known problem and a defined outcome, not "let's apply AI and see."[17:45] Build the Bench on the Plant Floor: Students need real plants and real AI tools, closing the gap between how they learn and how they'll be expected to work.Top Quotes[06:33] Tom Roberts: " Clean data is going to be incredibly important with those product codes, product classifications to understand what is actually exposed to tariffs, what's not, and I think AI is gonna play a big part in helping to automate some of the cleanup and transformation. "[12:10] Jan Griffiths: "Resiliency is really, step one is understanding where your risk is and being ready when something breaks."If this episode resonated, share it with a fellow automotive leader and subscribe to the Auto Supply Chain Champions Podcast, where we're closing the gap between insight and action across the global automotive supply chain.Follow the Auto Supply Chain Champions Podcast for real conversations with leaders who are making hard choices, focusing their bets, and leading with intent.

David Smith explains his book “Wokicide,” arguing that “woke” (critical social justice theory rooted in critical theory and postmodernism) persists in universities and schools because education lacks quality control, not because of politics. He proposes applying ISO 9001 and HACCP-style quality assurance to K–12 and universities: validated curriculum specifications, independent expert panels, hazard analysis, audits (scheduled and targeted), corrective action, and continuous improvement. A central Workplace Improvement Notice (WIN) system would let staff and even parents file tracked complaints with guaranteed responses, replacing DEI/unconscious-bias training with “deprogramming” modules and prioritizing evidence and accountability. Smith says QA would stop unvalidated ideological drift and is affordable by redirecting existing DEI-related spending.00:00 Intro and Two-Part Talk00:58 Why Woke Persists01:30 Education Lacks QA02:10 Validation Over Ideology04:53 Defining Woke Origins06:35 From Civil Rights to Overreach07:43 Flawed Woke Reasoning10:02 How Woke Spreads11:16 Equity Outcomes and Activism13:33 Deconstruction Playbook17:50 Woke Hall of Fame21:39 Perfect Storm in Education25:42 QA Solution Framework27:41 ISO 9001 and HACCP29:42 Authority and Adoption30:55 Four Phases Implementation33:35 Validation and Hazard Analysis34:47 Audits Monitoring Corrective Action37:09 Aggressive Feedback Loops39:05 WIN Notice Explained41:41 Curriculum Content Validation43:12 Audits in K-12 Schools44:53 K-12 QA Wrap Up45:47 Universities as the Source47:29 University Validation Hurdles50:30 University Auditing Red Flags51:58 Objections and Pushback57:12 Failure Modes and Fixes59:39 Cost and Staffing Reality01:02:08 Closing Q&A and Next StepsAmazon Kindle version: Wokicide: Pest Control for Education: https://a.co/d/0d0YeApM========Slides, summaries, references, and transcripts of my podcasts: https://tomn.substack.com/p/podcast-summariesMy Linktree: https://linktr.ee/tomanelson1

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.0:21 - Australia plans to defund universities that don't stop their antisemitism. Should Canada?, by Harrison Lowman9:36 - Canadians' trust in media keeps falling—and no wonder, by Peter MenziesThis 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.

How did UK universities reach their current catastrophic condition? For info, link and to support us: https://culturepowerpolitics.org/2026/07/16/universities-in-crisis-part-1/

How have universities changed in the eras of Fordism, post-Fordism and Platform Capitalism? How has the intersection of this history with the politics of neoliberalism and financialisation brought the entire sector to the brink of catastrophe? For info, links and to support us: https://culturepowerpolitics.org/2026/07/16/universities-in-crisis-part-2/

This episode walks through a complete nine-module course on starting and running a single-person business with AI — available free, with step-by-step videos, copy-and-paste AI prompts, and downloadable tools in every module.Get the course here: https://businessisgood.com/starting-a-single-person-business-the-complete-free-course/The course covers defining the problem you solve, building your first product, setting up infrastructure for $32, writing your first marketing post and getting your first clients, building a 30-day content strategy with AI, establishing referral and content funnels, running Meta ads without an agency, and applying the Simple Six framework for compounding growth.AI will create more million-dollar single-person businesses than ever before. It eliminates the barriers that used to require a team — websites, email marketing, content production, ad copy. Whether you love AI or hate it, those using it have a massive time and money advantage.Most young people will need to make their own jobs. Universities in Canada are years behind — their industrial-age structures can't build curriculum fast enough, and many tenured professors refuse to include AI. Students finish four-year degrees already behind peers who spent that time building and learning to leverage these tools.This course is useful for anyone starting a business, running one, or working for someone else. The fundamentals don't change: what you sell, how you sell it, how you deliver it, how you grow. The tools evolve, but the framework is permanent.All nine modules with videos, prompts, and downloads are linked in the show notes. Start at Module 1.Connect with Chris Cooper:Website - https://businessisgood.com/

