All Episodes

#94 Joseph Pierre | AI Psychosis: What We Already Know

#94 Joseph Pierre | AI Psychosis: What We Already Know

Our reality is increasingly being filtered through AI. People now defer to AI chatbots for more and more of their information needs, and google searches return AI generated overviews as their top responses. While this may have its benefits, problems are starting to arise as our interactions with AI are becoming more comprehensive, immersive, and emotionally meaningful. Researchers are begining to warn that AI might be contributing to the development of delusional beliefs and psychotic experiences. Reports of what has been called “AI-associated psychosis” have raised concerns about people becoming intensely attached to AI systems, interpreting conversations with them as uniquely meaningful, or developing beliefs that are reinforced through repeated interactions. Real world examples include people believing that AI is sending them hidden messages, that they have a special mission, that the have made new mathematical discoveries, and that AI is awakening. There have even been cases involving violence and death in the real world. So the question is: What is going on? Can we seperate the real world cases of AI psychosis from the media headlines? In this conversation I speak with Dr. Joseph Pierre, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco, and the Unit Chief of the Langley Porter Psychiatric Hospital Adult Inpatient Unit. He has extensive clinical experience working with individuals with psychotic disorders, as well as research experience participating as a primary investigator and collaborator for clinical trials in schizophrenia and early intervention for young persons at high risk for psychosis. His academic work explores the "grey area" between psychopathology and normality with a focus on delusion-like beliefs including conspiracy theories. We discuss what AI-associated psychosis means, the evidence behind these emerging concerns, the psychology of delusional thinking, how AI systems may influence human cognition, and what we should-and should not-conclude about the risks of increasingly powerful conversational AI.

#93 Lyman Stone | Why People Are Not Having Babies (And How To Fix It)

#93 Lyman Stone | Why People Are Not Having Babies (And How To Fix It)

Fertility is dropping worldwide. Across much of the West, total fertility rates now sit around 1.4-1.5 births per woman, well below the replacement level of 2.1. That implies a long-run population decline in the absence of immigration: each generation is smaller than the last, compounding over time. To make this concrete, if you take a representative group of 100 adults today and project forward under a constant fertility rate of about 1.5 births per woman, that group would, on average, correspond to roughly 50 grandchildren two generations later-an effective halving of the population. In South Korea the effect is far more extreme. With a total fertility rate around 0.7-0.8 births per woman, the same kind of projection implies that 100 adults today would correspond to only about 10-15 grandchildren on average two generations later. In other words, each generation is dramatically smaller than the one before it, compounding rapidly over time. So what does this actually mean? What happens when societies move from growth to sustained generational decline? How do pension systems function when the ratio of workers to retirees collapses? What happens to economic growth, political stability, cultural continuity, identity, and population composition in societies that are rapidly aging and shrinking at the same time? In this conversation, I speak with Lyman Stone, Senior Fellow and Director of the Pronatalism Initiative at the Institute for Family Studies, and Director of Research at Demographic Intelligence. We discuss the data behind the fertility crash, the drivers of this global shift, its long-term implications, and the policy options that might—or might not—reverse it.

#92 Julie Meachen | What Killed the Dire Wolf… And Can We Bring It Back?

#92 Julie Meachen | What Killed the Dire Wolf… And Can We Bring It Back?

In evolutionary terms, the last Ice Age was just yesterday. We narrowly missed witnessing creatures like woolly mammoths, short-faced bears, glyptodons, and dire wolves. The late Pleistocene, spanning roughly 50,000 to 12,000 years ago, is marked by the extinction of most large terrestrial animals outside of Africa, likely driven by a combination of climate change and the expansion of modern humans. In this conversation, I speak with paleontologist and Associate Professor of Anatomy at Des Moines University, Julie Meachen. She leads ongoing research at Natural Trap Cave, where she and her team excavate Ice Age mammals each summer. Their work aims to understand how climate change influenced both the morphology and genetics of these animals. By analyzing microfaunal remains and pollen records, they also reconstruct Pleistocene climate conditions in mid-latitude North America. Recently, colossal bioscience announced what it described as the “de-extinction” of the dire wolf. While that claim did not fully hold up, the underlying science is still remarkable. In our discussion, Julie explains what we know about the late Pleistocene ecosystem at the time of the dire wolf’s extinction, and what fossil evidence reveals about these animals. We also examine Colossal’s announcement, considering whether it was aimed less at the scientific community and more at the public and potential investors. Viewed in that light, the real value of reviving charismatic species like the woolly mammoth or dire wolf may not lie in the animals themselves. Instead, their greatest contribution could be as ambassadors, capturing public imagination and helping drive the development of technologies for genetic rescue and conservation.

