Podcast appearances and mentions of Bernie Sanders

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fmWhat if the Democratic establishment could take the wind out of the sails of the left wing insurgency by…giving in to progressives on their most morally resonant and popular issue?In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss: * The moral and political advantages of Medicare for All as an abstract concept, and how health care had become the motive force driving the growth of the Sanders movement;* Why no plan to open up Medicare to all beneficiaries has ever become law, and who's principally responsible;* How the Bernie Sanders plan came into existence, and what it would take to get a version of it enacted without accidentally blowing up the health care system.Then, even if this is a good idea on the merits, would it serve the political purpose of dialing down the factional war? Do progressive insurgents want single payer health care or do they want the issue to run on? Do they want policy wins or do they want to take over the Democratic Party? Is another truce, like the one Joe Biden forged in 2020 with Sanders and his allies possible? And would it hold even if a consensus left-center agenda didn't drive Democrats back into full control of government?Answers are available in full to listeners—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed.Further reading:* WE HAVE A YOUTUBE PAGE NOW! You can watch this episode in full there, and we'll be rolling out new subscription options over the coming weeks. Hit like, subscribe, and all the other buttons.* Brian's original case: Why the Democratic establishment should surrender to the left on Medicare for all. * Matt's blueprint for a center-left counterinsurgency. * Greg Casar: “In the past, there were some progressives, including people I've been friends with for a long time who used to say, I'd rather see you lose righteously than win politically and strategically. And I've learned to respectfully disagree with those people. We can't afford to lose anymore because the cost of losing is just so high.”

Troy Jackson locks down the nomination to replace Graham Platner in Maine, Wisconsin's gubornatorial primary devolves into chaos as the governor wades in with an unexpected endorsement, and Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rally in Michigan with Abdul El-Sayed, who's locked in a heated race with Haley Stevens. Jon, Tommy, and Lovett discuss all the latest from this summer's wild Democratic primaries, Donald Trump's embarrassing showing at the World Cup final, the deadly escalation of war with Iran, and a recent slate of ICE killings that show nothing has gotten better at the Department of Homeland Security — it's just gotten quieter.For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@crooked.com

Bill welcomes former Wisconsin Democratic Party chair Ben Wikler to discuss his new book, "This Is the Plan: How to End America's Meltdown and Save Democracy," and Wisconsin's political arc from La Follette-era progressivism to Scott Walker's rollback and a comeback under Gov. Tony Evers. Wikler argues the most effective political work is grassroots, trust-based conversations that target persuadable and low-propensity voters, noting how tiny margins can decide outcomes. He contends Democrats must prioritize state-level races—governors, legislatures, attorneys general, secretaries of state, and especially elected state Supreme Courts—to set election rules and defend democracy against Trump-era threats. Wikler describes building a year-round “permanent campaign” infrastructure in Wisconsin and outlines a step-by-step roadmap from weekly local elections through 2026 battleground-state trifectas, advancing the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, and pursuing major federal democracy reforms in 2029.You can order your copy of Ben's great new book at Bookshop.org. Today Bill highlights the work of Run For Something that has worked with over 200,000 people to run for office. More information at RunForSomething.net.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of The Joe Concha Show, Joe breaks down the dangerous consequences of extreme anti-ICE rhetoric from politicians like AOC and Hakeem Jeffries following the detonation of an explosive device outside a New York City federal building. He explores the Democratic party's shift towards socialism, praising Bill Maher for bucking the radical left and even admitting he'd consider voting for JD Vance. Joe also draws a hilarious parallel between The Dark Knight Rises villain Bane and the modern socialist agenda, roasts Gavin Newsom for a gaffe where he claimed he "can't read", and calls out the blatant hypocrisy of "man of the people" Bernie Sanders flying private.

The Morning XTRA with Tug and Los delivers conservative talk on the biggest political, cultural, and news stories of the day. Smart analysis, unapologetic opinions, and real conversations every weekday morning. Every weekday from 6a to 10a! The 6 o'clock hour is brought to you by Subaru of Gwinnett The left is in a nuclear war with itself What is up with these people being so okay with Nazis? Atlanta's ONLY All Conservative News & Talk Station.: https://www.xtra1063.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Morning XTRA with Tug and Los delivers conservative talk on the biggest political, cultural, and news stories of the day. Smart analysis, unapologetic opinions, and real conversations every weekday morning. Every weekday from 6a to 10a! Tug and Los discuss the growing divisions within the Democratic Party, why they believe the Left is increasingly at war with itself, and what a potential Kamala Harris–Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ticket could mean for the 2028 election. The guys also welcome radio legend Neal Boortz and Republican U.S. Senate nominee Mike Collins to the show, breaking down the latest political battles in Washington and Georgia. On today's show:• The culture war is far from over• Anna Paulina Luna and Tug find common ground on Chinese visa policy• David Hogg's support of the Democratic Socialists of America• Why is the Left willing to overlook Nazi symbolism?• Western Society is on the ropes in Europe• What today's Democratic Party says about the future of American politics Watch The Morning Xtra every weekday from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. on the Xtra 106.3 YouTube or listen on the Xtra 106.3 App

The veteran Senator was in town on Monday to rally for Flanagan. Analysis on the Democratic Senate race from Blois Olson on The WCCO Morning News.

The veteran Senator was in town on Monday to rally for Flanagan. Analysis on the Democratic Senate race from Blois Olson on The WCCO Morning News.

Welcome back to The Majority Report On today's program: Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez travel to Michigan to rally for Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed and House candidate Will Lawrence. Bernie and AOC both emphasized the $50M in dark money being spent on Haley Stevens' campaign. AOC asks if anyone believes that this money does not come with expectations from the donors. Bernie says this Senate race is not between Stevens and El-Sayed but El-Sayed and the billionaire class. Kira Ganga Kieffer, visiting Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at Fairfield University, joins the program for a conversation about her book, "Unvaccinated Under God: Religion and Vaccine Hesitancy in Modern America". In the Fun Half: Bhaskar Sunkara says on Interesting Times with Ross Douthat that he wants to recover the optimism the left once had about America and reclaim narratives about racism. The Tate brothers are arrested in Miami and extradited to the United Kingdom where they are wanted for rape and human trafficking charges. Donald Trump tries to shoehorn himself into Spain's world cup celebration. Trump is very nonchalant about the three (that we know of) servicemembers that were killed by Iranian drone strikes over the weekend, The Wall Street Journal reports on a $50M "experiment" Israel is undertaking to change public perception of the apartheid state. all that and more. Tell your Senators to block the NDAA until it is stripped of the proposal to integrate U.S. and Israeli militaries. To connect and organize with your local ICE rapid response team visit ICERRT.com The Congress switchboard number is (202) 224-3121. You can use this number to connect with either the U.S. Senate or the House of Representatives. Follow us on TikTok here: https://www.tiktok.com/@majorityreportfm Check us out on Twitch here: https://www.twitch.tv/themajorityreport Find our Rumble stream here: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Check out our alt YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/majorityreportlive Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the AM Quickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! https://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: https://majority.fm/app Go to https://JustCoffee.coop and use coupon code majority to get 10% off your purchase Check out today's sponsors: DELETEME: Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to www.joindeleteme.com/MAJORITY and use promo code MAJORITY at checkout. BLUELAND: Get 15% off your first order by going to Blueland.com/MAJORITY. ROCKETMONEY: Let Rocket Money help you reach your financial goals faster: RocketMoney.com/MAJORITY SUNSET LAKE CBD: Use coupon code "Left Is Best" (all one word) for 20% off of your entire order at SunsetLakeCBD.com.  Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech On Instagram: @MrBryanVokey Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on YouTube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.

Dean Karayanis, member of Rush Limbaugh's highly overrated staff and New York sun columnist, cuts through the news of a weird week to deliver an unfiltered analysis of current political events, media narratives, and the state of conservative commentary. Dean breaks down President Trump's recent speech on election security and the SAVE Act, offering a candid critique of its delivery, messaging, and strategic focus. He explores why mainstream media miscasts conservative arguments while highlighting the pitfalls of punditry that prioritize clout over principle. As a result, old-school liberals like Van Jones and Bill Maher are facing an insurrection from what they call far-left and communists respectively because young people really believe what they were taught by demagogues like Bernie Sanders, Mr. Abdul El-Sayed, and J.B. “Just Blubber” Pritzker. Beyond election integrity, the episode touches on Iran, the backlash against people of Greek descent who ask Hollywood to live up to its promise of “representation” in Christopher Nolan's “The Odyssey,” and the importance of holding leaders accountable.

The FBI just stopped investigating ICE agent shootings. A border commander confessed he lied under oath. Maine's Senate seat just got very interesting. In this episode: • FBI will no longer investigate when ICE shoots someone — DHS, the agency that employs the shooter, now decides if it was justified • 24 people shot by immigration agents since Trump returned to office, 6 are dead — nearly all were inside vehicles and were not ICE targets • Tom Homan told two lies about body cameras for ICE agents • Border Commander Greg Bovino confessed in federal court that he lied under oath about firing tear gas at peaceful protesters • Johan Durán Guerrero was killed by an ICE agent with a documented history of domestic violence and death threats against women • Maine Senate: Graham Platner is out; Bernie Sanders-endorsed Troy Jackson now likely faces Susan Collins • Trump endorsed Mike Lindell for Minnesota Governor — Lindell is registered to vote in Texas Key figures covered: Tom Homan, Greg Bovino, Johan Durán Guerrero, Troy Jackson, Susan Collins, Graham Platner, Mike Lindell, Donald Trump

Lion's Choice and Bernie Miklasz - h2 full 2104 Mon, 20 Jul 2026 20:03:08 +0000 tzRDJdsUPu20tLgUbPZccPnyLp9y62Ht comedy,religion & spirituality,society & culture,news,government The Dave Glover Show comedy,religion & spirituality,society & culture,news,government Lion's Choice and Bernie Miklasz - h2 The Dave Glover Show has been driving St. Louis home for over 20 years. Unafraid to discuss virtually any topic, you'll hear Dave and crew's unique perspective on current events, news and politics, and anything and everything in between. © 2025 Audacy, Inc. Comedy Religion & Spirituality Society & Culture News Government https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A

AOC hit the campaign trail in Michigan over the weekend alongside Sen. Bernie Sanders. She's rallying for Abdul El-Sayed in his race against Congresswoman Haley Stevens, but is there subtext of an AOC 2028 bid? Meanwhile, the Vance-Rubio succession race is getting spicier. Polls show Vance at the forefront, but there's only one poll that matters in the White House: President Trump's. And, how the new Christopher Nolan's “The Odyssey” became the latest site of the culture wars.   For more news and analysis, subscribe to the Playbook newsletter: politico.com/playbook 

The vision of a gateway to Heaven at Penuel is an important moment in Jacob's life, and it invites us to think about the “thin spaces” in our lives where we feel close to God. His statement, “Surely the presence of the Lord is in this place, and I did not know it,” can also invite us to be attentive to the serendipitous experiences of God that we might miss if we are not open to them.   Reflection Questions:1. Can you remember a time or place when you felt especially close to God? What made that experience meaningful?2. How does Jacob's story remind you that God's grace is present even in seasons of fear, failure, or uncertainty?3. Where might God be inviting you to recognize a “thin space” in your everyday life this week?Find out more at HydeParkUMC.org/NextSteps

Bernie Fratto kicks off the show previewing the highly anticipated World Cup final before opening up the Midnight Hour with 3 hot button debates: Are the ESPYS still legit? Should the World Cup to expand to 64 teams? And with a vote on permanent Daylight Savings Time looming, is that actually what people actually want? Plus, Bernie breaks down Victor Wembanyama's $51 million contract sacrifice, a brand new Fantasy Files, and the last World of Soccer before the grand finale!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

