Welcome to another AI for Lifelong Learners podcast. Your companion in exploring the ever-evolving landscape of artificial intelligence and its real-world impact on our continuous journey of growth and understanding of ourselves, life, and others.

In this featured episode, we step aside from my usual format to bring you an insightful conversation led by yours truly, Tom Parish. My wife, Donna, and I share a candid and relatable journey into the world of fitness and health as older adults. We recount our experiences navigating a sea of online opinions and advice, the challenges of finding what truly works, and our eventual success through personalized human coaching. The episode culminates in an interview with our coach, Dr. Justin Traxler, a physical therapist who specializes in strength training for adults.

You may be wondering, how does a deep dive into exercise for seniors and physical therapy connect with "AI for Lifelong Learners"?

This show is powerfully relevant. Dr. Traxler provides a fascinating, on-the-ground perspective on how AI is (and isn't) currently used in his practice. He discusses the potential of AI for generating workout programs but underscores its significant limitations in accounting for crucial individual factors: age, previous injuries, fear, specific health conditions, and the nuanced goals of a patient. His insights perfectly encapsulate a core theme of this newsletter: discerning where AI offers genuine utility versus where personalized, human expertise and connection remain irreplaceable.

Dr. Traxler's professional viewpoint on AI in healthcare and fitness provides a critical lens on the technology's current capabilities and ethical considerations, reminding us that while AI can be a powerful tool for information and efficiency but it's not yet a substitute for tailored, empathetic, and context-aware human guidance in complex, personal domains.

Join us for this important discussion that illuminates the practical realities of AI and the enduring value of human-centered learning and support.

What you will learn in this show:

Limited current use of AI in practice (for now)

His practice uses AI primarily for administrative tasks like generating social media hashtags and captions, not for patient encounters or creating exercise programs, mainly due to liability, HIPAA (patient information privacy), and the current limitations of AI.

AI for personalized workout programs – a cautious view

While acknowledging people and some trainers use AI (like ChatGPT) to create workout programs, he sees a significant con: AI cannot yet account for the multitude of crucial factors essential for safe and effective programming. These include age, previous injuries, specific goals (e.g., an Olympian's needs vs. a beginner's), fear of movement, and other individual nuances.

Human expertise is key for nuance

He believes AI, in its current state, lacks the ability to handle the complexity and personalization required for effective and safe exercise prescription, especially when dealing with individual limitations or medical histories.

On functional strength training, especially for older adults:

Definition of "older adult"

Generally considered this 65+, but emphasizes it's more about an individual's activity history; active individuals are "older adults" much later in life.

Importance of functional training

This type of training mimics daily life tasks (e.g., lifting a child, carrying groceries, handling luggage) and builds capacity to perform them without injury, as opposed to purely aesthetic training like bodybuilding.

"Use it or lose it"

Stressed that as people age, they lose muscle mass faster. Strength training is crucial to combat this, maintain bone density, and limit comorbidities. It's never too late to start.

Power is crucial for preventing falls

Highlighted that "power" (the ability to stimulate the nervous system quickly, e.g., to catch oneself during a stumble) is more critical for older adults than just strength alone, and walking doesn't sufficiently build this.

Mindset shift & empowerment

A big part of his work is educating older adults, empowering them to understand they can lift things, that it improves bone density and muscle mass, and that it's not "too late."

Addressing misconceptions

Many older adults fear getting "bulky" or think it's too late. He clarifies that getting bulky requires intense, specific effort, and the benefits of strength training far outweigh not doing it.

Osteoarthritis and movement

Emphasized "motion is lotion." Movement and exercise increase blood flow and synovial fluid, often reducing pain associated with osteoarthritis, rather than exacerbating it. Lifting helps build muscle around joints to protect them.

On training principles and coaching:

Proper form and warm-ups are crucial

Warm-ups (5–10 minutes) increase body temperature and lubricate joints. Proper form is essential to prevent injury.

Start with bodyweight

Master bodyweight movements (e.g., air squats, push-ups, proper hinging) before adding external load to ensure safety and effectiveness.

Minimum recommended exercise

The general guideline is 150 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity exercise per week, though many don't achieve this. He advises starting small (1–2 times a week) and building up.

The "marginal decade"

Referenced Peter Attia's concept – the last decade of life, where physical and cognitive decline can accelerate. The goal is to "train for your marginal decade" to maintain a high quality of life for as long as possible ("live long, die fast").

Remote coaching benefits

Effective for accountability and progressing individuals safely once they have good movement fundamentals. Apps like TrueCoach allow for feedback, video analysis, and program tracking. In-person is ideal initially.

Realistic expectations & dialing it in

For older adults, starting strength training will, at a minimum, maintain current muscle mass and bone density, but usually leads to gains. The focus isn't on competitive lifting but on functional improvement.

Balancing pushing limits and safety

Start with an "underdose" to build tolerance and confidence. Introduce "deload weeks" (intentionally reducing intensity for a week after 3–6 weeks of harder training) to allow recovery and prevent joint stress. Listen for "dull, deep, achy, throbby" joint pain as a warning.

Individualized programming

Training programs must account for individual limitations, medical history (cardiac conditions, osteoporosis, previous surgeries), and goals. Progress is gradual, especially if conditions like osteopenia are present.

Final key advice:

Just start moving

If doing nothing, begin with a simple walking program.

Strength training is safe and crucial

It's incredibly important and safe when done with supervision, especially initially.

It's never too late

Age should not be a barrier to starting strength training.

Strength training isn't about competition (for most)

It's about improving functional ability, health, and quality of life, not necessarily lifting maximal weights.

Thank you for your contribution of time and attention as a reader. I’ve received many lovely notes and thoughtful insights. A special thank you to those who have so generously contributed financially to AI for Lifelong Learners. What you do makes a difference and keeps me inspired.