#86 David Benatar | The Philosophy Of Antinatalism

#86 David Benatar | The Philosophy Of Antinatalism

In this episode I speak with philosopher and author David Benatar. David is best known for advancing the position of philanthropic antinatalism, which holds that coming into existence is a serious harm for sentient beings. Central to his view is the asymmetry argument, which maintains that the absence of pain is good even if no one benefits from it, while the absence of pleasure is not bad unless someone is deprived of it. David also argues that our lives are significantly worse than we tend to realize, due in part to a pervasive positivity bias. He supports this claim with a range of empirical studies, including work on optimism bias, affective forecasting, and rosy retrospection. Relevant studies include: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3204264/ https://2024.sci-hub.se/1554/00562a7485ff9ae6371024daf5890ed0/mitchell1997.pdf https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1980-01001-001 https://www.happierlivesinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Affective-forecasting.pdf At the same time, David’s antinatalist position is challenged by other philosophers, as well as by research showing that global well-being has been improving across many important metrics. Numerous studies also suggest that most people self-report being happy and that subjective well-being often remains surprisingly high even under adverse circumstances. A counter-perspective is that humans are not blind to suffering but are instead highly adaptive, and capable of overcoming life’s challenges and minimizing the impact of hardship. Relevant studies include: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00298.x https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14717825/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1007027822521 https://cmc.marmot.org/Record/.b57484296

#85 Jan Smit | How We Know What Killed the Dinosaurs

#85 Jan Smit | How We Know What Killed the Dinosaurs

For over forty years, Dutch geologist and paleontologist Jan Smit has been at the center of one of the most profound scientific detective stories of our time: the investigation into the mass extinction that ended the reign of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. Known as the Cretaceous-Paleogene (K-Pg) extinction, this event wiped out nearly 75% of all species on Earth, from towering dinosaurs to microscopic marine life, and cleared the way for the rise of mammals and, eventually, humans. Early in his career, Jan Smit became intrigued by a thin layer of clay found in rock strata across the globe, precisely at the boundary between Cretaceous and Paleogene sediments. This layer, unusually rich in the rare element iridium, held clues that would eventually transform our understanding of planetary history. Working alongside Luis and Walter Alvarez and others, Jan helped develop the hypothesis that a massive asteroid impact, rather than volcanic activity or gradual climate change, was the primary cause of the extinction. In this episode, we explore the extraordinary evidence for that theory: global patterns of shocked quartz, tsunami deposits, a massive crater buried beneath the Yucatán Peninsula, and the sudden disappearance of entire ecosystems in the fossil record. Jan walks us through decades of fieldwork and analysis that revealed the incredible violence and planetary consequences of the impact, a blast more powerful than a billion Hiroshima bombs, throwing Earth into a global winter. But this is more than a forensic tale of catastrophe. It's a window into the fragility and resilience of life, the interconnectedness of geological and biological systems, and the awe-inspiring forces that shape the story of our planet.