With no end in sight, is the war with Iran becoming untenable? Plus, feeling the Bern? After Graham Platner's implosion, are Bernie Sanders' picks igniting a Democratic civil war? All that and more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ralph welcomes back his old running mate, Native American activist, Winona LaDuke, who has devoted her life to advocating for Indigenous control of their homelands, natural resources, and cultural practices to talk about her latest incarnation: hemp farmer. Then, we'll speak to Hal Weitzman, from the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, about how Elon Musk's feud with Delaware may transform corporate America. Plus, we tick off Robert Reich's ten policy prescriptions the Democratic Party should fight for to beat the GOP in the upcoming midterms.Winona LaDuke is an activist, economist, and author, who has devoted her life to advocating for Indigenous control of their homelands, natural resources, and cultural practices. She is also a two-time vice-presidential candidate with Ralph Nader. Ms. LaDuke lives and works on the White Earth Ojibwe reservation in northern Minnesota, where she runs Winona's Hemp & Heritage Farm. She is also a member of the Indigenous Hemp & Cannabis Farmer's Cooperative.I'm looking first at seed sovereignty. We're growing [European hemp] varieties and then we're growing these feral hemp varieties. They're called feral varieties (which of course, that's something that I love) which means that when they eradicated hemp in the 1930s with the Marijuana Prohibition Act—well, they missed some spots. And those guys kept growing. And so 80 years of being illegal—isn't that great? Something that's illegal for 80 years is still with us, rocking out. And so I figure if you grew illegally for 80 years, you are really a tough hemp plant…And so we are growing out these hemp varieties and built a cooperative because we want to own the seeds and we want to own the technology (the value-added processing), and we want to use this hemp as a part of our future as tribes.Winona LaDukeMy grandsons are farming. I don't know who else can say their grandchildren are farming—let me know. My grandchildren are farming. They're running the horses. They're running the farms. You know, that's a retirement plan. My 401k will be worth nothing, but my grandchildren will feed me. This is my strategy.Winona LaDukeHal Weitzman is Executive Director for Intellectual Capital at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, editor-in-chief of Chicago Booth Review, and host of The Chicago Booth Review podcast. A former Financial Times editor and foreign correspondent, he is the author of Latin Lessons: How South America Stopped Listening to the United States and Started Prospering and What's the Matter with Delaware?: How the First State Has Favored the Rich, Powerful, and Criminal—and How It Costs Us All.There is a race to the bottom. There's been a race to the bottom for many decades. That's not new. I think it's accelerated somewhat. Delaware has joined that race from having been something of a “premium product” in terms of incorporating companies—Delaware has become a bit more “cut-price” I would say, and in that sense has followed Texas and Nevada. So the conclusion that we have a race to the bottom and it may be worse than Delaware—actually I think Delaware's already there. So it's not that it's getting worse outside of Delaware, it's getting worse including Delaware.Hal WeitzmanThe trend I think we're seeing is the exclusion of small shareholders completely—regardless of the status of your shares, this is about how big you are. And if you're a small shareholder there is no corporate democracy for you… It was practice in the past for activist groups, campaigning groups, to buy one share of a company and then to go to the shareholder meeting so they could make the point that they wanted to make. Now that kind of shareholder democracy is being encroached on. And the extent now is to say: unless you have a large position (regardless of the size of the company and the cost of the shares), you will not be allowed to bring suits against the executives for the correct running of the company.Hal WeitzmanNews 7/17/26* Our top story this week is New York Governor Kathy Hochul's decision to impose a one-year “pause” on the construction of AI data centers across the state. ABC7 reports that this is the first such moratorium in the nation, despite similar attempts in several states, most notably Maine where Governor Janet Mills vetoed a bill to this effect. Hochul argues that the pause is necessary so lawmakers and regulators can formulate “Guardrails to reduce the risk to our energy grid, minimize land disruption, noise pollution, and protect our natural resources, especially our water supply.” Hochul's move comes amidst a broader push against AI data centers from the left. Semafor reports Senator Bernie Sanders proposed a nationwide ban in March and many progressives running for state and local office in the midterms have made this a cornerstone of their campaigns. According to this piece, “In February, polling from Marquette Law School found 70% of all Wisconsinites agreeing that ‘the costs of the data centers outweigh the benefits.' Among Democrats, the number was 85%.”* Another progressive Member of Congress quite literally stepped into another hot-button political issue this week. While visiting a Palestinian village in the occupied West Bank Wednesday, Al Jazeera reports armed settlers stopped the van of Representative Ro Khanna and were “later joined by Israeli soldiers who continued to block the road.” In a video, Khanna points out, settlers can be seen “brandishing M4s [rifles], kicking the tyres of our van, laughing at us, mocking at us, videotaping us.” This continued for over an hour and was only resolved when he reached out to the American Embassy, according to Khanna. Israel has responded to this fiasco by blaming Khanna, accusing the congressman of failing to coordinate his trip with the Israeli government; Khanna retorted that “The [Israeli military] is lying” and called for the arrest of the violent settlers. Conservative political commentator Tucker Carlson excoriated U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, writing “An American member of congress is threatened by foreign terrorists carrying American rifles, backed by a foreign military paid for by American taxpayers, and the US ambassador to that country says not a word in defense of his own countryman…It's too much, too insulting and humiliating to America.”* Following his return from occupied Palestine, Khanna again teamed up with Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky to sponsor an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which would have removed the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative” from the must-pass legislation. Responsible Statecraft describes the initiative as “an unprecedented integration of the U.S. and Israeli military industrial complexes,” by creating “an executive agent within the Department of Defense whose sole responsibility is furthering U.S. and Israeli military tech integration across nearly every facet of the defense process.” This article also notes that “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has described this shift in the U.S.-Israel relationship as ‘my plan.'” However, House leadership is not backing this commonsense, bipartisan amendment. In a letter, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said he would vote against the amendment, calling it “overly broad” and claiming the amendment would “restrict our country's ability to confront Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations in the region who are sworn enemies of both the United States and Israel,” per the Times of Israel. However, Jeffries pledged not to whip votes against the amendment and indeed the House Minority Whip, Congresswoman Katherine Clark, voted for the amendment as did Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, despite the opposition of Jeffries and House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar. The Congressional Progressive Caucus reportedly whipped votes in favor of the amendment.* In more Israel-related news, this week Marco Rubio – who serves as Secretary of State as well as the acting National Security Advisor – announced that the State Department will launch a “sweeping campaign to dismantle…the International Criminal Court.” CNN observes that “The administration's ire against the ICC goes back to President Donald Trump's first term, when it targeted the ICC for seeking to investigate alleged war crimes committed by US forces in Afghanistan,” and that since taking office for the second time, the Trump administration has “imposed a slew of sanctions against ICC officials for their attempts to investigate the US and Israel.” CNN also quotes a State Department official who said that top officials, including Secretary Rubio and US ambassadors, “are calling countries as part of a campaign to diplomatically isolate the International Criminal Court.” It is worth noting that “all American presidents since the ICC's ratification have maintained that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over Americans,” and that Congress even passed a law calling for an invasion and occupation of the Hague if any American serviceman was ever prosecuted by the ICC, implying that this crackdown on the court is not about American sovereignty at all but rather the prosecution of Israeli officials for their war crimes in Gaza.* In another stunning story starring Marco Rubio, the New York Times reports the Secretary of State is functionally “running Venezuela from afar.” The Times story characterizes Rubio's position as the “de facto viceroy of Venezuela,” effectively controlling the country's “finances, the distribution of its natural resources and its government.” This story makes clear that while Delcy Rodríguez, the former Vice President of Venezuela under Nicolás Maduro, nominally occupies the presidency, Rubio is the one really calling the shots, with Rubio setting the conditions on what Venezuela's export revenue “can be spent on, and by whom,” and having the authority to approve or deny key governmental appointments in the country, such as the minister of defense. In short, the United States has established a shocking explicitly neo-colonial regime in the country, fulfilling the gravest prognostications of anti-imperialist critics of American intervention in the Bolivarian Republic.* Closer to home, Bloomberg reports the federal government has officially launched a grand jury investigation into the United Auto Workers and the union's outspoken president, Shawn Fain. The investigation stems from accusations made by the union's Vice President, Rich Boyer, who alleged that Fain used his position to secure benefits for his fiancée and her sister – and when Boyer refused to approve the benefits, Fain retaliated by stripping Boyer of his duties as chief negotiator with Stellantis NV. Fain has called the allegations “false” and is accusing Boyer of seeking to influence the upcoming UAW leadership election. Fain also claims that Boyer is the one retaliating after Fain “refused the vice president's request to hire family members to positions in the union.” Fain has long maintained that the Justice Department, and specifically the DOJ-appointed monitor, Neil Barofsky, has a political grudge against him because “the UAW took an anti-war stance about what was happening in Gaza.” According to Bloomberg, “Both Fain and Boyer have slates running and each is accusing the other of attempting to abuse their positions to benefit family.”* This week, another victim of harassment by the federal government, student activist Mahmoud Khalil, filed a landmark civil rights suit alleging that the government conspired with a number of private groups – including the Heritage Foundation, Betar, and Canary Mission – to “suppress criticism of Israel through a coordinated campaign to dox, jail and ultimately deport student activists.” According to the lawsuit, said activists were “nearly automatically targeted by the Federal Defendants for arrest and removal.” Khalil's lawyers argue that this “public-private partnership” could violate the “Ku Klux Klan Act, a Reconstruction-era law that sought to restrict government coordination with vigilante groups.” The suit is led by the Center for Constitutional Rights. The AP reports “Soon after his arrest, both Canary Mission and Betar boasted of their role in flagging Khalil's noncitizen status to the government.” Since Khalil's arrest, Betar has agreed to “dissolve its nonprofit status,” following a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James accusing Betar's members of harassing Palestinians.* Turning to the state level, this week 12 state attorneys general, led by California's Rob Bonta, filed an antitrust lawsuit seeking to block the acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery by Paramount Skydance, controlled by the Trump-aligned David Ellison. The proposed, $110 billion merger was approved by the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department last month, which reached the dubious conclusion that the merger is “not likely to result in harm to competition or American consumers.” In the filing, Bonta and the state AGs for Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington allege that the merger “would extinguish competition between Paramount and Warner Bros. and inflict substantial harm on movie theatres, basic cable distributors, and, ultimately, audiences nationwide.” This from Reason.* In the world of philanthropy, CNBC reports Warren Buffett, the billionaire chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, has “excluded the Gates Foundation from his sizable annual charitable donations.” As this report notes, the Gates Foundation has been among the top recipients of his annual Berkshire donations, totaling $47 billion worth of Berkshire stock since 2006. The reason for the exclusion of the Gates Foundation has been much speculated upon, in particular, whether it was due to the recent revelations about Gates' relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Asked about this, Buffett said that he had “read a great deal…in terms of what happened, with Bill and Epstein,” calling their relationship “distasteful,” but also saying that he “found nothing in there that was beyond what [he] could picture [himself] doing.” Instead of the Gates Foundation, all of this year's donations will go to foundations linked to the Buffett family.* Finally, British multinational diamond conglomerate De Beers, famous for coining the “A Diamond is Forever” tagline in 1947, reported this week that they plan to halt work at their “flagship” Venetia mine in South Africa as demand for the stones wanes. The BBC highlights both slackening consumer demand as well as competition from lab-grown diamonds, particularly those produced in China. That said, the closing of the Venetia mine – the biggest in South Africa, accounting for over 40% of the country's diamond production – will send shockwaves through that country's already shaky economy. That mine alone employs more than 4,000 people, while the mining sector employs nearly half a million. De Beers said they plan to reopen the mine in two years; in the meantime, they are looking to expand copper mining to keep up with demand from AI data centers.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Tarabuster Friday with Tara Devlin. 07/17/26 Topics for Tarabuster: ⚠️ Trump's “Big Lie” speech is a rehearsal for his next coup In his primetime address on “election security,” Trump once again peddled debunked fraud claims and demanded the SAVE America Act, laying rhetorical groundwork to dispute and override any midterm results that don't go his way—exactly how you tee up a second coup in plain sight.

Hello and Welcome to the DX Corner for your weekly Dose of DX. I'm Bill, AJ8B.The following DX information comes from Bernie, W3UR, editor of the DailyDX, the WeeklyDX, and the How's DXcolumn in QST. If you would like a free 2-week trial of the DailyDX, your only source of real-time DX information, just drop me a note at thedxmentor@gmail.com  {Marathon Alert} 3B9 - Rodrigues Island – Sebastian,3B8HR, will be QRV from 3B9HR, Rodrigues Island, July 22-28. holiday style. Since it is a holiday/vacation trip with simple gear, he will only be on the air “from time to time.” He will be running 100 watts to an end fed long wire on HF, SSB only. He thinks his operating times may typically be toward the endof the local day, 03-07Z. Confirmation of QSOs is through LoTW only. 9A – Croatia - The Croatian Amateur Radio Association willoperate the special event station 9A170NT to celebrate the 170th anniversary of Nikola Tesla's birth, and the station will remain active until December 31, 2026. QSL via LoTW, Club Log or QRZ.com. VP5 - Turks and Caicos Islands - G0VJG is QRV from North Caicos (NA-002), until July 30, operating VP5G from a beach location for 14 days. He will be using an inverted V and HF9V, a 6-element 6M Yagi, and a Juma PA 1000 amplifier. During the IOTA Contest he will operate single op. Activity will include SSB, CW, and FT4/FT8. QSL via M0OXO. {Marathon Alert} S7 – Seychelles - During the upcoming, July 25-26, RSGB IOTA Contest, members of the Seychelles Amateur Radio Association plan to be QRV as either S77HQ or S77SARA. No other details at the moment. {Marathon Alert} T2 – Tuvalu - The Rebel DX Group (3Z9DX, Dom) fired up T22TT Wednesday just before 1900Z. So far, they have been reported on 30, 20, 17, 15, 12 and 10 meters, all FT8. Listen for activity over the next 10 days in between work on the island. As always QSL only via Club Log, once they start uploading their QSOs. {Marathon Alert} T2 – Tuvalu - JK1JXZ, Masaaki “Aki” Iwasawa, will have callsign T2JK from Funafuti July 30 to August 7, 80-6M. On weekdays he expects to be on the air after 5 PM local time, and on the weekend, he will be on all day long. It is possible his stay will be extended to August 14. The flight arrival July 30 is at noon, so he may be able to get onthe air as soon as 3 PM local time there, he says.  {Marathon Alert} 8R – Guyana - 8R1TM, operated byPY1SAD, Aldir, is QRV from Guyana until July 26. He is active on 160 meters through 6 meters, including CW, SSB, digital modes, and satellite activity. On weekdays his expected activity from 23:00 UTC to 03:00 UTC on 6–160 metersusing CW, SSB, digital modes, and satellites. And during weekends he will have Full-time activity planned on 6–160 meters using CW, SSB, digital modes, and satellite operation. {Marathon Alert} TY5FR, Benin -  DL1BUG, Red Frenzel, is QRV as TY5FR, operating from Cotonou (grid locator JJ16FJ) until August 4. He will be using an ICOM IC-7300 with a CG Antenna CG-3000 autotuner, running 100W into a G5RV (2x 15M) antenna. His planned activity will be on 160-10M CW and SSB. QSL via Club Log (bureau or direct via OQRS), as well as bureau or direct via his home call, and LoTW.  {Marathon Alert} E5/S – South Cook Islands - ZL2KE,Steve, will operate as E51KEE from the South Cook Islands from 22/23 July to 14 August 2026, mainly on CW with some SSB, likely focusing on 30 and 40 meters unless propagation improves. Another Steve, ZL4CZ, will operate as E51CZZ from26 July to 6 August on SSB. Neither operator uses FT8 or other digital modes. E51CZZ will bring a ZS6BKW multiband DX antenna, and the operators will help repair E51JD Jim's damaged Hex Beam on Rarotonga.            If you have questions or need information, just drop me a note at thedxmentor@gmail.com Until next week, this is Bill, AJ8B saying 73 and thanks to my XYL Karen for her love and support. I Hope to hear you in the pileups! Have a great DX week! 

Scott Brewer and Kyle Agre are talking hunting, fishing and just about anything you can do outdoors each weekend on Gone Outdoors Radio. This week the pair welcomes Bernie Barringer, owner and promoter of the International Black Bear Show in Grand Rapids, MN. Bernie will share what the show is all about and why interested bear hunters should put it on their calendar! Doug Leier, Outreach Biologist from the North Dakota Game and Fish Department shares some strategies for those who plan to hunt public land this fall. Joel Nelson of onX Fish shares some of the new technologies and features that the platform offers anglers. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president could still fire commissioners, as the Court now permits, but if those firings broke quorum, the agency would be unable to proceed until replacements were confirmed. The guardrail would