Have a question? Remember to post a Substack note or drop a comment → here anonymously. Your thoughts are my inspirations.

Welcome to the next lifelong learners Podcast!

Today's episode explores territory rarely covered in tech discussions - the relationship between our stress physiology and our ability to thrive alongside artificial intelligence. My guest Bethlyn Gerard brings decades of experience in systems thinking and team performance, offering a fresh perspective on what it truly means to be human in an age where machines are handling more of our thinking.

To wet your appetite, here are some quotes from the interview that I think help set the stage and resonated with me:

* "K plus E equals W, which is, it takes knowledge plus experience to mature into wisdom." Shared by Bethlyn Gerard

* "We need to hone larger, intuitive, sensing, right-brain skills, because the machine's gonna do the rest of it." Bethlyn Gerard

* "The level of human physiology dysregulation and the need for skills that take coherent regulation [are in] an inverse relationship." Bethlyn Gerard

* "There's no excuse for less safe work to save a human job... There's no excuse to compromise the quality of care because we don't want AI to do it better for us." Bethlyn Gerard

* "One of the principles of AI for lifelong learning is that you need to be what the machines can't be." Podcast Host

About this episode:

In this thought-provoking conversation, Bethlyn shares insights from her recent experience in Vietnam, where she leveraged AI tools to rapidly develop and cross-reference 38 lesson plans in just hours. Work that would have traditionally taken days. However, this episode goes far beyond efficiency gains to explore a critical question: as AI increasingly handles analytical and computational tasks, how must humans evolve their uniquely human capabilities?

Why this matters for Lifelong Learners:

This discussion connects directly to the core principle of AI for Lifelong Learning and you’ve heard me say this often, “what’s on offer now in life is for you to be more human”. We’re discovering that our lived experiences make us uniquely human—something machines can never replicate.

Bethlyn makes a compelling case that as AI handles more routine cognitive tasks, our focus must shift toward strengthening our physiological foundations for expanded intuition, sensing, and right-brain skills. She explains why understanding stress regulation is as fundamental as learning photosynthesis, especially when our dysregulated physiology directly conflicts with the coherent regulation needed for the enhanced critical thinking our AI-assisted world demands.

Join me now in this inspiring and enlightening conversation with Bethlyn Gerad.

About Bethlyn Gerard:

Bethlyn Gerard is the Founder and Principal of Generativity Solutions, where she has spent over two decades strengthening organizations across various growth stages from startups to large health systems. As an innovative strategist and proven leader in healthcare models, Bethlyn specializes in outcomes assessment, protocol design, and turning complex data into high-value insights. Her expertise lies at the intersection of systems thinking, stress physiology, and team wellness, making her uniquely qualified to discuss how our rapidly changing technological landscape impacts human performance.Bethlyn Gerad can be reached at https://www.generativity.solutions or on Linkedin.

Welcome to AI for Lifelong Learners. Today we explore how artificial intelligence is transforming our creative and professional lives. I'm your host, Tom.

In the studio with me is Sam Lipman, a highly innovative composer and educator at the University of Texas who recently made waves with his concerto for trumpet and orchestra performed by the Austin Symphony, featuring the brilliant Ephraim Owens and the amazing Gifton Jelen from New York City.

What caught my attention during the pre-concert lecture questions were not just about Sam's innovative composition, the audience had many questions about the impact of AI – that is something I'd never witnessed at a classical music event. It speaks volumes about how AI has permeated every creative field, even those steeped in tradition.

Sam brings a unique perspective as both a composer and a professor at the Department of Arts and Entertainment Technologies at UT, where he recently pioneered a groundbreaking course on AI in music production. In Austin's forward-thinking culture that is known for embracing innovation, Sam is helping shape how the next generation of artists will engage with AI technologies.

Today, we'll explore Sam's experiences teaching this experimental course, the ethical questions his students grappled with, and how he envisions AI transforming music creation and production.

Interview summary

* Developed for UT Austin's AET department for students not fitting traditional career tracks

* Rebranded traditional music theory as "AI in music" to appeal to the administration

* The curriculum covers AI foundations, history, copyright issues, and applications

* Balances theoretical discussions with hands-on music creation

Ethics and legal aspects

* Strong emphasis on copyright issues through mock trials

* Students argued whether AI companies should use copyrighted training material

* Highlighted disparity: traditional media pays for music while AI companies use it freely

* Prediction: AI companies will eventually pay for copyrighted training materials

AI music tools and applications

* Students presented various AI music tools to classmates

* Covered composition tools, production tools (GAWs), and post-production tools

* Used free tools to avoid additional student costs

* Revealed limitations in AI music generation (predominantly 4/4 time with predictable progressions)

AI's creative limitations

* AI cannot predict music trends or create truly innovative music

* Inherent "lag" in relevance due to training in older music

* Cannot replicate the "ridiculous accidents" driving musical innovation

* Students discovered gaps between creative vision and AI capabilities

Personal AI usage

* Primarily used for administrative tasks rather than creative work

* Helpful for structuring plans, writing professional emails, reviewing contracts

* Generated background music for client project using Suno

* Used for marketing campaigns and promotional materials

* Compensates for personal skill gaps in administration and planning

As background:Composer Sam Lipman and trumpeter Ephraim Owens sit down with Dianne Donovan on KMFA to talk about the Austin jazz scene, where classical and jazz blend, and Sam and Ephraim's upcoming performance with the Austin Symphony Orchestra. February 2025.

In the audio version in this post and add some commentary.

Picture this: It's the 1980s, and giants like Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) and Wang Laboratories rule the computing world with their massive, expensive machines. These companies couldn't imagine a future where small, personal computers would matter. Their machines cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and surely, these toy-like PCs could never compete.