Components and beef on dairy are the strong themes in this interview. We dive into a farm's true net revenue, historic high beef prices and future items to keep an eye on. Dairy Stream host, Joanna Guza, and guest, Dr. Megan Roberts, discuss the following topics:  Structural shifts occurring now compared to 5-10 years ago Diversification in dairy changing baseline stability Three items to note on your milk check Calculating a farm's ‘true' net revenue Hedging strategies Beef on dairy, herd rebuild Cost of purchasing vs raising a replacement heifer vs crossbred calf Less cull cows, what does the next 12–18-month dairy cycle projection Keeping an eye on in 2026 and into 2027 About the guest Dr. Megan Roberts is a seasoned agricultural economist at Compeer Financial, bringing experience in farm economics, agribusiness education and policy analysis. With deep roots in agriculture, Megan combines academic expertise and hands-on farming experience to provide real-world insights that help farmers navigate economic challenges and opportunities. Before joining Compeer, Megan spent years teaching agricultural economics and business in higher education, including leadership roles in the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system and as an Extension educator at the University of Minnesota. She holds a doctorate in agricultural education from Texas A&M University, along with a master's and bachelor's degree in agriculture from the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities. Beyond academia, Megan is a farmer herself, living on a farrow-to-finish hog, corn and soybean farm in southern Minnesota with her husband and son. Growing up on a dairy farm and now co-managing her family's operation, she understands the day-to-day realities of farming, giving her a unique perspective that blends economic theory with practical application. Megan is a regular speaker at industry events and published author on farm business strategies and ag policy. Her ability to break down complex economic trends into actionable insights makes her a trusted resource for today's farmers and agribusiness professionals. This is sponsored by Compeer Financial.   Compeer Financial is proud partner of Dairy Stream.  Learn more about Dairy Stream sponsorship. This podcast is produced by the Voice of Milk, a collaboration of individual dairy organizations working to improve the future of dairy farm families. Become a sponsor, share an idea or feedback by emailing podcast@dairyforward.com.  *Recorded July 6

In this conversation from 2023, Matt speaks with Mark Mercer about academic freedom, the changing mission of universities themselves, and what role faculty, administrators, and students should play in shaping the future of the institution.  References: Mark's Interview in C2C Journal: https://c2cjournal.ca/2023/05/confronting-the-post-academic-university-in-conversation-with-mark-mercer/   Peter March at St. Mary's: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/students-protest-prof-who-posted-cartoons-1.623017  Kathleen Lowrey at University of Alberta: https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/u-of-a-professor-says-she-was-dismissed-over-views-that-biological-sex-trumps-transgender-identity-for-policy-decisions  Tomáš Hudlický at Brock University: https://niagaraindependent.ca/remembering-professor-tomas-hudlicky-and-how-poorly-brock-university-treated-him/  The Chicago Principles: https://provost.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/documents/reports/FOECommitteeReport.pdf   

Universities will be required to develop definitions of racism, including antisemitism, Islamophobia and prejudice against Indigenous people, under changes that come into effect next year. It coincides with hearings of the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion where Jewish students have detailed their experiences on campus.Universities will be required to develop definitions of racism, including antisemitism, Islamophobia and prejudice against Indigenous people, under changes that come into effect next year.It coincides with hearings of the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion where Jewish students have detailed their experiences on campus.

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.

Universities will be required to develop definitions of racism, including antisemitism, Islamophobia and prejudice against Indigenous people, under changes that come into effect next year. It coincides with hearings of the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion, where Jewish students have detailed their experiences on campus. - अस्ट्रेलियाका युनिभर्सिटीहरूले यहुदीमाथि हुने भेदभाव वा एन्टिसेमिटिजम्, त्यस्तै मुसलमान विरोधी विचार वा गतिविधि इस्लामोफोबिया तथा फर्स्ट नेसन्स समुदायप्रति हुने पूर्वाग्रहसहित जातीय विभेदका विभिन्न स्वरूपहरूलाई परिभाषित गर्नु अनिवार्य बनाइएको छ। यी नयाँ मापदण्डहरू अर्को वर्षदेखि लागू हुनेछ। नयाँ व्यवस्थाअनुसार युनिभर्सिटीहरूले एन्टिसेमिटिजम्को कुनै एउटा निश्चित परिभाषा अनिवार्य रूपमा अपनाउनुपर्ने छैन। बरु, उनीहरूले आफ्नै परिभाषा विकास गर्नुपर्नेछ। एक रिपोर्ट।Subscribe to the SBS Nepali podcast here.You can listen to SBS Nepali's live broadcast every Tuesday and Thursday at 2 pm via SBS South Asian on digital radio, on television channel 305, through the SBS Audio app, on SBS On Demand, or via our website.You can also follow SBS Nepali on social media: Facebook, Instagram and X (@SBS Nepali) - हाम्रा थप अडियो प्रस्तुतिहरू पोडकास्टका रूपमा उपलब्ध छन्। यो नि:शुल्क सेवा प्रयोग गर्न तपाईंले आफ्नो नाम दर्ता गर्नु पर्दैन। पोडकास्टमा सामाग्री उपलब्ध हुनासाथ सुन्न यहाँ थिच्नुहोस्।एसबीएस नेपालीको प्रत्यक्ष प्रसारण हरेक मङ्गलवार र बिहीवार दिउँसो २ बजे SBS South Asian मा डिजिटल रेडियोमार्फत, आफ्नो टेलिभिजनको च्यानल ३०५ मा, SBS Audio एपमार्फत, SBS On Demand मा वा हाम्रो वेबसाइटबाट सुन्न सक्नुहुन्छ।साथै हामी सोसल मिडिया प्लेटफर्महरू फेसबुक, इन्स्टाग्राम र एक्स मा पनि रहेका छौं SBS Nepali का नाममा।