This week's video transcript summary is here. You can click on any bulleted section to see the actual transcript. Thanks to Granola for its software.There was an issue with this only going to paid subscribers, so sending it again. Apologies to those who get it twice. I appreciate being paid so feel free to upgrade if you enjoy TWTW.EditorialIntelligence: Who Owns it?This week the word “AI” feels too small.AI is a technology. Intelligence is its product. And if intelligence is the product, the question is no longer just: Which model is best? Who has the cheapest tokens? Who owns the weights? Who controls the data center? Those are important questions, but they are lower in the stack.The bigger question is simpler and more political:Who owns intelligence?That sounds abstract until you make it concrete. Intelligence is becoming something companies can capture, package, serve, meter, route, improve, and sell.It can write code, answer questions, design molecules, automate offices, run agents, draft legal work, advise scientists, serve consumers, and reshape workflows. It is not merely software. It is a general-purpose capability. And all humans could benefit from more of it.General-purpose capabilities have a habit of becoming public questions. But the default answer, that public good is best delivered by government, is the wrong answer in this context.The Product Is IntelligenceWe should stop talking about AI as a feature and start talking about intelligence as the universal thing that is delivered as an input to the world.Water is an input. Electricity is an input. Literacy is an input. Connectivity is an input. Once a society depends on them, access stops being optional. Nobody needs government to build every well, power plant, school, or network. But everybody understands that a civilization cannot be organized around less than universal and reliable access to foundational inputs.Intelligence is reaching that level of importance now that we all know it is real.Government should not own it, operate it, or develop it. Quite the opposite. Companies are the right actors to build fast, compete hard, improve models, serve customers, and discover the real use cases. Self-interest is a useful framing here. Markets are good at finding demand, reducing costs, and turning invention into services people actually use.Companies are the right operators, developers, and owners. But that does not settle the real question of who owns the benefits. That is an economic question.If intelligence becomes metered infrastructure, what happens to the value it creates?The Ownership StackThis week's articles keep circling the same issue from different directions but in the nature of ‘circling' never quite nail it.Jamin Ball's “Own Your Weights” starts with the enterprise version of the question. Owning a model file is not enough. The durable asset is the loop: the data flywheel, the evaluations, the reinforcement system, the workflow learning, and the operating context that lets capability compound.Benedict Evans' “Ways to Think About Token Pricing” adds the market layer. Tokens may become essential, abundant, and cheap, like mobile data. But being essential does not guarantee that the token layer captures the value. The money may move up the stack to whoever owns the workflow, the customer, the distribution, or the application.Alex Karp's fight with the labs, reported in “Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI”, is the same argument in sharper enterprise language. Companies are afraid that model providers will not just sell intelligence, but learn from customer workflows and then move into the markets where those workflows create value. The “All-in” group are echoing Karp's view.And “What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?” names the new contested terrain. The loop is where intelligence meets the world. Whoever owns the loop owns the learning. Whoever owns the learning owns the compounding asset.That is why “who owns intelligence?” is not a slogan. It is the question under the model layer, the application layer, the enterprise layer, and the economic layer.Because intelligence is the product, the tools creating it are fragmented and competitive. So there is no logic in trying to discuss this at the level of a single company or set of tools and models.The Old Promise Was That Commerce Would Tame PowerThe essays this week give the historical backdrop.Deirdre McCloskey, in “What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution”, argues that modern growth came not simply from capital accumulation, but from a change in permission: ordinary people were allowed to innovate, trade, build, and be honored for it.That matters because intelligence could be another expansion of permission. It could make more people capable of building, learning, creating, coding, researching, translating, selling, and coordinating. It could lower the cost of competence.But only if access is broad.Paul Krugman's “AI in an Age of Oligarchy” warns that the same technology lands differently in different political economies. A new general-purpose technology entering a broad, open, upwardly mobile society is one thing. The same technology entering a concentrated economy, with extreme wealth and weak counterweights, is another.Tim O'Reilly's Economist essay, “Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate”, makes the governance point more directly. The old liberal hope was that commerce would tame arbitrary power. Markets, boards, courts, shareholders, disclosure, and competition would discipline the prince.But what if the prince uses markets to escape discipline?Henry Farrell's “political economy of billionaire derangement” pushes the same point. Founder culture, monopoly ambition, peer rivalry, weak correction mechanisms, and vast private control can amplify appetites rather than restrain them.The danger with intelligence is not that companies build it. They should. Companies build it, meter it, use public tolerance and public infrastructure to scale it, learn from everyone who uses it. All of those things are inevitable and healthy. Market forces will sort out winners from losers. The real danger is that the winners treat all of the surplus produced as purely private.Metered Intelligence Creates SurplusIf metering is not the problem, what is?The problem is pretending that metered intelligence creates value only for the metering entity. Metering water is only tolerated as a public good. If the public were blackmailed by a private water company with the threat of no water we would all rebel.Once we understand that the product of AI is intelligence we can see that every time intelligence is used, there is the immediate transaction: the user pays, the provider serves.But there is also system value. Usage creates signals. Workflows reveal patterns. Prompts, corrections, failures, preferences, integrations, edge cases, and business processes all help define where intelligence is useful and how it should improve. Intelligence breeds intelligence.Even when customer data is contractually protected, the market learns. The platform learns where demand is. The product team learns which workflows matter. The ecosystem learns which jobs are vulnerable, which tasks are automatable, and which parts of the economy can be reorganized around machine intelligence.So the surplus is not born in a vacuum.It rests on public science, public education, public data exhaust, public law, public infrastructure, public energy systems, public tolerance for data centers, and billions of human interactions. It is served by companies, but it is not made only by companies.This is why “Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches” belongs at the center of this week's issue. The detail can be debated. The principle is harder to dismiss. If intelligence becomes a new foundational resource, then some part of the wealth it creates should flow back to the people whose society makes it possible. Intelligence did not suddenly appear. AI is built on the entire history of human intelligence. It benefits from it and at the same time evolves it.Not Nationalization. A Human Wealth Fund.If intelligence belongs to everybody, some conclude that government ownership of intelligence is the right outcome.Governments are not well suited to build, operate, or improve intelligence. They will move too slowly, regulate too early, politicize the wrong things, and confuse economic participation with operational control.Andrew McAfee's “Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter” is useful here. His objection is not that the technology is unimportant. It is that steering too hard before we understand the shape of the change can become its own failure mode. Marc Andreessen's satire of AI regulation is less policy than temperament, but it captures a real Silicon Valley fear: that regulation can become permission, capture, and incumbency before it becomes wisdom.That fear should be taken seriously.But it does not answer the economic question. It answers only the operational one.How can the economic benefits of intelligence be distributed? The better answer is a sovereign human wealth fund.Call it a sovereign wealth fund if you must, but the phrase is too national. Intelligence will not respect borders. The leading companies are global. The models, chips, data centers, agents, platforms, and workflows will be transnational from the beginning. If the value created by intelligence is global, then the mechanism for sharing some of that value should begin with the companies global enough to capture it. The nice thing about xAI, OpenAI, and Anthropic is that they are supranational.These companies own and operate intelligence. Let them compete. Let them profit. Let them keep the incentives that make the system improve. But if intelligence is the new water, the wealth it creates cannot belong only to the companies that meter it. And they, themselves, have the power to fix it, even more than governments.Access will become a Human Right; Ownership Is the Economic DesignThis is where human rights come in. There is no right to access an AI model, yet. But there will soon be a need to change that.Not as a claim that every person is entitled to every frontier model at every moment for free. That is not serious. Capacity has costs. Models have costs. Inference has costs. Data centers have costs. Although those costs will decline over time, possibly quite quickly as self-learning models address costs.The claim is more basic: in a world where intelligence becomes a primary input into education, work, health, science, citizenship, creativity, and economic agency, baseline access to intelligence starts to look like a civic requirement.That could mean public access layers. It could mean education credits. It could mean open models. It could mean AI dividends. It could mean public-interest compute. It could mean taxes on rents. It could mean a company-initiated human wealth fund that returns some of the upside to society without handing the operating system to the state. The latter could couple wealth growth with universal distribution of ownership.The exact mechanism matters. But the distinction matters more.Government should not own intelligence. It should be universally available. And people should have a claim on the wealth intelligence creates.The Frontier Is Also PhysicalThe abstraction is not weightless.“The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning”, “New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium”, Reuters on pollution from Musk's xAI power project, and DataGravity's “Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?” all say the same thing from the ground up.Intelligence uses land. It uses power. It uses water. It uses chips. It uses grid capacity. It uses neighborhoods. It uses public patience.That makes the value question unavoidable. A society can accept the buildout if the buildout is legible as shared progress. It will resist it if the costs are local, the profits are private, and the benefits feel enclosed.Who Owns the “Loop”?The week ends where it began.“Anthropic and Blackstone” are betting that implementation is the next trillion-dollar business. “Vint Cerf” is working on identity for agents on the open internet. “GPT-Red” points toward systems that improve their own robustness. “Kimi K3” adds another open frontier model to the global mix.The model race continues. The deployment race is accelerating. The governance race is behind.My view is this:The central product of this era is intelligence. Companies have figured out how to capture it, package it, serve it, and meter it. That is good. It should stay in the hands of builders who have the incentive to make it better.But intelligence is too foundational to become just another private toll booth. A significant part of it will turn out to be free to users.As intelligence becomes a general-purpose resource, then access to it becomes a human-capability question, and the surplus from it becomes an economic-justice question. Not because government should run it. Because government should not run it. The operating layer belongs with companies. The wealth question belongs with everyone. But companies are best placed to turn that into a process of distribution.The question is not whether companies should build intelligence. They should.The question is whether humanity gets a stake in the wealth created by the thing that may soon become its most important shared input.Contents* Essays* Deirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial Revolution* AI in an Age of Oligarchy* Elon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hate* Murky Mirror: Truth and Consequences* The political economy of billionaire derangement* Is there any “oligarchy” to fight?* AI* Nearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. Threats* Why I Didn't Sign the AI Open Letter* Own Your Weights* Ways to Think About Token Pricing* Alex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AI* The AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft Office* What Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?* The Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just Beginning* 6 months to live for open models* Americans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' Riches* Who Gets to Define the Frontier?* GPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for Robustness* Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models* Vint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internet* xai-org/grok-build, now open source* The Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?* Orphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligence* The Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data Center* Why AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”* Kimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier Intelligence* Venture Capital* Three Years In* Venture Has Rarely Looked More Bifurcated* The Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active Now* Are Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?* Regulation* Exclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College Campuses* The Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.* India's crackdown on a new WhatsApp feature risks setting a global precedent* Let's build a children's public internet* Computer cops* Google is better at playing the AI regulations game* Infrastructure* Who Captures Value in AI Infrastructure?* New York becomes the first state to enact a data center moratorium* Pollution from Musk's unpermitted xAI power project hits hardest in Black communities* Interview of the Week* The End of the End of Geography* Startup of the Week* Radical AI's Joseph Krause: The Scientist Building The “Waymo” Lab For New Materials* Post of the Week* Marc Andreessen on AI RegulationEssaysDeirdre McCloskey on What Really Caused the Industrial RevolutionYascha Mounk and Deirdre McCloskey | Persuasion | July 11, 2026Yascha Mounk interviews Deirdre McCloskey about her argument that the modern world's economic liftoff came less from capital accumulation than from a change in ideas. McCloskey says both left and right versions of the conventional story rely too heavily on investment: the left stresses exploitation and surplus value, while the right stresses virtuous saving by capitalists. Her objection is historical and economic. Human beings had always invested, from irrigation works and Roman roads to seed grain, and simple accumulation quickly runs into diminishing returns.McCloskey's alternative is that northwestern Europe, first Holland, then Britain and Scotland, and then the North American colonies, developed a liberal ideology that changed who was allowed to innovate and be honored for it. The conversation links that shift to the erosion of inherited hierarchy, the spread of dignity for ordinary commercial life, and a moral vocabulary in which liberalism is not merely procedural but connected to virtues and values. The point is not that machines, coal, trade, and institutions did not matter, but that they do not explain the scale and timing of modern enrichment without a cultural permission structure for innovation.The interview also turns to the contemporary defense of liberalism. Mounk frames the series around the worry that liberalism is often treated as too thin to command allegiance, while its opponents speak more directly to moral passions. McCloskey's case is that liberal societies became rich because they dignified experimentation and ordinary enterprise, and that liberals need to recover the moral language behind that claim.Read moreAI in an Age of OligarchyPaul Krugman | Paul Krugman | July 12, 2026Paul Krugman frames AI as a major technological shock arriving inside an already unequal political economy. The post says AI's economic and social effects may take years to understand, but argues that the setting matters now: America has much greater wealth concentration and political inequality than it did in the 1950s and 1960s, when progressive taxation, stronger regulation, and more active antitrust might have contained some of the destructive effects of a new technology.Krugman's opening claim is that the same technology would likely have different consequences in a more level society. In today's United States, he writes, extreme wealth is both a cause and effect of policies that favor a small elite, including low effective taxes on capital and high incomes, weak enforcement of worker protections and antitrust, and cuts to programs that benefit ordinary Americans.The article is explicitly more about oligarchy than AI. Krugman says the paid sections document the rise of the “.0002%,” the economics and politics of extreme wealth, how oligarchy will shape AI's impact, and possible policy paths. His caveat is that AI itself may still produce a pushback against oligarchy, but absent that, he expects the pre-existing concentration of wealth and power to magnify AI's downsides.Read moreElon Musk is building a form of capitalism that Adam Smith would hateAuthor: Tim O'Reilly Published: July 12, 2026Tim O'Reilly argues that Elon Musk is using the legal forms of shareholder capitalism to escape the restraints that shareholder capitalism was supposed to impose. The article begins with SpaceX's public-market structure: ordinary public investors get little meaningful governance power, Musk keeps roughly 85 percent of the votes through super-voting shares, buyers waive jury trials and class actions, the company qualifies as controlled, and removal of Musk depends on the share class he controls. In O'Reilly's framing, that is not ordinary founder control; it is a design for being answerable to no one, possibly beyond Musk's own lifetime.The killer detail is the article's turn through Albert Hirschman, Montesquieu, James Steuart, Adam Smith, and Keynes. Older defenses of commerce held that markets would tame princely passions because the self-interest of merchants was safer than arbitrary rule. O'Reilly says Musk reverses that hope. The market discipline that was supposed to cage the prince has become the lever by which the prince raises capital, removes feedback loops, and carries private power into politics, government, Mars, robots, AI, or whatever ambition comes next.The pull is the link to AI governance. O'Reilly says corporations are already a kind of artificial intelligence: narrow-input systems that act at a scale no individual human can match. Their partial controls include independent boards, shareholder votes, courts, disclosure, regulators, public pressure, and activism. If the leaders building frontier AI strip those alignment mechanisms out of their own companies, the governance of the company becomes a preview of the governance of the machine.Read more: The EconomistMurky Mirror: Truth and ConsequencesAuthor: Esther Dyson Published: July 14, 2026Esther Dyson argues that today's institutional crisis is better viewed through the 14th century than through recent political history. Using Barbara Tuchman's A Distant Mirror as her frame, she compares a world of famine, plague, church schism, feudal predation, and purposeless war with a present in which institutions again feel brittle, incentives are badly aligned, and power is shifting into forms that are hard to govern.The killer detail is the historical analogy between land, corporations, and AI. Dyson moves from nobles who controlled serfs and territory, to the East India Company as a quasi-sovereign business, to today's AI systems and data centers as a possible new sector that crosses and weakens both nation-states and companies. The question is whether AI becomes a new kind of private land, owned by a new nobility, or an open prairie that many people can cultivate.The pull is human attention. Dyson says the central question is not what AI will do to people, but how people will react to it: whether they can value love, kindness, embodied attention, and artisanal human presence in a world of seductive artificial offerings.Read more: SourceThe political economy of billionaire derangementAuthor: Henry Farrell Published: July 15, 2026Henry Farrell argues that the visible political radicalization of some Silicon Valley billionaires is not a random personality quirk, but a product of the political economy that made them. Starting from Tyler Cowen's dismissal of “billionaire derangement syndrome” and Tim O'Reilly's warning that Elon Musk is using shareholder capitalism to escape shareholder restraint, Farrell flips the phrase: the question is why billionaires themselves can become deranged.The killer detail is Farrell's use of Peter Thiel as both theorist and example. Thiel's Stanford lectures described startups as monarchies and founders as figures vested with unusual power, while Silicon Valley culture rewarded eccentricity, monopoly ambition, and founder exceptionalism. Farrell says those ideas combined with dense founder-investor networks, peer rivalry, and weak correction mechanisms to amplify rather than discipline princely appetites.The pull is the ideological problem for classical liberals who once saw tech wealth as an ally of markets and freedom. Farrell says commerce did not tame the passions; in parts of Silicon Valley, the passions have begun to devour markets, institutions, and the liberal story that justified them.Read more: SourceIs there any “oligarchy” to fight?Matthew Yglesias | Slow Boring | July 16, 2026Matthew Yglesias argues that “oligarchy” is a rhetorically powerful but analytically loose way to describe American politics. The post begins from Bernie Sanders' “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, Amy Klobuchar's warning about a MAGA “broligarchy,” and the long afterlife of the Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page paper that was widely summarized as showing that only the rich matter in policy outcomes. Yglesias says the evidence supports a weaker claim: affluent people and business leaders have unusual access and influence, but that is not the same as rule by a small cabal.His main distinction is between inequality and oligarchy. The Gilens-Page measure treated the top 10 percent of households as “the wealthy,” and later critics found that rich and middle-class preferences usually align; in the cases where they differ, the rich win about 53 percent of the time. Yglesias also says business executives get special access partly because their decisions are materially important to communities, jobs, investment, and local tax bases, not only because of campaign donations.The post preserves Jerusalem Demsas' counterpoint from their podcast discussion: privileged donor and business access can still violate democratic equality even if the oligarchy label overstates the structure of power. Yglesias' narrower claim is that Democrats should be precise about what problem they are trying to solve, because donor influence can also push the party left on climate and cultural issues in ways that alienate many voters.Read more: Slow BoringAINearly 200 Economists and Tech Leaders Warn of A.I. ThreatsAuthor: Ben Casselman Published: July 13, 2026Ben Casselman reports on “We Must Act Now,” a statement warning that artificial intelligence could transform the economy faster than any previous technology and that policymakers need to move faster to understand and respond. The statement says AI may become radically more powerful over the next 10 years, bringing risks such as large-scale job displacement as well as opportunities such as higher living standards. Nearly 200 people signed, including 15 Nobel laureates, the chief economists of OpenAI and Anthropic, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and venture capitalist Vinod Khosla.The killer detail is who joined the warning. Casselman notes that the signatories include economists who have historically been skeptical of Silicon Valley's most dramatic AI job-loss forecasts, including Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, the MIT professors who won the 2024 Nobel in economics. Erik Brynjolfsson, who helped organize the statement, says there has been a notable change in the profession and that economists and policymakers are not ready for the “tsunami” he sees coming.The pull is the measurement problem. The statement does not offer a specific policy menu, but calls for economists, policymakers, and industry leaders to understand the economics of transformative AI and steer it toward complementing humans. Brynjolfsson says one high priority is better data on AI's spread and impact, because current measures tell conflicting stories about job losses and which workers are most exposed.Read more: The New York TimesWhy I Didn't Sign the AI Open LetterAuthor: Andrew McAfee Published: July 13, 2026Andrew McAfee explains why he did not sign “We Must Act Now,” the AI economy statement organized in part by his longtime collaborator Erik Brynjolfsson. McAfee agrees with the letter's starting point that AI is likely to become radically more powerful over the next decade and that it is a general-purpose technology. His objection is not to urgency or to studying AI's economic effects, but to the framing of risk, displacement, and institutional steering as the first move.The killer detail is McAfee's line edit. He says the original letter comes close, then “bounces off the crossbar” by calling for incentives, guardrails, and institutions to steer AI before we know enough about its actual impacts. He points to mixed current evidence: labor-market canaries, but also rising software job postings, low unemployment for younger workers, rising real median income, and claims that AI-adopting companies are adding workers faster than low-adopting peers. His worry is that the letter leans toward upstream governance and dirigisme when the evidence may call for capability building instead.The pull is his replacement statement. McAfee keeps the three-paragraph structure but changes the emphasis: AI is likely to become radically more powerful; like earlier world-changing technologies it will raise living standards while also bringing harms and shocks; and economists, policymakers, and technology leaders should build the capabilities to respond quickly and effectively. It is a concise version of the permissionless-innovation case inside the AI policy debate.Read more: The Geek WayOwn Your WeightsAuthor: Jamin Ball Published: July 10, 2026Jamin Ball argues that the enterprise AI debate about whether companies should “own their weights” or rent models from frontier labs is asking too narrow a question. A model weight file gives a company control over a point-in-time artifact, but not durable control over the capability stack. In his framing, the weight file is a melting ice cube: it does not get worse in absolute terms, but it falls behind as frontier systems improve and enterprise needs change.The killer detail is what Ball says companies really need to own: the data flywheel, reinforcement learning infrastructure, and evaluation harness that produce and improve the model. Simply deploying an open-weights model and declaring sovereignty leaves the enterprise with yesterday's capability and no way to compound workflow-specific learning.The pull is that enterprise AI control may be less about model ownership than operating ownership. The defensible layer is the system that turns company data, edge cases, business definitions, and evaluations into continuously improving performance.Read more: Clouded JudgementWays to Think About Token PricingAuthor: Benedict Evans Published: July 9, 2026Benedict Evans argues that today's AI token prices are a temporary signal from a supply-constrained market, not a reliable guide to long-term value capture. The open question is whether foundation models keep durable pricing power or become commodity infrastructure as data-center capacity, inference efficiency, and model competition all shift. His current read is that the visible market dynamics point toward commoditization unless something materially changes.The killer detail is the mobile data analogy. Evans says cellular networks became a trillion-dollar industry with hundreds of billions in capex after data usage exploded, but carrier stocks went nowhere because value moved up the stack. Tokens may behave similarly: an opaque unit tied to marginal cost, sold through bundles, essential to everything, yet not necessarily where profits accrue.The pull is uncertainty, not prediction. Evans lists paths to model dominance, including network effects, less competition, regulation, export controls, or a lab pulling ahead on execution, but says each requires a new fact not yet visible. Without that change, the model layer looks more like infrastructure beneath the products that capture value.Read more: SourceAlex Karp Is Saying What Every Angry CEO Is Thinking About AIAuthor: Tim Higgins Published: July 11, 2026Tim Higgins reports that Palantir CEO Alex Karp has turned corporate frustration with AI labs into a public argument about enterprise control. Palantir released a white paper, “Institutional Sovereignty in the Age of AI,” laying out steps companies and governments can take to protect themselves from OpenAI, Anthropic, and other foundation-model providers. The article links that paper to Karp's CNBC appearance, where he said “something has gone completely wrong” in the relationship between AI labs and customers and argued that enterprises are paying for tokens that create little value.The killer detail is the value-capture question. Higgins writes that Karp's critique has resonated because AI labs may gain power and insight from customer data, workflows, and decision-making, even when enterprise policies say customer data are not used for training. David Sacks amplified the concern by arguing that Anthropic is moving from the model layer into vertical applications such as science, security, legal, and coding, raising the fear that model providers will watch where value is being created and then move into those markets directly.The pull is that Karp is not alone, even if his style is unusually combative. Higgins notes that Satya Nadella has also warned that companies need to retain the learnings created when they use AI models, while Mark Zuckerberg has framed Meta's new model release partly around lower-cost frontier intelligence. The article presents Karp's campaign as one sign that established technology companies and large enterprises are trying to define where they fit when AI labs become central infrastructure, application competitors, and potential IPO giants at the same time.Read more: The Wall Street JournalThe AI Agents Are Coming for Microsoft OfficeAlex Wilhelm | Cautious Optimism | July 11, 2026Alex Wilhelm argues that one of the week's quieter AI questions is whether the productivity market that Microsoft successfully moved into subscription software is now being attacked by agentic tools. The piece begins with the infrastructure backdrop: SK Hynix raised $26.5 billion in a U.S. listing while building U.S. HBM and advanced-packaging capacity, and memory, chip, and foundry companies are now priced for sustained AI demand.Wilhelm then says the AI conversation has shifted quickly from raw capability to cost per task. He cites new model releases and vendor language emphasizing cheaper agentic and coding models, faster performance, and lower dollars per task. That matters because lower costs make it more plausible for AI systems to take on routine knowledge work at scale rather than remain a premium coding assistant market.The core of the article is Microsoft Office. Wilhelm notes that Microsoft turned Office from a one-time purchase into Microsoft 365, a large recurring revenue business with tens of millions of subscribers and a major productivity segment. Now, he says, late-stage unicorns and AI labs are pushing into the same territory: Anthropic's Cowork was reportedly used mostly outside software development, OpenAI merged ChatGPT and Codex into a tool for creating sheets, slides, docs, web apps, and long-running work, and other companies are building agentic coworkers that connect business data to documents, workflows, schedules, alerts, and apps.The article's caveat is that Microsoft has survived major platform shifts before. The argument is not that Office disappears quickly, but that the definition of office software is broadening from documents and spreadsheets into AI systems that can create, monitor, and act across workplace data.Read moreWhat Is Loop Engineering, and Who Owns It?Author: Nilesh Barla Published: July 11, 2026Nilesh Barla argues that “loop engineering” is becoming a distinct discipline because production AI agents now fail less at single prompts than at runtime: when to stop, what state to preserve, and how to recover after a bad step. Prompt engineering shapes one model call, and context engineering shapes what the model sees, but loop engineering shapes what a sequence of calls actually does.The killer detail is the three-primitives frame. Barla says a real agent loop needs halt conditions, state carryover, and recovery paths, then maps teams across five maturity levels. At the lowest level, an agent is just a model call in a for-loop with a step cap and raw history; by the higher levels, the system has structured state, explicit planning, replay, evaluation, and self-repair.The pull is organizational. If agents are becoming production systems rather than demos, someone has to own the runtime itself. The loop engineer is the role Barla gives to the person responsible for making long-running agent work dependable.Read more: Adaline LabsThe Fight Against AI Data Centers Is Just BeginningEmma Roth | The Verge | July 12, 2026Emma Roth argues that community resistance to data centers has moved from an early warning sign into a national political fight as AI facilities grow larger, more power-hungry, and more visible to nearby residents. The article starts with Apple's failed 2015 plan for a $1 billion data center in Athenry, Ireland, where a small group of residents challenged the project over noise, light pollution, flooding, traffic, and wildlife effects until Apple abandoned it in 2018.The current data-center buildout is presented as much larger and more contentious. Roth writes that residents now cite rising energy costs, water quality, noise, light pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions, while the U.S. Energy Information Administration expects commercial energy demand to surpass residential demand this year because of AI data centers and Goldman Sachs expects data-center power demand to double by 2027.The central evidence comes from Data Center Watch, which says protesters blocked or delayed at least 75 U.S. projects worth $130 billion from January to March, with active opposition groups more than doubling from 396 at the end of 2025 to 833 by the end of the first quarter of 2026. Roth also cites QTS abandoning a $12 billion Wisconsin campus, Delaware City regulators blocking a 580-acre project under the Coastal Zone Act, opposition stopping a QTS project in Prince William County, and pressure that pushed Kevin O'Leary to downsize the proposed 40,000-acre Project Stratos in Utah.The policy section describes a split between federal acceleration and local resistance. President Trump has treated data centers as part of the AI race with China and fast-tracked construction, while some Republican candidates are distancing themselves from that position ahead of midterms. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have proposed a moratorium until price and environmental protections exist, bipartisan lawmakers are backing ratepayer-protection measures, and states including Florida, Idaho, and Washington have passed rules on cost shifting, water use, and tax breaks. Roth's caveat is that the policy patchwork is still incomplete, leaving many communities to fight project by project.Read more6 months to live for open modelsAuthor: Nathan Lambert Published: July 12, 2026Nathan Lambert argues that open-weight AI models are facing their most serious policy test so far because U.S. officials are beginning to discuss concrete controls rather than abstract safety concerns. He says reported White House conversations about a new executive order may initially target Chinese-origin models and government use, but could create a broader review habit for frontier open models. His forecast is that a model above the capability range of GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, or GLM-5.2 could trigger a ban or indefinite delay within six months.The post separates two policy fights that are becoming intertwined: distillation and frontier capability. Lambert says the distillation campaign against Chinese models has become a form of regulatory capture because Anthropic and other closed-model companies would gain economically if Chinese open models were banned. He does not dismiss IP protection, but argues that if a closed model's capabilities are dangerous enough to justify restricting open models, the lab also has to explain why those capabilities are exposed through a queryable API. He cites unauthorized access to Anthropic's Mythos private beta as evidence that APIs are not automatically secure.The broader claim is that a unilateral U.S. ban would hurt positive actors more than bad actors if comparable open models remain available elsewhere. Lambert says the only durable ceiling would require global agreement, which does not exist, and that open models can improve safety by allowing broad inspection, adaptation, and understanding. His proposed near-term off-ramps are a strong U.S. open model release from companies such as Microsoft, Meta, or Reflection, and a broader coalition of open-source beneficiaries lobbying for safe rollout rather than prohibition.Read more: SourceAmericans Deserve a Dividend From AI Companies' RichesAuthor: Scott Stanford Published: July 14, 2026Scott Stanford argues that proposals to give the government a stake in AI companies miss the point unless ordinary citizens directly receive and control the upside. Sam Altman has discussed giving up equity in OpenAI, Washington already owns a stake in Intel, Nvidia is sharing China chip revenue, and Bernie Sanders wants large AI labs to contribute half their stock to a sovereign wealth fund. Stanford says those ideas all park value with the state, not with people.The killer detail is New Carlisle, Indiana, where AWS's Project Rainier is turning cornfields into one of the world's largest AI superclusters. The project is planned to run up to a million chips, draw more than two gigawatts of power, and represents an investment that has grown from $11 billion to $13.8 billion. Stanford uses that local transformation to argue that AI's public bargain should be visible at the household level.The pull is design. A citizen AI dividend would have to specify who earns a stake, how they hold it, and when they see cash. Without that mechanism, the AI wealth debate remains a fight over government balance sheets rather than public ownership.Read more: SourceWho Gets to Define the Frontier?Author: Mark Daley Published: July 14, 2026Mark Daley argues that Demis Hassabis is right to call for a serious institution to verify frontier AI systems, but that the power to test models is also the power to govern them. Hassabis's proposed Frontier AI Standards Body would get privileged pre-release access to advanced models, testing compute, held-out evaluations, support from national labs and security agencies, third-party auditors, and eventually authority to block models from the American market or coordinate a slowdown.The killer detail is Daley's constitutional objection. He says the proposal sometimes looks like a scientific lab, a standards body, an industry regulator, a licensing authority, and an emergency security council at once. Combining those roles because each requires technical expertise would be like putting the central bank, auditor-general, and Supreme Court in one building and calling it efficient.The pull is standard-setting. Daley's concern is not that verification is unnecessary, but that whoever writes the tests, decides what passes, adjudicates disputes, and grants market access may end up defining the frontier itself.Read more: SourceGPT-Red: Unlocking Self-Improvement for RobustnessOpenAI | OpenAI | July 15, 2026OpenAI describes GPT-Red as an internal automated red-teaming model trained to find prompt-injection vulnerabilities at a scale human red teams cannot match. The post says AI systems increasingly encounter third-party data through browsers, connected apps, local files, and tools, creating opportunities for malicious instructions hidden in emails, webpages, tool responses, or code repositories. Human red-teaming remains part of OpenAI's safety process, but the company says it is time-intensive and cannot generate enough diverse adversarial examples for model training.The system is trained through self-play reinforcement learning, with GPT-Red rewarded for eliciting valid failures and defender models rewarded for resisting attacks while still completing their tasks. OpenAI says the training environments specify threat models across settings such as local files, webpage banners, email bodies, and tool outputs. The model is kept separate from deployed production models because it is intentionally trained with malicious capabilities.OpenAI reports that GPT-Red generalized beyond its training set, including an internal replication of the indirect prompt-injection arena from Dziemian et al. (2025), where it found successful attacks in 84% of scenarios compared with 13% for human red-teamers. The post also says GPT-Red transferred attacks from simulation to a live autonomous vending-machine agent, causing price changes and order cancellations, and outperformed a prompted GPT-5.5 baseline against a Codex CLI agent on held-out data-exfiltration tasks.The article's main robustness claim is that OpenAI has used GPT-Red and predecessor models in training since GPT-5.3, with later GPT releases becoming more resistant to prompt injections. It says GPT-5.6 Sol has six times fewer failures on OpenAI's hardest direct prompt-injection benchmark than the best production model from four months earlier, that a “Fake Chain-of-Thought” attack class fell from more than 95% success against GPT-5.1 to below 10% against GPT-5.6 Sol, and that GPT-5.6 Sol fails on only 0.05% of GPT-Red's direct prompt injections. OpenAI says general capabilities and targeted over-refusal evaluations were not harmed, and says a preprint with more details will follow.Read moreAnthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just modelsRebecca Bellan | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Rebecca Bellan reports that Ode with Anthropic is the $1.5 billion AI implementation company launched by Anthropic with Blackstone, Hellman & Friedman, Goldman Sachs, and other backers. The article says the venture reflects a growing belief among frontier AI labs that enterprise adoption requires more than better models: customers need engineers who can embed inside businesses and turn AI into working systems.Ode was originally conceived by Blackstone after it used both large consulting firms and smaller AI services boutiques across its portfolio companies. TechCrunch reports that Fractional AI, an AI engineering services startup, stood out and was acquired by the joint venture shortly after the venture was announced. Fractional now forms the foundation of Ode, which has 100 engineers and works closely with Anthropic's applied AI team to identify where the technology can affect specific businesses.Ode CEO Chris Taylor tells TechCrunch that the company could someday become a trillion-dollar business if it scales without losing quality. He says an ideal customer is one whose CEO treats the AI project as a top one or two priority, whether it is a major product feature or the reworking of a core business process. Ode will operate under a “Claude-first” principle, using Anthropic technology whenever possible, but the article says it can use rival AI products when needed.The article's central implementation argument comes from Ode chief technologist Eddie Siegel, who says model selection matters but is not where most of the engineering effort goes. He compares it to the choice of programming language in software: one ingredient in a system that still has to be engineered. Bellan writes that Ode's challenge is hiring and training enough elite generalist engineers, many of them former founders, while competing with OpenAI's The Deployment Company and consulting giants that have built their own forward-deployed engineering teams.Read moreVint Cerf is working on a plan to unleash AI agents on the open internetTim Fernholz | TechCrunch | July 15, 2026Tim Fernholz reports that Vint Cerf, after leaving Google, is advising Innovation Labs on an open architecture for identifying AI agents online. Innovation Labs is a subsidiary of Identity Digital, a DNS registry company, and its proposal is to use domain-name infrastructure as part of a system for agent identity, accountability, and auditability. The premise is that agents will need a way to identify themselves if they move beyond proprietary systems and begin interacting across the open internet.The concrete proposal is DNSid, a registry that links an AI agent to an existing internet domain and uses cryptographic proofs to log its registration over time. Innovation Labs says it is trialing the standard with unnamed hyperscalers and identity companies. Cerf frames the problem around authority and accountability: what authority an agent has, where that authority came from, who is accountable for the agent's behavior, how its identity is established, and why anyone should trust it.The article's caveat is that standards are still emerging and agents are more active than static domains. Cerf says the period may be both fascinating and exasperating because the functionality is powerful and interoperability is unresolved. He compares the adoption problem to TCP/IP: competing systems may not work together until users push for functional interoperation. He also says an agentic economy is not inevitable, but that people will try to build it because delegating work to agents will be easier.Read more: TechCrunchxai-org/grok-build, now open sourceAuthor: Simon Willison Published: July 15, 2026Simon Willison argues that xAI's decision to open-source Grok Build is best understood as a trust repair move after a severe privacy failure. The CLI had triggered backlash when users realized that running it in a directory could upload the entire directory to xAI's Google Cloud buckets, including one user's reported SSH keys, password manager database, documents, photos, and videos. xAI disabled the feature, said previously retained coding data would be deleted, and released the code under Apache 2.0.The killer detail is what the codebase reveals. Willison counts 844,530 lines of Rust, only about 3% of which appears vendored, and finds remnants of the upload system still present but disabled: gcs.rs contains Google Cloud upload code, while upload_session_state() now returns a hard-coded session_state_upload_unavailable error. He also notes copied or ported tool implementations from Codex and OpenCode, prompt files, and a terminal Mermaid renderer.The pull is that terminal coding agents are becoming large, intricate software systems in their own right. The privacy failure mattered because these tools operate inside the directories where developers keep their most sensitive work; the open-source release matters because trust now depends on inspecting what an agent can see, send, and do.Read more: SourceThe Pulse: What can we learn from Bun's rapid Rust rewrite with AI?Author: Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric Published: July 16, 2026Gergely Orosz and Ivan Klaric argue that Bun's AI-assisted rewrite from Zig to Rust is a practical sign of how software engineering changes when models can take on large, bounded migrations with clear feedback loops. The piece does not treat the rewrite as magic: Jarred Sumner first spent hours turning design judgment into a detailed porting guide, then used adversarial review, parallel agents, compiler errors, and tests to force the work toward correctness.The killer detail is the scale. Bun had 535,496 lines of Zig, 1,448 files, and 22 million monthly downloads, making a conventional rewrite a year-long freeze the team could not justify. Using Fable, Sumner split the work across 64 agents, produced about 6,500 commits, and got the migration done in 11 days at an estimated API cost of $165,000.The pull is economic, not theatrical. If a one- or two-year migration can become an 11-day project, AI coding is not just faster autocomplete; it changes which technical debts are worth paying down.Read more: SourceOrphan risks at the frontier of artificial intelligenceAuthor: Andrew Maynard Published: July 16, 2026Andrew Maynard argues that frontier AI safety frameworks are creating “orphan risks”: harms that companies can see, but do not formally own because they are hard to quantify, do not fit catastrophic-risk thresholds, or fall outside audit-friendly compliance machinery. His target is not existing frontier safety work, but the narrowing effect that happens when private companies decide which risks count as governable.The killer detail is Maynard's contrast between measurable model dangers and threats to value. He points to Meta's three-day Galactica collapse, OpenAI's 2023 board crisis, safety-team departures, and wellbeing litigation as examples of risks that damaged trust, culture, legitimacy, or users without fitting cleanly into conventional model-risk categories. The proposed fix is an orphan-risk register: a public record of risks a company considered and chose not to manage, with reasons.The pull is accountability. Frontier developers' internal scoping choices have become a de facto layer of public governance, so the question is no longer only which risks they manage, but which risks they quietly leave outside the frame.Read more: SourceThe Lab of the Future Should Feel Like a Data CenterLatent.Space with Andy Beam and Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli | Latent.Space | July 16, 2026Latent.Space interviews Lila Sciences CTO Andy Beam and chief science officer for physical sciences Rafa Gomez-Bombarelli about the company's attempt to build an AI-run science factory. The post describes Lila's thesis as treating the lab itself as an “infinite token generator”: if internet data drove the first era of AI scaling, experimentally verified scientific data may be the next scarce training source. Lila is trying to produce that data with robotics, lab instruments, orchestration software, and AI models wired into the wet lab.The central analogy is the lab as data center. Instruments are nodes on a graph, a magnetically levitating transport layer moves materials between them, and experiment scheduling looks like a compute queue. Beam says Lila is not simply an automation company, because the point is not just throughput; it is flexibility, generalization, and experiment capture. The post says Lila has built more than 10 trillion experimentally validated “scientific reasoning tokens,” not internet text or biological sequences.The interview ranges across biology, chemistry, drug discovery, materials science, and the limits of automation. It notes that Lila rebuilt one gas-sorption measurement to run roughly 2,500 times faster, claims its general models can transfer priors from small-molecule chemistry to metal-organic frameworks for carbon capture, and describes model-suggested platinum-group-free electrocatalysts that moved from looking boring or wrong to becoming strong performers. The caveats are physical: experiments have runtimes, biology cannot always be accelerated, chains of thought can be unreliable narrators, and reward hacking becomes more dangerous when a model controls a real lab.Read more: Latent.SpaceWhy AMI Labs' Alexandre LeBrun won't call his AI “AGI” or “superintelligence”Kate Park | TechCrunch | July 16, 2026Kate Park interviews AMI Labs CEO Alexandre LeBrun about why Yann LeCun's world-model startup avoids the language of “AGI” and “superintelligence.” LeBrun says the terms are not useful because they lack stable definitions: “We never used the word AGI. And I just noticed that nobody is using it anymore; they switched to superintelligence.” His argument is that the practical frontier is not a label, but whether AI systems can understand and predict real-world states.The article explains the world-model thesis by contrasting language prediction with physical-state prediction. A large language model predicts the next word; a world model predicts the next state, such as what happens when a glass tips over. LeBrun says LLMs remain complementary and efficient for language, but the physical world is where current AI is weak. Robotics is the clearest case: hardware has advanced quickly, but robots are still brittle outside controlled routines because they lack context and situational understanding.AMI is still pre-product, but TechCrunch reports that LeBrun was in Seoul looking for industrial partners, researchers, and global companies. He says world models cannot be built entirely inside a lab because they need access to real environments. That is why South Korea appeals to AMI: robotics, semiconductors, manufacturing, and fast adoption create the kind of hardware-heavy context that software-only AI has barely touched.Read more: TechCrunchKimi K3 Tech Blog: Open Frontier IntelligenceKimi | Kimi | July 16, 2026Kimi introduces Kimi K3 as an open 3T-class frontier model aimed at coding, knowledge work, reasoning, multimodality, and long-context agentic use. The source describes the model as a 2.8T-parameter system built on Kimi Delta Attention and Attention Residuals, with native multimodality and a 1M-token context window. It says Moonshot AI plans to release model weights by July 27.The post presents K3 through benchmark and use-case sections rather than as a general product announcement. It reports results across coding, productivity, agentic, and multimodal evaluations, including DeepSWE, Terminal-Bench 2.1, Program Bench, SWE Marathon, FrontierSWE, PostTrain Bench, OfficeQA Pro, SpreadsheetBench 2, MCP Atlas, AutomationBench, BrowseComp, GDPval-AA v2, AA-Briefcase, MMMU-Pro, MathVision, BabyVision, OmniDocBench, and PerceptionBench. The source says all reported K3 results use maximum reasoning effort with temperature and top-p set to 1.0, and that different benchmark comparisons use KimiCode, Claude Code, or Codex harnesses depending on the test.Kimi's caveats are unusually concrete. The limitations section says K3 was trained in preserved thinking-history mode, so quality may become unstable if an agent harness does not pass historical thinking content correctly or if an ongoing session switches to K3 midstream. It also says K3's emphasis on long-horizon tasks can make it excessively proactive when it encounters minor issues or ambiguous intent, and recommends imposing explicit behavioral constraints for applications that require strict boundaries. The post adds that K3 remains behind Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol in user experience despite being competitive overall.Read moreVenture CapitalThree Years InAuthor: Tomasz Tunguz Published: July 10, 2026Tomasz Tunguz marks Theory Ventures' third anniversary by arguing that AI's central market effect is time compression. In his telling, model release cycles, company revenue milestones, enterprise adoption, and venture categories have all accelerated. Seed, Series A, and Series B still exist as financing labels, but they no longer cleanly describe company maturity when some seed rounds are larger than IPOs and the best AI companies can mature much earlier than prior software companies.The killer detail is the shift from models to inference. Tunguz argues that inference has become the dominant AI market because workloads and buyer preferences are fragmenting: video, batch, local, agentic, and real-time tasks each create different infrastructure needs. He compares this to databases splitting into OLTP, OLAP, vector, and streaming categories, with AI pushing the same specialization into inference infrastructure.The pull is that Theory sees the AI-native venture firm as part of the same pattern. The firm says it has analyzed twice as many investment opportunities with three investors working alongside a nine-person intelligence organization, using agents and research systems to map markets, source companies, and support diligence. The piece is both a market map and a statement about how venture itself is being rebuilt by the technology it funds.Read more: LinkedInVenture Has Rarely Looked More BifurcatedAuthor: Beezer Clarkson Published: July 14, 2026Beezer Clarkson points to PitchBook's Q2 report as evidence that the U.S. venture market has split into two very different realities. AI now accounts for more than 60 percent of all U.S. venture deal value, meaning the headline market can look active and well-funded even while much of the non-AI market is dealing with a much colder liquidity and fundraising environment.The thread uses that split as the setup for Clarkson's latest Origins episode with Alec Litowitz, founder of Magnetar and QStar Capital and one of Citadel's original founding partners. Clarkson says markets like this are periods of genuine uncertainty, not merely ordinary risk, which is why Litowitz's Adaptability Quotient framework is relevant.The embedded clip makes the liquidity point concrete. Litowitz says DPI is “the resolution of uncertainty” because it converts an uncertain investment into actual cash returned to LPs. In his framing, a realized dollar is a real mark, while TVPI remains uncertain until it is realized.The killer detail is the distinction between pricing risk and resolving uncertainty. Litowitz's perspective matters because QStar is a SpaceX investor and Clarkson says the conversation happened just before one of venture's most consequential IPOs. The episode's stated questions are why venture remains a way to gain exposure to innovation, how AI is changing what is investable, why liquidity is ultimately a function of time, and why uncertainty requires a different decision framework from risk.Read more: XThe Best Angel Investors in the US: Who Backs the Most Unicorns, and Who's Active NowAuthor: Ilya Strebulaev Published: July 10, 2026Ilya Strebulaev ranks angels, angel groups, accelerators, and incubators by lifetime U.S. unicorn investments, counting checks written before a company reached unicorn status. The top of the combined list is dominated by organizations: Y Combinator leads with 113 unicorn investments, followed by Plug and Play at 52 and 500 Global at 41. Sand Hill Angels is the highest-ranked angel group at 31.The killer detail is how quickly the list changes below the biggest accelerators. Strebulaev says 271 of the 304 investors in the Top 200 are individuals, or 89%. In the top 100, individuals are 91%. That makes the market underneath the large accelerator counts look much more personal: mostly operators and individual angels writing early checks from their own networks.The pull is the ranking's own caveat. Strebulaev writes that every lifetime leaderboard has a blind spot because many of the unicorns behind those totals were founded a decade or more ago, and some angels have since moved into formal funds, slowed down, or stopped investing. His post therefore separates lifetime performance from recent cohorts, including companies founded in 2015 or later and 2020 or later. For founders or allocators making current decisions, that distinction matters: a career record and a current record are not the same measure.Read more: Ilya StrebulaevAre Prediction Markets Doomed to Fail?Author: Contrary Published: July 16, 2026Contrary argues that prediction markets' current boom depends on whether platforms can prove they are more than regulated gambling with exchange-style branding. Kalshi and Polymarket have reached mass cultural, investor, and regulatory attention, but the article says the underlying idea is old: academic markets, corporate forecasting tools, Intrade, PredictIt, and other predecessors all struggled with the same linked problems of liquidity, legality, and user appeal.The killer detail is the comparison with sportsbooks. Prediction markets present themselves as peer-to-peer, transparent, and non-house-based, but sports contracts reportedly account for more than 90 percent of Kalshi trading, and the article says the platforms keep a much thinner slice of volume than sportsbooks. A market can therefore show sports-betting-scale handle while generating far less revenue.The pull is that the product's hardest problem may be distribution of wins. If a small group of sharp traders captures most profits while casual users lose interest, prediction markets may become valuable data feeds and professional tools before they become durable consumer networks.Read more: SourceRegulationExclusive: The Next Frontier of the Deportation Wars: College CampusesAuthor: Adrian Carrasquillo Published: July 11, 2026Adrian Carrasquillo reports that college campuses are becoming a new front in the fight over immigration enforcement because automatic license plate readers can turn ordinary campus security infrastructure into searchable location data. His thesis is that Flock Safety's camera network, even without direct ICE or DHS contracts, can feed deportation enforcement through local police partnerships and data-sharing practices.The killer detail is the campaign target. The Emergency Campaign to Support Higher Education, working with Schools Drop ICE, is focusing on 75 colleges and universities publicly identified as having Flock contracts. Flock says it has no ICE or DHS contracts, but activists argue the risk comes through local agencies that coordinate with federal authorities and run searches on their behalf.The pull is broader than immigration. Carrasquillo notes that license plate readers have already been abused by officers for stalking, and that Flock's AI search features can identify more than plates, including bumper stickers. A campus safety tool can become a political surveillance system when the data layer is searchable.Read more: The BulwarkThe Supreme Court Broke Independent Agencies. Here's a Way to Slow the Damage.Author: Todd Phillips Published: July 12, 2026Todd Phillips argues that the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. Slaughter damaged independent agencies by ending for-cause removal protections, but did not leave Congress powerless. The ruling weakens the old model in which commissioners at bodies such as the FTC, NLRB, CPSC, SEC, and CFTC could be insulated from dismissal over policy disagreements. Phillips says the next fight is whether presidents can turn nominally bipartisan commissions into one-party instruments.The killer detail is the procedural fix: quorum rules. Phillips proposes that Congress require bipartisan slates of commissioners to be seated before independent agencies can act. A president