They were wrong. Catastrophically wrong.

One by one, these titans fell. DEC, once a colossus of computing, was sold to Compaq. In 1992, Wang Laboratories went bankrupt. Prime Computer stopped selling new computers that same year. Data General was swallowed by EMC in 1999. Even IBM, who helped create the PC revolution, stumbled badly as they underestimated how quickly things would change.

Today, in 2025, we're watching this same story unfold in artificial intelligence. The disruption has a name: DeepSeek.

The DeepSeek earthquake

Last week, a Chinese company called DeepSeek released something that has Silicon Valley in a panic. They demonstrated an AI model that matches or exceeds the capabilities of OpenAI's latest technology - but at a fraction of the cost. We're not talking about small savings here. DeepSeek claims they built their system for $5.6 million, compared to the half-billion dollars or more that U.S. companies spend on similar systems.

Just like the PC makers of the 1980s who figured out how to build powerful computers cheaply, DeepSeek reimagined how AI systems could work. They use clever mathematical tricks to do more with less - like using 8-bit numbers instead of 32-bit numbers, which dramatically reduces the computing power needed.

The results are stunning. Users around the world are downloading DeepSeek's models and running them on personal computers. Some are processing hundreds of thousands of AI queries for mere pennies. It's like watching the personal computer revolution happen all over again, but at AI speed.

Market tremors and the NVIDIA question

When markets opened after DeepSeek's announcement, NVIDIA - the company that makes the expensive chips used for AI - lost nearly a trillion dollars in market value. Some people ask: "Why does this matter? It's just stock prices going up and down."

But this misses the bigger picture. The trillion-dollar drop reflects a fundamental shift in how we think about AI's future. Just as the PC revolution showed we didn't need million-dollar mainframes to do powerful computing, DeepSeek is showing we might not need massive arrays of expensive chips to do powerful AI.

This isn't just about NVIDIA. The entire AI industry has been building on the assumption that more expensive hardware equals better AI. DeepSeek just proved that assumption wrong.

The pattern of creative destruction

Here's where we see a deeper pattern emerge. Every major technological revolution follows this path: First, something is expensive and exclusive. Then, someone figures out how to make it cheaper and more accessible. The established players panic, claiming the cheaper version can't possibly be as good. But if it is good enough, it changes everything.

We saw it with mainframes giving way to PCs. We saw it with expensive software being replaced by apps. Now we're seeing it with AI.

But here's the twist that many are missing: When technology gets cheaper, we don't use less of it - we use more. Economists call this Jevons Paradox. When personal computers got cheap, we didn't buy fewer computers - suddenly everyone needed one. When cloud storage got cheap, we didn't store less data - we started storing everything.

Tomorrow's AI landscape

This brings us to what happens next. Just as the PC revolution didn't kill computing - it exploded it into something far bigger - DeepSeek's breakthrough won't kill AI. Instead, it will likely transform AI from something that only big tech companies can afford into something that becomes part of everyday life.

Microsoft's CEO Satya Nadella captured this perfectly when he tweeted about Jevons Paradox in response to DeepSeek. As AI becomes more efficient and accessible, its use will skyrocket. The pie isn't shrinking - it's growing dramatically.

This could be an opportunity for the tech giants who can adapt. Amazon's cloud services could offer cheaper AI to millions of customers. Apple's devices could run powerful AI locally. Meta could embed AI throughout its services at a fraction of the current cost.

But for those who can't adapt - who cling to the old, expensive way of doing things - well, just ask the executives of DEC how that worked out in the 1990s.

The lesson is clear: in technology, the future belongs not to those who build the most expensive systems, but to those who figure out how to make powerful technology accessible to everyone. Deep Seek just showed us that future is coming faster than anyone expected.

And just like the PC revolution before it, this will create both winners and losers. The winners will be those who embrace the change and figure out how to use cheaper, more accessible AI to solve real problems. The losers will be those who refuse to believe the world is changing until it's too late.

History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes. And right now, it's rhyming pretty loudly.

It's like when a new student joins your class who's really good at something. They might seem like competition at first, but often they end up raising everyone's game and making the whole class better. That's how progress often works - through challenge and response, push and pull, each side making the other stronger.

What fascinates me most about this story is how it shows that big breakthroughs often come not from doing things bigger and more expensively, but from finding clever new ways to balance different approaches. It's kind of like finding out you don't need an expensive gym membership to get fit - sometimes a creative approach with simpler tools can work just as well or better.

The Relational Paradigm: challenges and opportunities

The DeepSeek breakthrough isn't just a story of disruption—it's a perfect example of how major changes create both challenges AND opportunities. Those who focus solely on the potential downfall of established players like NVIDIA or the threat to American tech dominance are missing half the picture. This is where the relational paradigm comes into play, teaching us that we need to examine both sides and how they interact to truly grasp the situation.

Think back to high school once again. You had the popular kids and the quiet kids. Neither group was inherently "better"—they balanced each other out, each contributing to the school community in their unique ways. The same principle applies here with American and Chinese AI developments. They're not locked in a zero-sum game, but rather pushing each other to improve in different ways.

This story is particularly fascinating because it highlights how quick people are to jump to extremes. Some cry, "This changes everything!" while others lament, "This ruins everything!" The reality, as is often the case, lies somewhere in the middle. It involves both positive and negative aspects that need to be understood in relation to each other.

Yes, DeepSeek's breakthrough might disrupt the current AI industry giants. But it also opens up new possibilities for AI integration in everyday life, potentially spurring innovation we can't yet imagine. It might challenge American tech dominance, but it could also lead to more robust international collaboration and competition, ultimately benefiting global AI development.