Universities will be required to develop definitions of racism, including antisemitism, Islamophobia and prejudice against Indigenous people, under changes that come into effect next year. It coincides with hearings of the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion where Jewish students have detailed their experiences on campus.Universities will be required to develop definitions of racism, including antisemitism, Islamophobia and prejudice against Indigenous people, under changes that come into effect next year.It coincides with hearings of the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion where Jewish students have detailed their experiences on campus.

The Cybercrime Magazine Podcast brings you daily cybercrime news on WCYB Digital Radio, the first and only 7x24x365 internet radio station devoted to cybersecurity. Stay updated on the latest cyberattacks, hacks, data breaches, and more with our host. Don't miss an episode, airing every half-hour on WCYB Digital Radio and daily on our podcast. Listen to today's news at https://soundcloud.com/cybercrimemagazine/sets/cybercrime-daily-news. Brought to you by our Partner, Evolution Equity Partners, an international venture capital investor partnering with exceptional entrepreneurs to develop market leading cyber-security and enterprise software companies. Learn more at https://evolutionequity.com

In this episode of Tech Unscripted Season 3, leaders Dr. José-Marie Griffiths and Dr. Kristina Johnson discuss how artificial intelligence is reshaping higher education across learning, research, and campus operations. They explore infrastructure needs like data modernization, emerging teaching and assessment methods, and the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and ethics. The conversation highlights practical steps universities can take—such as building AI-ready data systems, encouraging transparency in AI use, and preparing students with adaptability and agent-based skills—while warning about widening institutional and student divides without equitable access.

America's healthcare shortages across nursing and allied health roles are reaching a critical point, with a projected shortage of nearly three million workers across all healthcare roles in just the next few years. Today's guest, Tess Michaels, the founder and CEO of Clasp, joins host Jason Altmire to discuss how her organization is working to address those shortages through scholarships and employer partnerships. Clasp connects employers and students by offering tuition repayment benefits in exchange for a commitment to work for that employer after graduation, reducing turnover and recruitment costs for businesses while lowering the financial risk of training for high-earning healthcare fields. Jason and Tess also discuss how new federal student loan caps may threaten access to advanced healthcare degrees.To learn more about Career Education Colleges & Universities, visit our website.

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.

If you have a child in college — or are planning on sending one — this new report will terrify you. A bombshell new FIRE study just analyzed 850 million campaign donations from 100,000+ professors at 55 top universities. The verdict: the average faculty member's politics sit to the right of Bernie Sanders by a hair — and nearly half of conservative professors are too afraid to speak up in their own classrooms.

It's a hard time to run a university: public trust is low, political pressure is high, and finances are fragile. But Daniel Diermeier, who trained as a political scientist, has Vanderbilt humming. How? He says the key is choosing magnets over wedges.   SOURCES: Daniel Diermeier, chancellor of Vanderbilt University.   RESOURCES: "Higher Ed's New Crisis Managers," by Lee Gardner (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2026). "Professors Need to Diversify What They Teach," by Jon Shields, Yuval Avnur, and Stephanie Muravchik (Persuasion, 2025). "A Call for Constructive Engagement," (American Association of Colleges and Universities, 2025). "2020 Statement on Anthropology and Human Rights," (American Anthropological Association, 2020). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, by Michelle Alexander (2010). "Kalven Committee: Report on the University's Role in Political and Social Action," (The University of Chicago, 1967).   EXTRAS: Sign up here to pre-screen our new video show. "'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). "Do Boycotts Work?" by Freakonomics Radio (2016). Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.