Savage exposes how Bernie Sanders and other anti-American Democrats must be defeated by American patriots. He calls for an investigation into Sanders' background and his visits to the Soviet Union. Savage discusses Sanders' radical proposals and the growing influence of leftwing groups like Antifa, calling for it to be labeled a terrorist group. He speculates as to why there is a resurgence of socialism in the Trump era. He then warns that the United Kingdom is a bellwether for what could happen to America. Listeners tell Savage how London, Munich, and other European cities have been transformed by communists using radical Islamists.

── Interview 1: Bradlee Dean — SonsOfLibertyRadio.com ── ────────────────────────────────────────[00:04:50]86% of Self-Described Patriots and Christians Drop Their Kids Off to Be Raised by Their Sworn EnemiesDean: after Columbine, everybody ran from the schools instead of to them; we went into 366 public high schools in 25 states to be part of the answer.────────────────────────────────────────[00:11:56]Marsha Blackburn Is Covering Tennessee in Data Centers — Knight: These Are Surveillance CentersPeople nationwide are protesting AI; politicians are selling something nobody wants and calling it opportunity.────────────────────────────────────────[00:23:44]When I See Yuval Harari Shaking His Fist at God, I Think of David and Goliath — Now He's MineKnight: I look into the dark abyss every day, but when tyrants taunt God it keeps me going; those that fear God don't fear man.────────────────────────────────────────[00:28:29]Kissinger Said US Military Men Are Dumb, Stupid Animals Only to Be Used for Foreign PolicyDean: if that could drop into every American's ear, they'd understand what politicians are about — the military-industrial complex, not the troops. ──────────────────────────────────────── ── Interview 2: Eric Peters — EricPetersAutos.com ──────────────────────────────────────────[01:02:16]The American EV Has Been Crushed — Ford Lost $20,000 on Every F-150 Lightning It SoldLucid has never made a cent and threatened bankruptcy multiple times; a 66% sales increase means nothing if you're losing on every unit.────────────────────────────────────────[01:35:05]EU Bureaucrat Admits Speed Limiting Technology Was Always Designed to End Driver ControlFirst a chime, then throttle pushback already required in Europe, then you can't override at all; the official admitted that was the plan all along.────────────────────────────────────────[01:37:00]They Won't Just Control Speed — They'll Geofence Where You Can GoOxford bollards already block roads; C40 cities plan to limit flights to once every three years and clothing to three items per year; it rolls out gradually.────────────────────────────────────────[01:40:33]McConnell's Weekend at Bernie's — Republicans Just Have to Run the Clock to August 3Peters: the lying is so blatant it's good news — we cannot vote our way out of this; we may be in a 1774 moment, just before Lexington and Concord.────────────────────────────────────────[01:44:06]Peters: Trump Is the Perfect Agent of Chaos for the Great Reset — Brought in to Pull It OffA leftist could never have imposed what Trump has done; the Butler assassination attempt was staged; Trump was positioned to build the surveillance state with red hats staying quiet.────────────────────────────────────────[02:03:00]The Biggest Power We Have Is to Disconnect — Don't Buy Connected Cars or Smart TechnologyPeters: we need proper dependency on friends and community; G. Edward Griffin said we must work collectively for individual liberty; the founders did exactly that. ──────────────────────────────────────── Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silver For 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code “KNIGHT” For high quality made in America products go to HomeSteadProducts.shop and use promo code “Knight” for 10% off your purchases Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-show Or you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