The key is to resist the urge to see this development in black and white terms. Instead, we need to embrace the complexity, understanding that the true impact of Deep Seek's innovation will be a tapestry of interrelated effects, some challenging, some opportune, all part of the ever-evolving landscape of technological progress.

As we move forward, the winners in this new AI paradigm won't just be those who can build the cheapest or most powerful systems. They'll be the ones who can navigate this complex relational landscape, understanding how different factors interact and finding opportunities in the balance between disruption and continuity, challenge and opportunity, East and West.

tp

Addendum: An understandable perspective on what is DeepSeek and what it means and doesn’t mean - well, so far …

Pixabay.com

Regardless of what side of the political spectrum you align with, I can't help but wonder if we're all feeling like Dorothy in L. Frank Baum's Land of Oz – thrust into a world that's both wondrous and unsettling. The current AI revolution swirls around me, appearing to want to transform every aspect of my life. Just this morning, a chatbot scheduled my doctor's appointment with eerie efficiency, while an algorithm curated the very news stories I was reading. It was as if I'd stepped into a realm where technology and magic were one and the same.

AI for Lifelong Learners is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, you may become a free or paid subscriber. Your engagement as a reader inspires me to write more.

I'll admit, part of me is thrilled by the possibilities. The idea that AI could solve problems we've grappled with for centuries is exhilarating. It's what we all dreamed about in the earlier days of AI research. And to be fair, I know there are people who carry the same passion. But there's also this nagging worry in the pit of my stomach, like the homesickness Dorothy felt in Oz. I ask myself, are we losing something essential in this rush towards a hyper-efficient, AI-driven future? What about the quirky, imperfect, beautifully-human parts of our world?

As I grapple with these conflicting emotions, I'm reminded of an old parable about two mirror makers. Their story, much like the contrasting characters in Oz, speaks to this push and pull between embracing change and holding onto what's constant. In a world where AI sometimes feels like an all-powerful Wizard behind the curtain, this tale offers a perspective that feels particularly relevant.

So grab a cup of coffee (or tea, if that's your thing) and join me on this moment of reflection. I think you'll see why this story has been on my mind lately, and maybe it'll give us both a new way to navigate the emerald cities and dark forests of our AI-filled present.

Form and Flow in the Art of Truth

In a quiet village, nestled between rolling hills, lived two craftsmen who made mirrors. Each had inherited a piece of ancient, polished silver from their ancestors, and each claimed that their mirror revealed the truest reflection.

The first craftsman, Serra, framed her mirror in straight, dark wood. It stood on a rigid stand that never wavered. "This is how we see what truly is," Serra explained to visitors. "The frame keeps everything aligned, and the stand ensures nothing shifts." Those who gazed into Serra's mirror often noticed how serious and solemn they appeared, as though every line on their face had been etched by time's unyielding hand.

The second craftsman, Rivera, crafted a mirror unlike any other. Its frame spiraled and curved like a river, and its stand swayed gently, as if breathing. "This is how we see what could be," Rivera would say. "The frame reminds us that everything flows, and the stand shows us that all things move in harmony." Visitors who looked into Rivera's mirror saw their reflections ripple and shift—sometimes smiling, sometimes laughing, sometimes wearing expressions they didn't know they had.

For many years, the villagers debated which mirror showed the truth. Was it Serra's, with its steadfast clarity? Or Rivera's, with its shifting possibilities? They argued endlessly, but neither side could convince the other.

One day, a young mathematician named Ada arrived in the village. She had spent years studying the patterns of constancy and change, the delicate balance between what remains and what transforms. Curious about the two mirrors, she decided to visit both craftsmen.

First, she went to Serra's workshop and gazed into the unyielding mirror. Her reflection was crisp and sharp, every detail perfectly in place. "Your mirror shows the world as it appears," Ada remarked. Serra nodded, pleased.

Then, Ada visited Rivera's workshop and peered into his flowing mirror. Her reflection shimmered and morphed, her features blending and shifting as though caught in a current. "Your mirror shows the world as it could be," Ada said. Rivera smiled.

But Ada wasn't satisfied. She had a hunch that the full truth lay somewhere between the two. So she asked Serra and Rivera to bring their mirrors to the village square.

She positioned the mirrors so they faced each other, with a space in between. When the villagers gathered around, something extraordinary happened. The infinite reflections that appeared between the mirrors weren't simple repetitions. Instead, they seemed alive. A frown in one reflection melted into a smile in the next, which grew into a laugh in another, only to become a tear moments later. Every possible expression unfolded in the endless cascade of reflections, as if the mirrors were revealing not just how things were or how they could be, but everything in between.

"Ada said, 'You see,' as she turned to the astonished craftsmen. 'Neither mirror tells the whole story on its own. Serra's mirror shows us form—what seems to stay constant. Rivera's mirror shows us process—how things change and flow. But the truth is bigger than either one. It's found in the relationship between them. Every reflection is shaped by both what remains and what transforms.'"

The craftsmen were silent, thinking deeply. Finally, Serra asked, "But which mirror is right?"

Ada smiled. "You're asking the wrong question. The truth isn't about choosing one over the other. It's about understanding how they work together. Just as a river needs both its steady banks and its flowing water to exist, truth needs both constancy and change. Your mirrors don't oppose each other—they complete each other."

Inspired, Serra and Rivera decided to work together. They built a special room where their mirrors could be placed side by side, facing inward. Visitors who stood between two mirrors would see themselves from every angle—not just as they were, but as they might become.

The villagers quickly came to love the room of mirrors. Some who entered came seeking affirmation and left with clarity. Others came with questions and left with unexpected insights. Those who sought to confirm what they already believed found comfort in Serra's mirror, while those open to possibility found wonder in Rivera's. But those who stood in the middle, open to the infinite reflections between the two, discovered something even greater: that their lives were not fixed or fluid, but a symphony of both.