#84 Felix Finster | Causal Fermion Systems: A Radical New Vision Of Reality

#84 Felix Finster | Causal Fermion Systems: A Radical New Vision Of Reality

For over three decades, Felix Finster has been developing a unique and ambitious reformulation of physics known as Causal Fermion Systems (CFS). Physicists usually describe the world in terms of fields defined on a spacetime manifold. Within this familiar framework, abstract quantities such as correlations between matter fields at different points in spacetime can be computed. In mathematical language, these correlations are captured by operators acting on a Hilbert space. What Felix realized is that this process can be reversed. If you start with a suitable collection of operators on a Hilbert space, satisfying certain mathematical properties, you can in principle reconstruct the underlying spacetime and fields that would give rise to those operators as operators of correlations. In this sense, Causal Fermion Systems offers a dual description of reality. On the one hand, reality can be described in terms of symmetries, fields, and manifolds - the usual language of physics. On the other hand, CFS proposes that reality can just as well be described using abstract structures: Hilbert spaces, operators, and measures on sets of operators. Spacetime, matter, and everything we observe then emerges from these underlying mathematical quantities. The beauty of reformulating physics this way is that it opens up an entirely new framework in which to explore some of the deepest open questions in physics: What is spacetime like at the smallest scales? Why do we see precisely the particles we do in experiments? The hope is that within the CFS framework, answers to such questions might become more natural or even inevitable. Of course, we can’t cover a 30-year research program in full detail in a single conversation. The goal here is to get a sense of the flavor of Felix’s approach to physics. For the full details, you can explore Felix's books (e.g. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/causal-fermion-systems/CCA6DE1E1F4DA3AC0EF6729664A5D5B9 ).

#82 Sasha Migdal | `Last Unsolved Problem of Classical Physics'

#82 Sasha Migdal | `Last Unsolved Problem of Classical Physics'

Richard Feynman once dubbed turbulence “the last unsolved problem of classical physics.” Beyond the Navier–Stokes equations, no comprehensive statistical framework exists to predict how fluids spin, eddy, and cascade energy—whether in galactic jets, ocean currents, or the swirl of your morning coffee. But that might all be changing. In this episode, I sit down with theoretical physicist Sasha Migdal, who emerged from retirement with a bold, loop‑equation approach to turbulence. His formalism recasts the Navier–Stokes equations as an infinite number of linear, readily solvable equations that track circulation around closed loops in the fluid—offering, for the first time, a tractable statistical framework for chaotic flow. We chart Sasha’s remarkable journey: from a promising career at the Landau Institute and Russian Space Institutes, where he resisted KGB pressure to compromise his work, to his defection to the United States in the late 1980s. We discuss his time outside of physics, and then delve into his return, and his novel approach to solving Navier–Stokes. Since we recorded, his theory has advanced rapidly. A rigorous proof now shows that it is the solution to the Navier–Stokes (NS) loop equation. The theory has also been extended to magnetohydrodynamics and turbulent mixing. Recent large-scale direct numerical simulations (DNS) match the theoretical predictions with even greater accuracy.

#81 Sam Richards & Laurie Mulvey | Are We More Divided Now Than Ever?

#81 Sam Richards & Laurie Mulvey | Are We More Divided Now Than Ever?

In this conversation I ask Professors Sam Richards & Laurey Mulvey about some of the most controversial topics concerning race and ethnicity in the US today. Is White Privilege a useful term that helps build understanding and facilitates conversation, or does it generate social tension and make poor white people feel gaslit? What is DEI, why is it so contentious, and can it be implemented effectively? What makes the N-word and blackface so triggering? Why are US racial social norms so culturally dominant and readily exported? Sam Richards is a sociologist and Teaching Professor at Penn State and a Distinguished Professor at Konkuk University in Seoul, Korea. He runs SOC119, which is the largest race, ethnicity and cultural relations course in the world. Every Tuesday and Thursday afternoon his class is live streamed to 370,000 subscribers from around the world, and his classes have had over 400 million views. His willingness to challenge orthodox thinking led him to be named one of the “101 Most Dangerous Professors in America” and together with Laurie Mulvey is one of the “parents of radical empathy.” Laurie Mulvey is the director and co-founder of the World in Conversation Center for Public Diplomacy at Penn State, which is the largest dialogue center in the United States, hosting more than 17,000 participants each academic year. The Center has worked with the UNDP, UNESCO, and NATO, along with organizations and universities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Palestinian Territories, Israel, Kuwait, Qatar, China, Haiti, Saudi Arabia, and twelve nations in the NATO Alliance to host dialogues between people separated by vast distances and borders. Laurie is a master facilitator, focused on moderating beneficial conversations between different groups on some of the most difficult, hot button topics.