The Speech With No Evidence. Networks Stiff Trump.SAVE Act Won't be Saved. Trump TACO's on Tolls.Lindsey's Mixed Legacy. Mitch Still MIA.Low T at the DOD. Daylight Savings Time. Again.With Olivier Knox, Senior National Correspondent at U.S. News and World Report, John Bennett, White House Correspondent at The Hill and Igor Bobic, Senate Reporter for NOTUS. Today's Bill Press Pod is supported by The Laborers' International Union of North America. More information at LIUNA.orgSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If you support us on Patreon, you may know that we have been doing Aftershows weekly for many years. We are releasing Aftershows from the past (two years old) on Fridays for everyone's enjoyment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_rKIuUt9YA You Tell 'Em, Bernie! (Sega 1999 E3 Press Conference) Aftershow CJ played the audio from Sega's 1999 E3 press conference in the standard episode. And in the Aftershow, CJ takes a few minutes to talk about what you may have just heard. If you have an idea for a game we can play in the Aftershow, email it to us at playeronepodcast@gmail.com! Thanks for your support!

── Interview 1: Bradlee Dean — SonsOfLibertyRadio.com ── ────────────────────────────────────────[00:04:50]86% of Self-Described Patriots and Christians Drop Their Kids Off to Be Raised by Their Sworn EnemiesDean: after Columbine, everybody ran from the schools instead of to them; we went into 366 public high schools in 25 states to be part of the answer.────────────────────────────────────────[00:11:56]Marsha Blackburn Is Covering Tennessee in Data Centers — Knight: These Are Surveillance CentersPeople nationwide are protesting AI; politicians are selling something nobody wants and calling it opportunity.────────────────────────────────────────[00:23:44]When I See Yuval Harari Shaking His Fist at God, I Think of David and Goliath — Now He's MineKnight: I look into the dark abyss every day, but when tyrants taunt God it keeps me going; those that fear God don't fear man.────────────────────────────────────────[00:28:29]Kissinger Said US Military Men Are Dumb, Stupid Animals Only to Be Used for Foreign PolicyDean: if that could drop into every American's ear, they'd understand what politicians are about — the military-industrial complex, not the troops. ──────────────────────────────────────── ── Interview 2: Eric Peters — EricPetersAutos.com ──────────────────────────────────────────[01:02:16]The American EV Has Been Crushed — Ford Lost $20,000 on Every F-150 Lightning It SoldLucid has never made a cent and threatened bankruptcy multiple times; a 66% sales increase means nothing if you're losing on every unit.────────────────────────────────────────[01:35:05]EU Bureaucrat Admits Speed Limiting Technology Was Always Designed to End Driver ControlFirst a chime, then throttle pushback already required in Europe, then you can't override at all; the official admitted that was the plan all along.────────────────────────────────────────[01:37:00]They Won't Just Control Speed — They'll Geofence Where You Can GoOxford bollards already block roads; C40 cities plan to limit flights to once every three years and clothing to three items per year; it rolls out gradually.────────────────────────────────────────[01:40:33]McConnell's Weekend at Bernie's — Republicans Just Have to Run the Clock to August 3Peters: the lying is so blatant it's good news — we cannot vote our way out of this; we may be in a 1774 moment, just before Lexington and Concord.────────────────────────────────────────[01:44:06]Peters: Trump Is the Perfect Agent of Chaos for the Great Reset — Brought in to Pull It OffA leftist could never have imposed what Trump has done; the Butler assassination attempt was staged; Trump was positioned to build the surveillance state with red hats staying quiet.────────────────────────────────────────[02:03:00]The Biggest Power We Have Is to Disconnect — Don't Buy Connected Cars or Smart TechnologyPeters: we need proper dependency on friends and community; G. Edward Griffin said we must work collectively for individual liberty; the founders did exactly that. ──────────────────────────────────────── Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silver For 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code “KNIGHT” For high quality made in America products go to HomeSteadProducts.shop and use promo code “Knight” for 10% off your purchases Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-show Or you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-david-knight-show--5282736/support.

Kevin starts ranting, and Bernie Miklasz talks relievers!- h2 full 2072 Fri, 17 Jul 2026 20:28:10 +0000 BkhKAU2nu0NVmf4EBR7pl4nhInbagOXU comedy,religion & spirituality,society & culture,news,government The Dave Glover Show comedy,religion & spirituality,society & culture,news,government Kevin starts ranting, and Bernie Miklasz talks relievers!- h2 The Dave Glover Show has been driving St. Louis home for over 20 years. Unafraid to discuss virtually any topic, you'll hear Dave and crew's unique perspective on current events, news and politics, and anything and everything in between. © 2025 Audacy, Inc. Comedy Religion & Spirituality Society & Culture News Government https://player.amperwavepodcastin

This week, Bernie sits down with Donivan Blair, bassist for The Toadies. Donivan talks about growing up in Sherman, Texas, playing in Hagfish with his brother Zach Blair, and finding his place in one of Dallas' most influential rock bands. He also reflects on the legendary Dallas music scene, the making of The Toadies' latest album, The Charmer, with the late Steve Albini, and the band's decision to take ownership of their music. They also discuss his “Why Bass?” podcast and the people, experiences, and influences that have shaped his career.@ToadiesOfficialinstagram.com/whybass71instagram.com/thetoadies******************************************Hungry for more?Check us out at https://isbreakfast.com******************************************

Day Break | Free Speech, Free For All Friday --- 00:00 - Monologue 28:15 – David A. Kallman, Senior Partner with the Kallman Legal Group. In this edition of the Kallman Legal Report, Kallman discusses the media's role in covering major political stories, including recently declassified documents related to the 2020 election and allegations of voter fraud. He also examines concerns about foreign influence in media ownership and discusses election-related issues emerging in Michigan. 38:31 – John Solomon, founder of Just the News and host of Just the News, No Noise. Solomon discusses his work surrounding the Trump administration's declassification of election-related documents, examining allegations of voter fraud, foreign interference, and the role of major news organizations in covering—or choosing not to cover—these developments. The conversation also addresses concerns about compromised voter records and election security. 57:52 – Rep. Tim Walberg, Representative for Michigan's 5th Congressional District and member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and House Education and Workforce Committee. Walberg reacts to President Trump's national address, discusses the upcoming midterm elections, and examines concerns surrounding election security, allegations of foreign interference, and the importance of restoring public confidence in the electoral process. 1:17:04 - Monologue 1:26:05 – Steve Dulan, professor and attorney. Dulan discusses President Trump's address, voter fraud allegations, wildfire smoke affecting Michigan, and other major legal and political developments making headlines, providing legal analysis on the day's top stories. 1:36:20 – Tim Golding, Michigan State Director for Americans for Prosperity. Golding discusses Michigan's political landscape heading into the upcoming gubernatorial and Senate races, previews AFP's event featuring Mike Rogers, and discusses a Lansing political rally featuring Abdul El-Sayed alongside Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders while examining what these events may signal for Michigan voters. --- Check out our brand new podcast, 'Forgotten America'... Episode 22 is live NOW at Steve Gruber on YouTube! Link below: https://youtu.be/Dfr8Z_syB-M

In den USA gewinnt eine neue, radikale Generation linker Politiker an Einfluss. Angeführt von den «Democratic Socialists of America» (DSA) fordern junge Aktivisten das etablierte Parteiensystem heraus. Getrieben von steigenden Lebenshaltungskosten und wachsender Ungleichheit setzen sie auf antikapitalistische und antizionistische Botschaften. Für die Demokratische Partei birgt dieser Linkspopulismus jedoch grosse Risiken, sagt Auslandredaktorin Isabelle Jacobi. Zwar mobilisieren die rebellischen Kandidaten eine lautstarke Basis, doch in entscheidenden Swing States drohen sie gemässigte Wähler zu verschrecken. Statt geschlossen aufzutreten, verstricken sich die Demokraten in heftige Flügelkämpfe. Das schwächt ihre Chancen bei den anstehenden Wahlen und liefert den Republikanern um Donald Trump eine perfekte Steilvorlage für den Wahlkampf. Gast: Isabelle Jacobi, Auslandredaktorin Host: Antonia Moser Redaktion: Sarah Ziegler und Alice Grosjean [Hier ist Isabelles Kommentar dazu](https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/houston-die-demokraten-haben-ein-problem-die-radikale-linke-ld.10014409). [Exklusiv für dich als Podcast-Fan: 7 Tage NZZ-Digitalabo geschenkt. Unverbindlich testen. ](https://probeabo.nzz.ch/podcast?utm_source=shownotes&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=0726_NZZCH_Podcast)

Democratic socialists are having a moment. But can they actually remake the Democratic Party — and the American economy — in their image? My guest today, Bhaskar Sunkara, is longtime democratic socialist, and he makes the case that socialism has a universal appeal that transcends our current politics and will ultimately triumph against capitalism. 0:00 Intro 1:24 The rise of democratic socialism 5:00 Why is this a breakthrough moment for Democratic Socialism? 8:24 Class Realities: The demographics of socialist voters 9:26 The intellectual foundations of the American left 11:02 What socialists want: Affordable housing, Medicare for All 15:55 Socialist housing policy: construction, rent control, public housing 18:17 The socialist approach to AI and technological change 22:16 The case for unions 24:18 Is Democratic Socialism compatible with capitalism? 25:57 Class conflict vs. the identity politics of the wokeness era 29:00 The ideological conflict between Hillary Clinton liberals and the Bernie Sanders left 30:40 This Socialist wants the left to stop hating America 36:38 Why Israel-Palestine and anti-imperialism are central issues for Democratic Socialists 45:51 Luigi Mangione and the illiberal left 50:37 Is Zohran Mamdani a moderate? 51:54 Was Joe Biden's presidency a socialist experiment? 55:42 Raising taxes to expand the welfare state (A full transcript of this episode is available on the Times website.) Thoughts? Email us at interestingtimes@nytimes.com. Please subscribe to our YouTube Channel, Interesting Times with Ross Douthat. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also subscribe via your favorite podcast app here https://www.nytimes.com/activate-access/audio?source=podcatcher. For more podcasts and narrated articles, download The New York Times app at nytimes.com/app. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he dives into today's top stories shaping America and the world. In this episode of The Wright Report, Bryan breaks down Trump's rapidly expanding military campaign against Iran, including new strikes on contested Persian Gulf islands that could pave the way for U.S. boots on the ground. Bryan lays out the Pentagon's strategy to hammer Iran's air defenses and seize strategic islands near the Strait of Hormuz, plus what it would take to destroy Iran's deeply buried nuclear program at Pickaxe Mountain. He also breaks down the growing economic fallout, with emergency oil reserves nearly exhausted and the Red Sea shaping up as the next flashpoint. Plus, Bryan covers Trump's reversal on ICE traffic stop arrests after a string of deadly encounters, an escalating theological clash between JD Vance and the Vatican over immigration, a batch of encouraging economic data, and the Democratic Socialists' new platform to abolish the presidency, Senate, and Supreme Court. "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32   Keywords: Wright Report, Bryan Dean Wright, Iran war, Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz, Pickaxe Mountain, Kharg Island, ICE traffic stops, immigration, JD Vance, Pope Leo, Vatican, Marco Rubio, ICC, US economy, inflation, DSA platform, Democratic Socialists, Bernie Sanders, AOC, Zohran Mamdani

In the first hour of tonight's Sports Open Line, Nate Gatter's guests are Bernie Miklasz for our weekly segment to talk Cardinals baseball, followed by Kevin Kalish, SLU Men's Soccer Head Coach to discuss their schedule, recruiting class, and upcoming season!

The Great Bernie Williams joins the show live from Fanatics Fest. Bern Baby Bern!

Craig and Cmac talk with the Great Charlotte Flair from the WWE and legendary Yankee Bernie Williams live from Fanatics Fest.