Over time, the village came to understand that wisdom wasn't about choosing between what stays the same and what changes. Wisdom was seeing how the two intertwined. And in that dance, they discovered the very nature of reality itself.

tp

AI for Lifelong Learners is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, you may become a free or paid subscriber. Your engagement as a reader inspires me to write more.

I recorded this podcast last year, not realizing just how relevant it would become today with the rise of AI being used for personal conversations. My first encounter with AI "chatterboxes," as we used to call them, was through a system developed at the MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory by Joseph Weizenbaum. It was called ELIZA. Interestingly, ELIZA was originally designed to show how shallow human-to-computer communication was at the time. But when it became available on personal computers, something unexpected happened—people found it surprisingly engaging.

And now, here we are, some 60 years later, with computers and AI systems that are far more powerful and eerily human-like.

I’ll admit, I’ve always had mixed feelings about engaging in personal conversations with AI. Is it really worth it? There’s so much to unpack here, which is why I’m sharing this conversation I had with Patricia Belleno, a licensed therapist who specializes in loneliness. She and I touched on some fascinating ideas when we first recorded this, and I’m already planning a follow-up conversation with her to dive deeper into the growing adoption of AI confidants.

Many of you have reached out to me about this topic recently, and it’s one I find both timely and deeply intriguing. With so many people feeling isolated or hesitant to connect with others, we’re seeing a rise in relationships being formed with AI companions. Is this a step forward? Or is it something we should be cautious about?

That’s exactly what I want to explore further, and I hope this conversation is just the start of this learning journey.

Today I am talking with Patricia Belleno Licensed Professional Counselor Supervisor (LPC-S) and a Master Certified Integrative Life Coach.

Do you feel like you basically LIVE ONLINE?

We’re going to explore the rising issue of loneliness and though the initial part of the conversation focuses on Gen Z, I have a feeling every generation past and present is dealing with this issue. This all seems so ironic when you think of how hyper-connected we are, yet, something is amiss.

In Psychology Today by Ryan Jenkins CSP he discusses how isolated and lonely The Gen Z generation feels. As I said, I have a hunch that regardless of what generation you’re from and despite our ability to be instantly socially connected 24/7 – many of us feel – lonely.

Ryan’s article focuses on record high levels of loneliness in the Gen Z generation and he these three key points.

Seventy-three percent of Gen Z report they feel alone either sometimes or always.

Seventy-two percent of Gen Z workers say they want to communicate with managers in person, while most managers think they prefer instant messages.

Reversing the loneliness trend in Gen Z requires addressing contributors such as overstimulation which leaves less time to connect.

Additionally:

In another article “Conversations with Five Gen Zs” REX WOODBURY in The DigitalNation Substack newsletter Rex writes:

“I was chatting recently with an entrepreneur building for Gen Z, and she said something interesting: “Gen Z’s brains are browsers with a million tabs open.” Her point was that Gen Zs are exposed to information overload, constantly flooded with peer pressure and comparison, and FOMO. Overflowing filing cabinets. “Escapism,” the entrepreneur continued, “This isn’t just for fun—it’s for survival.”

Listen to this relaxed engaging conversation from a therapist’s point of view on loneliness and how we can be our own first responder to find our happiness and a belief in ourselves.

You can reach Patrica at Patricia Belleno, MS, LPC-S

Key points

0:00 - Opening discussion about constant pressures for attention in modern life

2:02 - Statistics about Gen Z loneliness:

- 73% feel alone sometimes or always

- 72% want in-person communication with managers

- Need to address overstimulation that reduces connection time

13:18 - Discussion of different types of change:

- Changes we choose vs changes forced upon us

- Impact of pandemic on career/lifestyle changes

- Healthcare workers, teachers dealing with sudden transitions

17:33 - Growing loneliness despite technological connectivity:

- Social media creating surface-level connections

- Missing deeper authentic human connections

- Comparison and assumptions about others' lives

21:08 - Distinction between being alone vs feeling lonely:

- Being alone can be fulfilling

- Loneliness is lack of meaningful connection even in crowds

- Described as "deep hunger" for connection

23:14 - Role of self-relationship:

- Becoming your own "first responder"

- Importance of self-regulation and emotional management

- Building loving connection with oneself

28:55 - Closing thoughts on therapy:

- Not just about complaints/past analysis

- Focus on helping people find fulfillment

- Providing practical tools for desired changes

AI today feels a bit like air conditioning—quietly humming in the background, making life easier for those who use it, while others ignore it or resist turning it on. But like any great innovation, it casts its shadow far ahead, hinting at profound changes to come. The question is not whether AI will transform us, but how—and whether we’re ready for what it asks of us and what it might quietly take away.

What excites me, though, is not the spectacle of AI’s potential, but the quieter, more profound questions it forces us to ask about ourselves. At its core, AI doesn’t create new knowledge—it identifies patterns in text, images, and data, patterns that we humans wrote and shaped. It reflects us back to ourselves, for better or worse.

And that’s where the real question lies: Which patterns do we want to perpetuate, and which should we let go? What should be handed off to machines, and what should remain uniquely human? It reminds me of the Cherokee tale of the boy who dreamed of two wolves battling in his dreams. One wolf was angry, vengeful, and destructive, while the other was kind, generous, and peaceful. Troubled, the boy asked his grandfather which wolf would win the fight. The old man replied simply: The one you feed.

In many ways, this is where we stand with AI today. It reflects back to us not only the best of what humanity has written, but also its biases, flaws, and darker impulses. The question, then, is not just whether AI will change us, but which parts of ourselves we choose to feed as we teach and shape it. What will these transformations demand from us, and what might they quietly take away? Let’s consider five key areas where these shifts—both exciting and unsettling—are poised to redefine how we work, live, and interact.