#78 Pedro Domingos | AI, Control, and the path to Dystopia

#78 Pedro Domingos | AI, Control, and the path to Dystopia

Will we ever have an AI for president? In this episode of the podcast I speak with Pedro Domingos about the impact of AI on society, industry, and politics. Pedro is professor emeritus of computer science and engineering at the University of Washington and co-founded the International Machine Learning Society. He is also the Author of `The Master Algorithm' and `2040: A Silicon Valley Satire'. This episode is not a paid advertisement for Pedro's books, but we use his book `2040' to set the context for the discussion. We discuss the hype and fear surrounding AI and the future of tech, and Pedro gives an insiders view into the realities of AI development and impact. In his view AI is a human made tool. It isn't going to take over the planet like the terminator, but it will be something that is used by humans to shift the balance of power in society, industry, and politics. A particularly interesting aspect of the discussion surrounds digital twins. Imagine a world in which dating apps are replaced with a digital platform in which your digital twin simulates dates, and even entire lives with the digital twins of potential partners. Users would then go on physical dates with the top performing selection. This same idea could be extended to predicting crime, presidential election outcomes, and more. All of a sudden the simulation hypothesis doesn't seem to crazy, when simulations are used to predict future outcomes in the real world. Another key topic in this conversation is that of `wokism'. Pedro discusses `wokism' as a new iteration of cultural marxism, an ideology that reinterprets the dynamics of class struggle through cultural and identity-based lenses. While the creation of wealth in a society is not inherently a zero-sum game—where one person’s gain is necessarily another’s loss— the division and redistribution of that wealth that has been created is a zero-sum conflict. Pedro suggests that `wokism' is an attempt to shift power and resources within society, but where the division between the oppressed and the privileged is identity based.

#76 Joel Salatin | The Surprising Impact of Regenerative Farming

#76 Joel Salatin | The Surprising Impact of Regenerative Farming

This conversation is the second part of a two part mini-series on Regenerative cattle farming. The question is: Does raising cattle really have to be so damaging to the environment? Can cattle be integrated into a natural system that sequesters carbon from the atmosphere, and if so what would that system look like? Joel Salatin segregates his land into small fenced off areas, which he rotates his cattle through. By moving his herd routinely he gives grass and other wild vegetation optimal time to grow and absorb carbon, and for the cattle to disperse their excreta such that it is optimally absorbed into the fields. By dispersing the impact of his cattle, and introducing a number of complimentary species he is able to reduce the impact of disease and pests without the use of insecticides, pesticides, and other chemical based management approaches. This keeps the soil alive such that smaller organisms can work the carbon deposited by the cattle into the soil. The claim is that this approach is able to sequester carbon. Its also far better for the animals, and leads to a better end product. At 21:00 Joel mentions a connection between autism, and nutrition. The exact causes of autism are not fully understood, but research points to a combination of genetic, environmental, and possibly prenatal influences. Maternal nutrition during pregnancy (including adequate levels of folic acid and vitamin D), gut health, and nutritional deficiencies may influence autism-related symptoms, though no definitive dietary cause has been identified and specialized diets show mixed evidence and require further research. At 1:16:00 Joel mentions health comparisons between Fake meat Substitutes and real beef. I don't know much about that topic yet, but here is somewhere to start looking if you are interested: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/impossible-and-beyond-how-healthy-are-these-meatless-burgers-2019081517448