“The idea that things can fundamentally be better—and that we can make that happen—is what pulled me into organizing.” On this Detroit is Different episode, Chris Gilmer-Hill, candidate for Michigan State House District 8, connects his campaign to family history, Black Detroit memory, and years of grassroots political work. He traces his roots from his great-grandmother Annabelle coming from Louisiana to Wayne University in the 1930s, to his family becoming “the first Black family on their block” in University District with a racial covenant crossed out in Sharpie, to stories of sharecropping, labor struggle, and the Elaine Massacre shaping his understanding of power. Chris shares how Bernie Sanders' 2020 campaign moved him from watching politics to organizing, rooted in the belief that “a better world is possible.” Through DSA and Detroit campaigns, he began knocking doors for Lyra Spencer, Denzel McCampbell, and others, learning that real power comes from “normal people” talking to neighbors about policies that can materially improve their lives. He has canvassed across Detroit—east side, west side, southwest, every council district—and says the work taught him that people are willing to listen. This episode shows how family knowledge, socialist values, environmental justice, and door-to-door organizing brought Chris from studying systems to fighting to change them. Detroit is Different is a podcast hosted by Khary Frazier covering people adding to the culture of an American Classic city. Visit www.detroitisdifferent.com to hear, see and experience more of what makes Detroit different. Follow, like, share, and subscribe to the Podcast on iTunes, Google Play, and Sticher. Comment, suggest and connect with the podcast by emailing info@detroitisdifferent.com Find out more at https://detroit-is-different.pinecast.co

Alla vigilia delle elezioni di midterm, con la popolarità in calo e molti americani preoccupati per il costo della vita, Donald Trump ha rispolverato uno dei fantasmi più antichi della politica statunitense: il pericolo comunista. Ma dietro la propaganda c'è un cambiamento reale. Tra i giovani e nell'elettorato democratico il socialismo è sempre più popolare, mentre candidati vicini a Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez e Zohran Mamdani guadagnano spazio. L'America sta davvero cambiando il suo rapporto con il capitalismo? E alle urne conterà di più la paura del “pericolo rosso” o il prezzo della spesa? Scegli ActionAid per il tuo 5x1000 e sostieni tutti i diritti. Istruzione, cibo, acqua, una vita libera dalla violenza: la tua firma può cambiare una storia. Inserisci il codice fiscale di ActionAid nella tua dichiarazione dei redditi: CF 09686720153 Scopri di più: https://www.cinquepermille-actionaid.it Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We've got a fun one for you today, folks!Andrew Coltrin, aka PartlyRobot, aka author of "A is for Autism," "The ADHD FAQ," and "The ADHD Coping Skills Deck," joins Joe, Elly, and Bernie on the pod this week to talk about his latest book, neurodivergence, and finding what works for you (diagnosed or not).************Thank you for catching the People's Guide to Publishing vlogcast!  We post new episodes every Thursday about publishing, authors, and the book industry. You can also listen via your preferred podcast app, or by visiting linktree.com/microcosmGet the book: https://microcosmpublishing.com/catalog/books/3663Get the workbook: https://microcosmpublishing.com/catalog/zines/10031More from Microcosm: http://microcosmpublishing.comMore by Joe Biel: http://joebiel.netMore by Elly Blue: http://takingthelane.comSubscribe to our monthly email newsletter: http://eepurl.com/gIXT6vFind us on social media:Facebook: http://facebook.com/microcosmpublishingBlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/microcosm.bsky.socialInstagram: http://instagram.com/microcosm_pub************

As Director of National Intelligence, Gabbard presided over the nation's top intelligence agencies, including the CIA, the NSA, and the intelligence branch of the FBI. Her tenure was brief but embattled. In addition to advising the president on things like Iran's nuclear capabilities, Gabbard regularly released tranches of declassified documents in reports with headlines like, “New Evidence Uncovers Obama-Directed Creation of False Intelligence Report Used to Launch Years-long Coup to Undermine President Trump and the American People.” But last month, a remarkable story from Washington Post reporter Jon Swaine brought us one step closer to understanding the enigma that is Tulsi Gabbard. His investigation, Tulsi Gabbard, her guru and the mysterious messages that helped shape her political career, helps explain why, for instance, Gabbard has shapeshifted over the years, from liberal Democrat to Bernie Sanders ally to Trump insider. Why she's flip-flopped on same-sex marriage and war with Iran. As Swaine uncovered, Gabbard's public persona may have been shaped and re-shaped, in part, by a mysterious guru and his followers.  On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Bluesky, TikTok and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Michael Wolff and Joanna Coles dig into the political fallout from the sudden death of Lindsey Graham, revealing what Trump was really thinking behind his public tributes, how Truth Social posts are crafted inside his inner circle, and why Graham's complicated relationship with the president was driven as much by fear and access as loyalty. They also dissect the growing speculation surrounding Mitch McConnell's health, Trump's increasingly inescapable Middle East conflict despite his promise to avoid forever wars, and why Michael believes the president is trapped by his own inability to change course. Finally, they turn to an unexpected force reshaping the Democratic Party, making the case that Bernie Sanders may have had a far greater impact on American politics than even his critics are willing to admit. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Season 2 continues with "The Rustlers," as the Duke Boys team up with country music legend Mel Tillis to protect his prized racehorse from Boss Hogg, horse rustlers, and one crooked horse dealer. While the General Lee doesn't get as much screen time as usual, this episode delivers plenty of memorable moments—including a race between the General Lee and a thoroughbred, Uncle Jesse's now-famous climb out of the General, and Boss Hogg's hilarious attempts to impress Lulu. In this review, Rob, Corndog, and Bernie discuss Mel Tillis' unforgettable guest appearance, the real-life story behind his famous stutter, and the surprising appearance of Dorothy Collier, who would later marry James Best and become Dorothy Best. Corndog also breaks down several production details, including one of the rare General Lees without a roll bar, continuity clues, classic vehicle sightings, and hidden details that longtime Dukes fans will appreciate. The crew also plays another round of the Automotive Celebrity Birthday Game, Bernie brings the latest automotive news, and everyone debates one important question: Could the General Lee really outrun a racehorse? Whether you're a longtime Dukes fan or simply love classic TV and vintage muscle cars, there's plenty to enjoy in this week's review. The post K&F Show #372: Dukes Review S2E3 “The Rustlers” – Mel Tillis & Rosco's Future Wife first appeared on The Muscle Car Place.

Circle August 4th on your calendar: Michigan is now the number one marquee primary matchup I'm watching. Mallory McMorrow is out of the race as of a couple of weeks ago, and what's left is a head-to-head contest between the Democratic establishment — or at least what's left of it — and the insurgent progressive movement. Yes, friends, it's Haley Stevens versus Abdul El-Sayed, and it's set to be a knockout fight.This really represents the first live test for the current Democratic Party. Can the progressive movement, with a more charismatic candidate and a high-energy, extraordinarily competent campaign, expand its coalition enough to win statewide? Or will it do what it's done in the past — hit a ceiling when the opposition consolidates?There's only one new clean head-to-head test: a Tavern Research survey from July 6th through July 7th of 2,211 likely Democratic primary voters. It found Haley Stevens at 42%, El-Sayed at 41%, with 17 to 18% undecided. That's a margin-of-error race, but it's the first time in a very long time that we've seen Haley Stevens up over Abdul. The same poll tested the old three-person field and found El-Sayed at 41%, Stevens at 38%, and the flagging McMorrow at five. In other words, when McMorrow disappears, the voters are forced into a binary choice, and they're making it more on the Stevens side than the El-Sayed side. But still: tight, tight, tight, tight, tight.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Because we live in reboot culture, this is essentially — coalitionally, at least — Bernie Sanders versus Hillary Clinton for a new generation. The Stevens coalition is exactly like Hill-dogs: older voters, Black voters, traditional self-identified Democrats, non-college voters, and on the Michigan side, Metro Detroit — particularly Oakland, Macomb, and Wayne counties. What's powering Stevens is Black voters. She's led El-Sayed consistently in almost every poll. Meanwhile, Abdul's coalition is younger voters, very liberal and progressive voters, college-educated voters, voters outside Metro Detroit, Democratic Socialists, Arab Americans, and Muslim organizing networks. He also has significant labor support, including the UAW endorsement, despite most UAW members being non-college educated, which would normally fall outside his coalition. A very strange world we live in.The one demographic that's going to decide this race is women. They're the biggest disputed demo in every poll we've seen. An April Glenn Gariff poll showed Stevens leading among women 29% to 17%. But in a June Mitchell poll, the exact opposite was demonstrated: El-Sayed led with women 51% to Stevens's 35%. So as we look at the rest of the polls from now until Election Day, keep an eye on the ladies. They're the majority of the likely Democratic primary electorate. If Stevens can consolidate older and Black women while also inheriting McMorrow's suburban women, she can win. But if El-Sayed's progressive and younger female support holds, his coalition may be large enough to break through.Which brings me to the latest front of this war. I don't know if it's being done to court women, I don't know if it's being done specifically on purpose, but the results are undeniable: El-Sayed and Stevens are in an out-and-out shooting match to be more cringe. For Haley Stevens, this isn't something she has to worry about. She's naturally gifted in this regard. She's awkward, she has a thick Great Lakes accent, and she speaks in this clipped, emphatic manner. On one hand, she is herself. She feels less like a polished Washington candidate and more like somebody who wandered out of a Detroiters sketch. Abdul El-Sayed has the opposite problem. He's clearly a charismatic, compassionate candidate, a strong communicator, and an aggressive counterpuncher. But if you're running against him, your job is to make El-Sayed scare the hos. I think his campaign has found a solution: make himself toe-cringingly embarrassing. My read — and this is analysis, not something the campaign has admitted — is that cringe is a form of inoculation against being defined as scary. If you're embarrassing, you can't be terrifying.So who's going to win? I'm an old-school guy. I tend to bet chalk unless I'm convinced otherwise. And while I very much believe El-Sayed has the better campaign, and I think he's the better candidate if we're just looking at raw talent, I'd still bet the Michigan coalition that usually wins. Haley Stevens is a suboptimal candidate, and I've counted her out at every step of this race. I thought McMorrow was going to win. That obviously didn't happen. So don't take my prediction for a whole lot. But Stevens doesn't really have to do anything but be her cringy self to get over the line. Meanwhile, waiting on the other side, smiling like the butcher's dog, is Mike Rogers. He nearly beat Elissa Slotkin in 2024, losing by only 18 to 20,000 votes, about 0.3%. This is supposed to be more of a blue-wave year, but Rogers is going to benefit from a fractured leftward coalition. After Stevens and El-Sayed spend weeks beating the hell out of each other, the question is whether the losing half comes home. If they don't, Rogers benefits.Chapters00:00:00 - Intro00:03:01 - Michigan Preview00:14:58 - Update00:22:04 - Trump's Upcoming Address00:25:40 - Reconciliation00:29:36 - Inflation00:32:37 - Interview with Bill Scher01:20:01 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

Bill frames current Democratic primaries as “establishment versus outsider,” citing races in New York City, Maine, and Michigan, and introduces Bernie Sanders' former strategist Tad Devine and his book, "How the Democrats Screwed Bernie." Devine recounts the first Sanders presidential planning meeting at Press's home, explains why Sanders ran to elevate issues like wages, healthcare for all, climate change, and campaign finance reform, and describes how Sanders' large email list fueled unprecedented small-dollar fundraising. Devine argues the 2016 nominating system—including superdelegates, limited debates, DNC coordination with the Clinton campaign, and a voter-file shutdown—was stacked against Sanders, and says Sanders would have beaten Donald Trump. Looking to 2026, Devine urges Democrats to let voters decide primaries, prioritize authenticity and economic issues, curb big-money influence, and mobilize to stop Trump.You can get your own copy of Tad Devine's book at Bookshop.org.Once again, Bill highlights the necessity of winning the midterms for Democrats to stop Donald Trump and his enablers. If you can support the cause financially, the best and easiest place to do that is ACTBLUE.com.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

François Ruffin est député et journaliste, auteur de plusieurs documentaires et candidat à notre prochaine élection présidentielle.Je me méfie de moi-même quant il s'agit de faire des interviews politiques car je ne crois pas du tout que si tu parles à une personne pendant 2h tu fini par savoir ce qu'elle a dans le ventre.Alors j'ai proposé à François une discussion à bâton rompu, sur des tonnes de sujets à débuter par l'écologie comme la plus grande insécurité qu'on refuse de nommer, du logement comme premier problème de pouvoir d'achat en France, de la mondialisation que les Français n'ont jamais vraiment choisie, de l'intelligence artificielle qui menace autant les cadres que les ouvriers, et de la manière dont le Rassemblement National a construit sa progression en trois étages.J'ai questionné François Ruffin sur ses propres angles morts, sur ce que "faire ensemble" veut dire pour lui, et sur ce qu'il changerait dans l'école, la police et la fiscalité s'il en avait le pouvoir.Je crois que comme il le dit lui même c'est une discussion qu'on en entend rarement avec un politique : sans petite phrase, sans recherche de buzz, avec une vraie tentative de dire ce qu'il pense dans ses tripes.Citations marquantes"L'économie et l'argent, ce sont des imaginaires. Il n'y a pas d'argent, il n'y a pas d'économie." (00:10:01)"Si la planète était une banque, ça fait longtemps qu'on l'aurait sauvée." (01:21:58)"On a des PDG à stock-options ou propriétaires multimilliardaires qui viennent se cacher derrière la vertu du petit entrepreneur." (00:45:41)"Je crois qu'on existe par les autres et qu'on se sauve par les autres." (01:04:00)"La démocratie, ce n'est pas du consensus. C'est du conflit, mais organisé, verbalisé, institutionnalisé." (01:41:54)Idées centrales L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité (00:07:06) Pour Ruffin, l'écologie n'est pas un sujet parmi d'autres mais l'insécurité la plus grave qu'on refuse de traiter comme telle, parce qu'on préfère l'éviter psychologiquement plutôt que de regarder en face une "chronique d'une mort annoncée".Le logement, angle mort du pouvoir d'achat (00:27:53) La part du logement dans le budget des ménages est passée de 10 % à 30 % en vingt ans, avec des loyers en hausse de 80 % pendant que les salaires réels progressaient de 20 %. Ruffin en fait un sujet aussi central que les retraites, et un facteur direct de la chute de la natalité.Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble (01:05:47) Ruffin distingue une société qui cohabite (statique, côte à côte) d'une société qui avance vers un horizon commun. Sans projet partagé, il pense qu'un peuple s'épuise dans les jalousies et les boucs émissaires, comme un couple sans projet commun.Un État colonisé de l'intérieur (00:49:07) Plutôt que de parler de lobbying, Ruffin décrit un État où les intérêts privés (pharmaceutiques en particulier) ont pénétré la décision publique de l'intérieur, citant les réunions du lobby des grands labos tenues dans les salons de l'Élysée.L'IA, un double choc pour les classes moyennes (01:28:10) Contrairement aux vagues précédentes, l'IA touche des métiers qualifiés qui se croyaient protégés par leur diplôme, en cumulant robotisation et délocalisation des postes de bureau, de comptabilité ou de design.Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages (01:49:45) Ruffin décrit le RN comme construit en couches successives : Jean-Marie Le Pen et le racisme affiché, Marine Le Pen et le discours social, Jordan Bardella et le ralliement aux milieux économiques, avec une tension naissante entre ces deux derniers étages.Questions posées dans l'interviewPourquoi l'écologie n'est-elle jamais présentée comme la insécurité qu'elle est réellement ?Comment un responsable politique peut-il agir au niveau national dans un monde mondialisé ?Le logement est-il devenu le vrai sujet du pouvoir d'achat en France ?Comment expliquer que les Français n'aient jamais vraiment choisi la mondialisation ?Faut-il taxer davantage les ultra-riches sans braquer les petits patrons ?Comment redonner une finalité claire à l'école et à la police ?L'intelligence artificielle peut-elle faire s'effondrer le capitalisme lui-même ?Pourquoi les partis politiques n'arrivent-ils plus à débattre entre eux, même à gauche ?Quels sont les angles morts de la gauche, et les vôtres ?Comment le Rassemblement National a-t-il construit sa progression électorale ?Références citéesLivres et écritsLe Progrès. Le Nôtre, François Ruffin (00:56:55)Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach (01:24:03)Résonance, Hartmut Rosa (01:26:39)La Grande Transformation, Karl Polanyi (01:29:38)"The Antisocial Century", The Atlantic (01:04:19)Travaux de Ha-Joon Chang, économiste sud-coréen (00:20:10)Rapport d'Olivier Lluansi sur la réindustrialisation (00:47:12)Article de Grégory Pouy pour la Fondation Jean-Jaurès sur l'impact des podcasts en politique (00:04:21 et 01:45:19)Personnes citéesAmbroise Croizat (00:13:44)Jean Monnet (01:10:35)Franklin D. Roosevelt (01:09:07)Christophe Castaner (00:22:58)Gérald Darmanin (00:42:52)Bernie Sanders (01:12:27)Kamala Harris (01:12:23)Michel Maffesoli (00:36:42 et 01:15:04)Sarah Saldmann (01:46:12)Annie Ernaux (01:47:42)Antoine Foucher (00:22:12)Yann LeCun et Fidji Simo (01:35:43)Jean Pisani-Ferry (01:23:09)Keynes (01:21:36)Institutions et conceptsSAFER (00:30:26)RIC, référendum d'initiative citoyenne (00:37:24)CROUS (00:31:34)Medef, CGPME, U2P (00:45:20)Classement Challenges des grandes fortunes (00:40:44)Livret A et taux de centralisation (00:56:53)Timestamps clés00:04 : Pourquoi cette conversation avec un politique sort de l'ordinaire06:13 : Générique, entrée en matière sur la canicule07:06 : L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité10:01 : L'économie et l'argent, de purs imaginaires12:27 : D'où vient l'engagement politique de Ruffin13:44 : Ambroise Croizat et la naissance de la Sécurité sociale17:14 : Comment agir au niveau national contre les multinationales20:10 : Le modèle sud-coréen : importer moins plutôt qu'exporter plus22:58 : La mondialisation, un choix des dirigeants, pas des Français25:48 : Protéger certains produits sans fermer le pays27:53 : Le logement, premier poste du pouvoir d'achat33:21 : Les années 80 et la grande déréglementation37:24 : Le RIC et les états généraux comme réponse démocratique40:38 : Sortir des boucs émissaires et de la jalousie sociale45:22 : Distinguer les petits patrons des multinationales49:07 : Un État colonisé de l'intérieur par les intérêts privés53:00 : Où trouve-t-on l'argent pour l'armée58:38 : Remettre la cuisine, le jardinage et la réparation à l'école1:01:02 : La théorie de la société sans friction1:05:47 : Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble1:09:07 : L'horizon commun : une économie de guerre climatique1:12:23 : Les angles morts de Kamala Harris et de la gauche1:15:18 : Insécurité, immigration, violence : ce qu'en pense Ruffin1:21:36 : Sortir de la compétitivité comme seul horizon1:26:48 : L'IA peut-elle faire tomber le capitalisme1:28:10 : Le double choc de l'IA : robotisation et délocalisation1:35:43 : Pourquoi l'Europe n'a ni réseau social ni IA souveraine1:41:54 : La démocratie comme conflit organisé, pas comme consensus1:44:06 : Le rôle des journalistes politiques dans la course au buzz1:46:12 : Ce que l'expérience de terrain change vraiment1:49:45 : Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages1:53:53 : Pourquoi la radicalité se mesure au programme, pas au ton1:56:50 : Ouvrir et fermer la porte, la conclusion de François Ruffin Suggestion d'autres épisodes à écouter : #401 Les politiques sont-ils deconnectés du réél? Avec Boris Vallaud (Partie 1) (https://audmns.com/ZOPVNPw) #376 Quelles stratégies pour reconstruire une France autonome et résiliente? Avec Arnaud Montebourg - Partie 1 (https://audmns.com/UxFQjUM) [Solo] La vraie violence est celle dont on ne parle pas (https://audmns.com/COyPqqx)Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