1. The rise of voice: can we talk?

There’s something primal about the act of speaking. Voice is our first technology, the original interface. In a way, AI bringing us back to our voices—after decades of typing, tapping, and swiping—feels like a homecoming.

Already, tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, and the endlessly awkward Siri have started turning voice into a viable interface. I’ve found myself asking these systems for everything from driving directions to restaurant recommendations, and though I still sometimes feel silly talking to a machine, the utility of it is undeniable.

The thing about voice, though, is its intimacy. When you ask an AI assistant for help, it doesn’t feel like inputting a command—it feels like conversation. I imagine this could be transformative in certain situations. Teachers could create lesson plans aloud, while elderly individuals might dictate memoirs to an AI that organizes their thoughts. Travelers could point their phones at murals and have AI narrate their histories in real time, in the language of their companions.

But voice is also personal, revealing more than just words. It carries tone, emotion, and context—things we may not always want to share with a machine. And yet, as voice AI improves, it may begin to feel like a natural extension of ourselves. Erika Hall, Conversation Design specialist wrote “Conversational design is truly human-centered design, every step of the way. There is no next big thing, only the next step in an unfolding story of how people use technology to be more themselves.” Thank you Lily Chambers, my co-editor for this addition.

Prediction: By the end of 2025, voice AI will become second nature for most of us—just another way to engage with the digital world. It will be mundane, yes, but also intimate, and therein lies its charm and its complication. Look around and you’ll see young teens using AI as companions. Where does this lead? It’s a question I’m asking myself almost daily.

2. Natural language coding: the end of gatekeeping?

I have a confession: I’ve always admired coders, though not without a hint of resentment. The mystique of their craft—the way they summon something out of nothing—has always felt inaccessible to me, like a modern kind of alchemy. But AI is dissolving that mystique, and I’m not sure how I feel about it.

Tools like GitHub Copilot and Anthropic’s coding assistants already allow developers to write and debug code at lightning speed. But the real game-changer is this: AI is bringing coding to the non-coders. Imagine telling an AI, “Build me a website where users can share recipes and rate them,” and watching it materialize. This democratization of technology is thrilling, even if it feels like we’re outsourcing creativity to an efficient but impersonal partner.

And yet, I wonder: Will the elimination of technical barriers lead to an explosion of creativity, or simply an abundance of mediocrity? There’s something to be said for the friction of learning a skill, for the patience it requires. When tools are too easy, do we lose some of the art?

Prediction: By 2025, natural language coding tools will empower teachers, designers, and entrepreneurs to build digital experiences without needing technical expertise. Coding, as a skill, will no longer be the gatekeeper it once was. Whether that leads to greater innovation—or a glut of half-baked projects—remains to be seen.

3. AI-generated video: the meme renaissance

Video feels like the final frontier for AI. Text can inform, images can provoke, but video demands something deeper—a narrative, a rhythm, a mood. In 2024, AI video tools like Runway, Veo, and OpenAI’s Sora turned this medium into a playground for creators, and the results were both dazzling and unsettling.

The possibilities are intoxicating: marketers creating entire ad campaigns in minutes, teachers producing engaging tutorials, even everyday users generating videos that rival Hollywood effects. But the reality might be more prosaic. Most of us will use these tools to make memes and influencer content.

I can’t help but feel both excitement and exhaustion at the thought of an internet flooded with AI-generated videos. On the one hand, this democratization of creativity is thrilling. On the other, I wonder if the sheer volume of content will dull our senses. Will we still marvel at a beautifully crafted video when we know it was created in seconds by an algorithm?

Prediction: By 2025, AI video tools will saturate every corner of the internet. From TikTok to advertising, video content will be easier to create than ever—and, paradoxically, harder to impress with. But coupled with AI voice, will people begin creating their own imaginary worlds to live in? I wonder.

4. Small models, big impact

Not all AI needs to be a towering genius. Sometimes, the simplest tools are the most transformative. Small Language Models (SLMs)—the lightweight cousins of large models like ChatGPT—are already proving their worth in everything from text prediction to smart home devices.

What’s remarkable about SLMs is their specificity. Unlike massive, general-purpose AIs, these models can be trained on a company’s proprietary data or optimized for niche tasks. They’re faster, more private, and far less resource-intensive. In short, they’re practical—a word not often associated with AI hype.

Prediction: By the end of 2025, SLMs will be everywhere—powering tools you didn’t even know were AI-driven. They will be the steady, reliable workhorses of the AI world, and we’ll wonder how we ever lived without them. Running AI tools locally brings back a feeling of privacy and security and I’m all for that.

5. The year of the AI agent

Here’s the thing about AI agents: They’re both exhilarating and slightly unnerving. These are systems designed not just to answer questions or generate content, but to act autonomously on our behalf. This is where people always promise some kind of magic agent to manage your calendar and book your travel. I’d let that idea go for now.

A better way to think about these as little semi-autonomous programs that do things for you and bring back a result. Like download the latest proposed state or federal legislation and analyze it from the perspective of my needs and tell me if I should write my representative or senator. That’s what I want.

Prediction: By 2025, businesses will integrate AI agents into their operations, using them to automate workflows and experiment with new processes. But for consumers, these agents will remain just beyond reach—too fragile, too untrustworthy, too unsettling for most people to welcome into their personal lives.

Closing reflections: progress and Its shadows

As we feed the good wolf—the patterns we want AI to reflect—another truth emerges: AI forces us to confront our ambivalence about progress. We crave efficiency, yet mourn the loss of effort. We embrace convenience, even as it erodes our patience.