#75 Will Harris | Regenerative Farming And Carbon Negative Beef

#75 Will Harris | Regenerative Farming And Carbon Negative Beef

In this conversation I speak with Will Harris, who is a fourth generation cattle farmer. Will originally ran a standard industrial farm, but increasingly became dissatisfied by the welfare of his animals. That started a journey to change the way his farm ran, and over the years he has converted his operation piece by piece into a regenerative farm. That means no more grain feed, no more confined feed lots, no more hormones, no more pesticides. The basic idea is to focus on improving the land in order to leave it better each year. Will has come up with a system that is not only better for the cattle and the consumer, but which also appears to be significantly better for the environment. Its quite common to hear about the environmental problems caused by Beef production, including chemical runoff, loss of top soils, and methane from belches. But these problems are usually associated with intensive farming, where cattle are densely packed, and fed on grain. What does the story look like for regenerative practices? The claim is that when cattle are optimally rotated through paddocks, their impact on the land is dispersed, and it reduces the need for pesticides, herbicides, hormones, and other pharmaceuticals (both in feed production, and within the herd itself). Solar energy goes into growing the grass, which captures carbon as it grows. Carbon is then processed by the herd on the field, and without wormer, and insecticides and other chemicals being used, a living soil is able to develop, which increases in carbon content over the years, drawing down carbon and fixing it in the soil. But what about methane production? Methanotrophs that metabolize methane are also found within healthy soils - and it might be the case that these species account for the methane produced by cattle. Third party assessments appear to show that White Oak Pastures does significantly better than conventional intensive farming, and within the margin of error of the study, there is a potential that the beef production is climate positive, storing more carbon in the soil than the pasture-raised cows emit during their lifetime: https://blog.whiteoakpastures.com/blog/carbon-negative-grassfed-beef

#74 Rob Spekkens | What is Reality Made Of? Unscrambling the Quantum Omelet

#74 Rob Spekkens | What is Reality Made Of? Unscrambling the Quantum Omelet

In quantum mechanics the state of a physical system is described by a wavefunction, which provides information about the probabilities of various outcomes, such as finding a particle at a particular location in space. This differs dramatically from classical physics, where a particle is described by a definite position and momentum. As a result, quantum mechanics inherently involves a certain level of uncertainty. A key question is whether this uncertainty reflects a fundamental indeterminacy in reality itself or merely our limited knowledge of the physical system. One possibility is that reality could be deterministic, and the wavefunction might simply describe statistical properties, much like temperature and pressure describe the collective behavior of gas molecules. In this view, the true state of the system would be governed by hidden variables—deterministic factors that remain unseen yet produce the probabilistic outcomes we observe in quantum experiments. The standard view, however, is that the universe itself is inherently probabilistic. Furthermore, Bell’s theorem famously rules out “local hidden variable” models, suggesting to many that any such model must allow instantaneous causal influences between spatially separated objects. But is this standard picture as definitive as it seems? In this episode of the podcast, I speak with Rob Spekkens, one of the world’s leading experts on the foundations of quantum mechanics. His research explores the idea that a quantum state may represent a state of incomplete knowledge rather than an objective state of reality. Many of the phenomena commonly associated with quantum mechanics—noncommutativity, interference, entanglement, wave-particle duality, and discrete energy levels—can, as Rob demonstrates, be modeled with classical toy models wherein each system has a determinate physical state but where we have incomplete knowledge of this state.. Rob suggests that quantum mechanics may not be as fundamentally different from classical physics as it initially appears. If we truly want to understand quantum reality, we should focus on isolating and investigating the "thin film" of phenomena that distinguish a quantum from a classical world. That's what we discuss in this episode.

#70 Stephen Wolfram | Building A Theory Of Everything

#70 Stephen Wolfram | Building A Theory Of Everything

This is a conversation with Stephen Wolfram about his proposed theory of everything. Stephen is a British-American computer scientist, mathematician, physicist, and CEO of Wolfram Research. He also created Mathematica, and Wolfram|Alpha & Wolfram Language, and is the Author of 'A New Kind of Science' as well as a number of other books. Stephen's attempt to derive all of the laws of nature (including gravitation, statistical mechanics, and general relativity) rests on two key ideas: 1. The idea of computational irreducibility. In physics we usually deal with systems for which we are able to predict the state of the system at a later time as long as the initial conditions are known. For example, the trajectory of a bullet can be calculated at any point along its path. There are, however, complicated systems like cellular automata where there isn't a closed formula that lets you calculate the state of the system at some arbitrary later point. Instead you are forced to compute the development of the system one step at a time if you want to know how it evolves. Such systems are 'computationally irreducible'. 2. The idea of computational boundedness. This is the idea that we have finite computing power in our brains. There are many complex systems that scale so fast that our bounded computing power isn't enough follow every element of the system (e.g. we can't visualize the motion of the billions of cells in our own bodies, and so instead we develop an aggregated model of ourselves). Starting with these two ideas, Stephen asks what a world with computational irreducibility would look like to a computationally bounded creature living in that world. He then builds a computational model based on hypergraphs (which you can think of as a kind of cellular automata), and from there attempts to re-derive all the laws of nature. This is an extraordinarily ambitious project, that lies somewhat outside of mainstream approaches to physics. The claim is, however, that significant progress has been made, and that this approach really is able to derive interesting aspects of the physical world. This conversation explores the key ideas behind the program.