François Ruffin est député et journaliste, auteur de plusieurs documentaires et candidat à notre prochaine élection présidentielle.Je me méfie de moi-même quant il s'agit de faire des interviews politiques car je ne crois pas du tout que si tu parles à une personne pendant 2h tu fini par savoir ce qu'elle a dans le ventre.Alors j'ai proposé à François une discussion à bâton rompu, sur des tonnes de sujets à débuter par l'écologie comme la plus grande insécurité qu'on refuse de nommer, du logement comme premier problème de pouvoir d'achat en France, de la mondialisation que les Français n'ont jamais vraiment choisie, de l'intelligence artificielle qui menace autant les cadres que les ouvriers, et de la manière dont le Rassemblement National a construit sa progression en trois étages.J'ai questionné François Ruffin sur ses propres angles morts, sur ce que "faire ensemble" veut dire pour lui, et sur ce qu'il changerait dans l'école, la police et la fiscalité s'il en avait le pouvoir.Je crois que comme il le dit lui même c'est une discussion qu'on en entend rarement avec un politique : sans petite phrase, sans recherche de buzz, avec une vraie tentative de dire ce qu'il pense dans ses tripes.Citations marquantes"L'économie et l'argent, ce sont des imaginaires. Il n'y a pas d'argent, il n'y a pas d'économie." (00:10:01)"Si la planète était une banque, ça fait longtemps qu'on l'aurait sauvée." (01:21:58)"On a des PDG à stock-options ou propriétaires multimilliardaires qui viennent se cacher derrière la vertu du petit entrepreneur." (00:45:41)"Je crois qu'on existe par les autres et qu'on se sauve par les autres." (01:04:00)"La démocratie, ce n'est pas du consensus. C'est du conflit, mais organisé, verbalisé, institutionnalisé." (01:41:54)Idées centrales L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité (00:07:06) Pour Ruffin, l'écologie n'est pas un sujet parmi d'autres mais l'insécurité la plus grave qu'on refuse de traiter comme telle, parce qu'on préfère l'éviter psychologiquement plutôt que de regarder en face une "chronique d'une mort annoncée".Le logement, angle mort du pouvoir d'achat (00:27:53) La part du logement dans le budget des ménages est passée de 10 % à 30 % en vingt ans, avec des loyers en hausse de 80 % pendant que les salaires réels progressaient de 20 %. Ruffin en fait un sujet aussi central que les retraites, et un facteur direct de la chute de la natalité.Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble (01:05:47) Ruffin distingue une société qui cohabite (statique, côte à côte) d'une société qui avance vers un horizon commun. Sans projet partagé, il pense qu'un peuple s'épuise dans les jalousies et les boucs émissaires, comme un couple sans projet commun.Un État colonisé de l'intérieur (00:49:07) Plutôt que de parler de lobbying, Ruffin décrit un État où les intérêts privés (pharmaceutiques en particulier) ont pénétré la décision publique de l'intérieur, citant les réunions du lobby des grands labos tenues dans les salons de l'Élysée.L'IA, un double choc pour les classes moyennes (01:28:10) Contrairement aux vagues précédentes, l'IA touche des métiers qualifiés qui se croyaient protégés par leur diplôme, en cumulant robotisation et délocalisation des postes de bureau, de comptabilité ou de design.Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages (01:49:45) Ruffin décrit le RN comme construit en couches successives : Jean-Marie Le Pen et le racisme affiché, Marine Le Pen et le discours social, Jordan Bardella et le ralliement aux milieux économiques, avec une tension naissante entre ces deux derniers étages.Questions posées dans l'interviewPourquoi l'écologie n'est-elle jamais présentée comme la insécurité qu'elle est réellement ?Comment un responsable politique peut-il agir au niveau national dans un monde mondialisé ?Le logement est-il devenu le vrai sujet du pouvoir d'achat en France ?Comment expliquer que les Français n'aient jamais vraiment choisi la mondialisation ?Faut-il taxer davantage les ultra-riches sans braquer les petits patrons ?Comment redonner une finalité claire à l'école et à la police ?L'intelligence artificielle peut-elle faire s'effondrer le capitalisme lui-même ?Pourquoi les partis politiques n'arrivent-ils plus à débattre entre eux, même à gauche ?Quels sont les angles morts de la gauche, et les vôtres ?Comment le Rassemblement National a-t-il construit sa progression électorale ?Références citéesLivres et écritsLe Progrès. Le Nôtre, François Ruffin (00:56:55)Ecotopia, Ernest Callenbach (01:24:03)Résonance, Hartmut Rosa (01:26:39)La Grande Transformation, Karl Polanyi (01:29:38)"The Antisocial Century", The Atlantic (01:04:19)Travaux de Ha-Joon Chang, économiste sud-coréen (00:20:10)Rapport d'Olivier Lluansi sur la réindustrialisation (00:47:12)Article de Grégory Pouy pour la Fondation Jean-Jaurès sur l'impact des podcasts en politique (00:04:21 et 01:45:19)Personnes citéesAmbroise Croizat (00:13:44)Jean Monnet (01:10:35)Franklin D. Roosevelt (01:09:07)Christophe Castaner (00:22:58)Gérald Darmanin (00:42:52)Bernie Sanders (01:12:27)Kamala Harris (01:12:23)Michel Maffesoli (00:36:42 et 01:15:04)Sarah Saldmann (01:46:12)Annie Ernaux (01:47:42)Antoine Foucher (00:22:12)Yann LeCun et Fidji Simo (01:35:43)Jean Pisani-Ferry (01:23:09)Keynes (01:21:36)Institutions et conceptsSAFER (00:30:26)RIC, référendum d'initiative citoyenne (00:37:24)CROUS (00:31:34)Medef, CGPME, U2P (00:45:20)Classement Challenges des grandes fortunes (00:40:44)Livret A et taux de centralisation (00:56:53)Timestamps clés00:04 : Pourquoi cette conversation avec un politique sort de l'ordinaire06:13 : Générique, entrée en matière sur la canicule07:06 : L'écologie comme la plus grosse insécurité10:01 : L'économie et l'argent, de purs imaginaires12:27 : D'où vient l'engagement politique de Ruffin13:44 : Ambroise Croizat et la naissance de la Sécurité sociale17:14 : Comment agir au niveau national contre les multinationales20:10 : Le modèle sud-coréen : importer moins plutôt qu'exporter plus22:58 : La mondialisation, un choix des dirigeants, pas des Français25:48 : Protéger certains produits sans fermer le pays27:53 : Le logement, premier poste du pouvoir d'achat33:21 : Les années 80 et la grande déréglementation37:24 : Le RIC et les états généraux comme réponse démocratique40:38 : Sortir des boucs émissaires et de la jalousie sociale45:22 : Distinguer les petits patrons des multinationales49:07 : Un État colonisé de l'intérieur par les intérêts privés53:00 : Où trouve-t-on l'argent pour l'armée58:38 : Remettre la cuisine, le jardinage et la réparation à l'école1:01:02 : La théorie de la société sans friction1:05:47 : Faire ensemble plutôt que vivre ensemble1:09:07 : L'horizon commun : une économie de guerre climatique1:12:23 : Les angles morts de Kamala Harris et de la gauche1:15:18 : Insécurité, immigration, violence : ce qu'en pense Ruffin1:21:36 : Sortir de la compétitivité comme seul horizon1:26:48 : L'IA peut-elle faire tomber le capitalisme1:28:10 : Le double choc de l'IA : robotisation et délocalisation1:35:43 : Pourquoi l'Europe n'a ni réseau social ni IA souveraine1:41:54 : La démocratie comme conflit organisé, pas comme consensus1:44:06 : Le rôle des journalistes politiques dans la course au buzz1:46:12 : Ce que l'expérience de terrain change vraiment1:49:45 : Le Rassemblement National, une fusée à trois étages1:53:53 : Pourquoi la radicalité se mesure au programme, pas au ton1:56:50 : Ouvrir et fermer la porte, la conclusion de François RuffinHébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Today's Poll Question at Smerconish.com: Would a 2028 Democratic contender benefit from taking on the socialist wing now? Michael revisits Bill Clinton's famous "Sister Souljah moment" from 1992, and asks whether today's Democratic Party is approaching a similar political crossroads. As Democratic Socialists gain momentum in key primaries, is there an opening for a 2028 presidential hopeful to draw a clear ideological line—or would that fracture the party before the general election? Featuring analysis of Josh Shapiro, Rahm Emanuel, Bernie Sanders' influence, and Bill Daley's warning about a potential "Tea Party trap," this episode explores the strategic debate shaping the Democrats' future. Listen here, then vote at Smerconish.com - and be sure to RATE, REVIEW, and SHARE this podcast! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

────────────────────────────────────────[00:02:08]Journalist John Rappaport Dies — Knight Contrasts Him With Lindsey Graham, Who Died the Same WeekendRappaport questioned official COVID narratives when nobody else would; Graham spent his career pushing wars, coups, and mass death from behind the scenes.────────────────────────────────────────[00:05:22]Graham and McCain Flew to Ukraine to Stoke the Coup — Told Troops in 2016 "Next Year We Go on Offense Against Russia"Putin is not primarily responsible for the Ukraine war; Graham and McCain were pushing this outcome for years before Russia invaded.────────────────────────────────────────[00:15:04]Graham Never Saw a War He Didn't Like — His Last Act Was Pushing Trump to Strike Iran"We're killing all the right people" — his own words; he told Trump now was the time because Trump "thinks he runs the world."────────────────────────────────────────[00:22:16]Hamas AK-47 Fire Cannot Vaporize Cars — Israeli Apache Helicopters CanDocumentary evidence shows melted engine blocks at the Nova festival; AK rounds can't do that; Hellfire missiles from Israeli Apaches can; orders caught on video.────────────────────────────────────────[00:33:45]Graham Said "If America Pulls the Plug on Israel, God Will Pull the Plug on Us" — God Has Pulled the Plug on GrahamNetanyahu confirmed Graham kept pushing for more US funding even when Israel didn't want it; he'd go over Netanyahu's head to demand more.────────────────────────────────────────[00:40:05]Christian Zionists Replaced Christ and Abraham With the Nation of Israel — Cruz Says "We Are Commanded to Support Israel"They replaced promises to Abraham with promises to a corrupt warmongering government that kills for land; a convenient, not unfortunate, interpretation.────────────────────────────────────────[00:54:08]McConnell's Weekend at Bernie's Has Run 29 Days — Republicans Changed Kentucky Law in 2024 to Block a Special ElectionThey knew McConnell was in poor health and changed the law; hold out to August 3 and the governor cannot appoint a replacement.────────────────────────────────────────[00:55:10]CNN About to Fire Scott Jennings After Claiming to Speak With McConnell for 20 Minutes — RepeatedlyCNN said his claims don't represent the network; every GOP insider claimed the same 20-minute conversation, suggesting coordinated talking points.────────────────────────────────────────[01:18:11]WHO Reports Cancer Exploding Globally — Expected to Affect 90% of the Population by 2050Before the mRNA rollout, cancer affected ~20% of men and 17% of women; after 70% global vaccination turbo cancers are accelerating toward the WHO's 90% projection.────────────────────────────────────────[01:19:02]Dr. Ryan Cole Warned in Spring 2021 That T-Cell Suppression Would Cause a Cancer Explosion — He Was RightHe observed destroyed T-cell counts immediately after vaccination and predicted the wave of aggressive cancers now being confirmed globally. ──────────────────────────────────────── Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silver For 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code “KNIGHT” For high quality made in America products go to HomeSteadProducts.shop and use promo code “Knight” for 10% off your purchases Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-show Or you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @DavidKnightShow@protonmail.comCash App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

After a productive first 100 days after returning to office, President Trump has since hit a rough patch – stubborn inflation (despite an otherwise powerhouse economy), an unpopular war with Iran, setbacks at the Supreme Court, plus growing dissent among congressional Republicans as his party faces the distinct possibility of losing one or both chambers of Congress in November. Has the ever-impulsive, risk-taking Trump lost his political Midas touch, or is he simply yet another president befuddled by a second-term jinx (not to mention a disgruntled electorate)? If Trump is sorely in need of a “win”, will it come on the domestic front or abroad (spoiler alert: look to Cuba)? After that, the fellows discuss whether it was fair play for the American president to intervene in World Cup officiating and the International Olympic Committee to allow Russian athlete to compete for Mother Russia in the 2028 Games, if the war in Ukraine is anywhere close to a tipping point, whether futbol is in fact an expression of socialist convictions (or so New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani believes), and the policy smarts (or a lack thereof) of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' call for a sovereign wealth on AI companies' stock and how those firms should be addressing the industry's image problem (the fellows playfully disagreeing on using AI to cheat on schoolwork).  Subscribe to GoodFellows for clarity on today's biggest social, economic, and geostrategic shifts — only on GoodFellows.

Dave Rubin of "The Rubin Report" talks to Larry Elder and Bryan Dean Wright about Elon Musk explaining to Joe Rogan the real dark reason that Democrats like Gavin Newsom, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton changed their minds on open borders and immigration policy; the underlying source of the dangerous teenage flash mobs like the one that severely damaged businesses around Newport Beach, California, that everyone is too afraid to discuss; Spencer Pratt's latest video attacking Gavin Newsom for weakening the integrity of California elections; Andrew Gillum, the Democrat who almost beat Ron DeSantis in the race for governor of Florida, getting arrested for drug possession; how Democrats like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Ro Khanna were too blinded by power to see all the early warning signs of the dangers of supporting someone like Graham Platner; the dangers of Donald Trump escalating the Iran War with his plans to take over Kharg Island; and much more. Today's Sponsors: Angel Studios - Choose entertainment that is focused on stories about real human experiences. If you go premium, you'll get 2 free tickets to see Young Washington in theaters this Independence Day, and be part of making this film the #1 movie in America for our nation's 250th birthday. Go to: http://Angel.com/rubin