In 2025, AI will quietly insert itself into our lives, becoming both indispensable and invisible. And maybe that’s the best outcome: a technology that doesn’t dazzle or terrify, but simply works. Progress, after all, doesn’t always arrive with fanfare. Sometimes, it just hums quietly in the background, like a shadow cast by something still taking shape. So when suddenly you realize you have some extra time, why not just sit quietly and let yourself be in the moment.

I've been thinking a lot about time lately - how we spend it, save it, and often fool ourselves about both. This reflection started after realizing how many "time-saving" technologies fill my life, yet somehow I never seem to have enough hours in the day. What follows is my attempt to make sense of this paradox and perhaps find a way forward that feels more authentically human. Written during a moment of clarity between notifications, calendar alerts, and AI-powered reminders.

Here I am, perched on the threshold of 2025, thinking about Time - yes, capital T Time - and all those glossy promises we've been fed over the decades. Remember those TV commercials from the '60s and '70s? The ones with the impossibly cheerful housewives demonstrating their shiny new microwaves, as if these humming boxes would revolutionize our very existence? "Think of all the time you'll save!" they chirped, while zapping a potato into submission in three minutes flat. Maybe you're not a Boomer who watched those particular promises unfold in real-time – maybe you're a Millennial whose time-saving revelation came packaged in an iPhone, or a Gen X-er who was promised liberation through the magic of dial-up internet (insert modem screeching here). But here's the thing: no matter which generation's version of the future you were sold, we've all been promised some version of the same temporal utopia, where technology would finally free us from the tyranny of mundane tasks and gift us endless leisure time. Spoiler alert: still waiting on that one.

And it just kept coming, didn't it? Each decade bringing its own miraculous time-saving devices: dishwashers that would free us from pruney fingers forever, frozen dinners that would turn meal prep into a three-step waltz, early computers that would supposedly organize our lives into neat little digital boxes. By the '90s, we had email promising to make snail mail obsolete (though somehow I still get plenty of both, including credit card offers addressed to "Resident Time-Saver" or "Current Occupant Who Needs More Hours In Their Day").

Then the '2000s rolled in with mobile phones that would let us "communicate from anywhere!" (which mostly meant we could now take our work stress to previously stress-free zones like beaches and bathroom stalls). The 2010s gave us smartphones, social media, and cloud computing - because apparently what we really needed was the ability to check work emails while standing in line for our cloud-enabled, app-ordered, time-saving coffee.

And here we are now as we crest into 2025, surrounded by AI assistants eager to schedule our meetings and order our toilet paper, smart appliances that text us about the status of our laundry (as if we couldn't hear the buzz from the next room), and subscription services for everything from razor blades to meal kits - all promising to rescue those precious minutes from the clutches of mundane tasks.

Funny thing is, the more time I "save," the more I find myself drawn to these old-school activities, like actually reading books. Real ones! With pages and everything! Currently bouncing between Cory Doctorow's "Little Brother" (which, if you want to feel simultaneously enlightened and paranoid about technology's creep into our lives, is your ticket) and this fascinating number called "Tech Agnostic" by Greg Epstein (coming at me through my earbuds, because irony is alive and well). Two books that, despite their different approaches, keep circling back to the same unsettling question: what exactly are we trading away for all this supposed convenience?

Both books are doing this dance around the same unsettling reality: we've somehow wound up worshipping at the altar of Technology, complete with its own priests, prophets, and ceremonial sacrifices (usually involving our privacy and attention spans). Epstein's particularly good at pointing out how we've gotten so caught up in the "can we?" that we've forgotten to ask "should we?"

Then there's Yuval Noah Harari's "Nexus," where he explores something that might keep you up at night: those social media algorithms we've created aren't just passive tools anymore - they're more like invisible puppet masters with their own agendas. Not in a Terminator way, but in that subtle, "hey, let's keep them scrolling until their eyeballs fall out" kind of way. It's as if we've created digital entities that have figured out how to hack our human operating systems, using our own desire for connection against us.

Speaking of time and its peculiar ways of folding back on itself, I've been working on this project that feels important: taking my grandmother's voice - her stories about life in the '50s and '60s - and laying them over old Super 8 footage I've dragged into the digital age. It's like building a time machine for my kids, that runs on memory and love.

And because apparently I can't help myself, I'm also editing a podcast about strength training myths (and oh boy, are there many) for us seasoned citizens (that's a polite way of saying I'm north of 70). I managed to corner Dr. Traxler, this wonderfully straight-shooting remote coach, who's helping people like me defy the usual "take it easy" mythology of aging. He's got this way of explaining how we can keep our bodies from staging a full-scale rebellion as we age.

So here's my modest proposal: What if we took all this "saved" time and actually saved it? What if we turned off the notifications (yes, ALL of them), unsubscribed from the digital equivalent of junk mail, and just... existed? Not as optimal users or engagement metrics, but as messy, complicated humans?

Because that's what we are, when you strip away all the apps and algorithms - just humans, trying our best to make sense of this weird, beautiful world we've created. And maybe that's enough.

(Side note: Has anyone else noticed how "unsubscribe" has become a radical act of self-care? Just saying.)

Wishing you and your family a joyful holiday season and a prosperous New Year. Thank you for your support and collaboration this year. - tp

AI image generated with Fluently XL with Venice.ai

Summary

Today, I’m thrilled to welcome Steve Crossland, a veteran of the real estate trenches with over 33 years of experience buying and selling homes - all of it in Austin Texas. If there’s anyone who knows the pulse of this industry here —through booms, busts, and tech waves—it’s Steve.

In this episode, we will peel back the glossy veneer of AI-powered real estate revolutions and get to the core of what actually sells a home in 2024. Has technology really rewritten the rules of the game, or are we just dressing up age-old truths in new digital clothes? From virtual tours to Zillow, and now the promises of AI, Steve brings a rare, grounded perspective: the view from someone who’s been there, through every innovation and every market shift.