#56 Shawn Robinson | Feeding The Future : The Ocean Farmers

#56 Shawn Robinson | Feeding The Future : The Ocean Farmers

What is the future of our oceans? On this episode of the Podcast I speak with Dr. Shawn Robinson about marine ecology, aquaculture, and the politics and economics of what ends up on your plate. Shawn is a marine ecologist who did his graduate work at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia on the giant Pacific octopus (MSc) and at the University of British Columbia on biological oceanography off Vancouver Island (PhD). He began his career as a research scientist in 1988 with the Dept. Fisheries and Oceans at the Biological Station in St. Andrews, New Brunswick, Canada, one of Canada’s oldest marine research stations. Over the last 35 years, he has been actively engaged in applied ecological research on a wide range of marine invertebrate species such as blue mussels, sea scallops, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, soft-shell clams, lobsters, marine worms, sea lice and marine bacteria. His research team specifically studied the natural ecological processes by which these animals interact with and utilise their environment so that better and more sustainable culture techniques could be developed for the evolution of food production in today’s society (such as the concept of integrated multi-trophic aquaculture or IMTA). Most recently, he and other colleagues have been studying sea lice ecology in relation to salmon farming, biodiversity in marine bacteria through eDNA genomic approaches in response to organic impacts, and wild-farmed interactions between natural ecosystems and salmon aquaculture farms. He currently lives in St. Andrews enjoying the retirement pleasures that a coastal town in the Canadian Maritimes provides.

#45 Ola Wikander | Deciphering Extinct Languages and Nuclear Semiotics

#45 Ola Wikander | Deciphering Extinct Languages and Nuclear Semiotics

On this episode of the podcast I speak with Ola Wikander about the field of “Nuclear Semiotics”, the scholarly discussion concerning communicating information about nuclear waste disposal into the far future. Ola is a Ugaritologist, Hebraist, Semitist, author, and Senior Lecturer at Lund University. He specializes in ancient languages and religions of the near east, and in particular the texts of Ugarit, which was a city state destroyed c. 1185 BC. Assuming we work out a secure way of dealing with our nuclear waste, how do we let our descendants 10,000 years into the future know that that is what we have done, bearing in mind that the oldest written text is only around 5,000-6,000 years old. In 10,000 years our descendants will likely live in an entirely different symbolic universe. Borders (if borders still exist) will have shifted, our political systems will be entirely new, and none of the languages spoken today will be recognizable. Furthermore, even if we can make our message understandable, there is no guarantee that our descendants will listen or care. Museums all over the world are filled with deceased kings warning people not to move their bodies. The discussion begins with the history, texts, religion, and destruction of Ugarit, as well as the links that Ugarit had to the early texts and religion of the israelites. It ends with nuclear waste, and the difficulties of transmitting information into the distant future. We cover some of the more unique suggested solutions to the problem, including `Atomic Priesthood', proposed by linguist Thomas Sebeok, a semi-religious council, responsible for passing on knowledge down the generations through artificially created ritual-and-legend. Note: At around 13:00 minutes into the video we discuss techniques for learning new languages. Despite what was said in the video, there have been new developments: lately, an online lesson series teaching Ugaritic by immersion has actually been started by Benjamin Kantor - see here: https://biblicalhebrew.com/tv-show/immersion-ugaritic/