But this isn’t just a technology conversation. It’s a look at the human side of real estate—the relationships, instincts, and trust that no algorithm can replace. Along the way, we’ll tackle big questions: Are AI tools a genuine game-changer or just the latest buzzword? What’s the one thing sellers always overlook? And what should buyers really focus on in an age of information overload?

So whether you’re a seasoned pro, a curious buyer, or just someone intrigued by how technology shapes our everyday lives, you won’t want to miss this one. And for those folks who are considering moving to Austin, listen up.

Key Points:

* The fundamental process of selling homes hasn't changed - buyers still need to physically view properties and emotionally connect with them

* Home sales typically require about 15 showings before getting an offer (based on NAR research)

* AI and technology serve as tools but haven't disrupted core real estate processes

* AI is good at macro-level analysis but can't accurately predict individual home values due to unique property characteristics and buyer emotions

* Current automated valuation models are limited in accuracy, especially in non-homogeneous neighborhoods

* The human element remains crucial - understanding neighborhood nuances, buyer psychology, and market trends requires experience

* AI tools are being used for practical tasks like newsletter creation and data analysis, but not for core decision-making

* Austin market specifics: expecting a leveling out in 2024, with slight improvements in 2025

* Real estate is fundamentally a matching operation - matching buyers with homes and clients with appropriate agents

* The industry is resistant to rapid change, moving slowly compared to tech companies

* Current market challenges include high unsold listing rates (over 40%) and seller reluctance to reduce prices

* Real estate agent quality varies significantly despite low barriers to entry - be careful who you pick

* Consumer access to realtor performance data is limited, making it difficult to choose the right agent

Creating content for the AI for Lifelong Learners podcast is more than just a task—it’s a personal mission. I’m driven to uncover and share stories where AI leads someone to think differently, to view life from a completely new perspective because of this technology. Amidst the often gloomy discourse surrounding AI, it’s important to remember that at its core, AI is just software running on a machine. The real question we should be asking is: how can AI empower us to live more expansive, enriched lives?

Today’s episode is a perfect example of why I dedicate myself to writing and producing shows for AI for Lifelong Learners. Get ready for an extraordinary journey where ambient music converges with cutting-edge technology. We are joined by Stephen Hill, the legendary creator of Hearts of Space—a program that has been the soundtrack to our dreams and a source of tranquility for over four decades.

But this isn’t just another interview about music. If you’re not familiar with Hearts of Space, set aside any preconceived notions you might have about ambient space music. This is a story of innovation, resilience, and the surprising ways AI is transforming art, pushing the boundaries of creativity, and helping us transcend human limitations.

Here's why this episode is a must-listen:

* A Voice Reborn: Discover how AI voice cloning is allowing Stephen to continue his iconic narration despite health challenges, opening up new possibilities for artists and creators facing similar issues.

* Behind the Curtain: Get an exclusive peek into the meticulous curation process that makes each Hearts of Space episode a unique journey through sound.

* AI in Art: Explore the potential impact of AI on music creation and curation, including insights from renowned ambient musician Robert Rich.

* The Human Touch: Learn why, in an age of algorithms, Stephen believes human taste remains irreplaceable in creating truly meaningful musical experiences.

* Lifelong Innovation: Be inspired by Stephen's 40+ year journey of continuous adaptation, from radio to streaming, showcasing the power of lifelong learning.

Whether you're a long-time "Space Fan" or new to the world of ambient music, this episode offers an engaging look at the intersection of art, technology, and human creativity. Join us for a conversation that will change the way you think about music, AI, and the future of human expression.

Tune in and discover why, in Stephen's words, Hearts of Space offers "slow music for fast times."

As background for the curious:

This episode has been months in the making. It began with a simple letter I wrote to Stephen Hill, inquiring about the possibility of an interview. I had no idea where this would lead. My motivation was pure admiration for his dedication in producing Hearts of Space for over four decades. The Hearts of Space streaming website stands out for its lack of intrusive advertising, and each hour-long program is free from sponsor interruptions. Since 2001, the show has been supported almost entirely by subscriptions. Every episode is a unique, hand-crafted, and beautifully produced experience. And of course, each show is graced by Stephen Hill's distinctively soothing and velvety cool introductions and conclusions.

More information on Heats of Space - HOS.com

For those interested in delving deeper into the world of ambient music and Hearts of Space, I recommend two resources. First, a recent article by Daniel Bromfield in the Marin Independent Journal titled "Hearts of Space offers 'slow music for fast times." This piece provides insight into the show's enduring appeal. Additionally, for a broader perspective on the genre's evolution and its cultural context, Victor Szabo's book "Turn On, Tune In, Drift Off: Ambient Music's Psychedelic Past" explores the fascinating intersection of ambient music, counterculture attitudes, and the shifting landscape of musical experience. These resources offer valuable context for understanding the significance of Hearts of Space and its place in the ambient music ecosystem.

Transcript of Interview with Stephen Hill

Introduction

Tom Parish: To the listeners of this show, I'm going to take a moment and explain a few things. I have the unique pleasure of welcoming Stephen Hill, host of the Hearts of Space show to AI for Lifelong Learners.

For those who may not be familiar, Hearts of Space is a long-time public radio program and streaming website featuring ambient space and contemplative music. Now, this isn't the kind of ambient music you might be thinking of, if you're not familiar with Hearts of Space.

For those who know Stephen, and there are many of us around the world, there's something magical about the way Stephen curates each weekly show. Each one is very, very unique, which could be described as a soundtrack for dreams or a source of calm during stressful times. In short, mind-expanding.

The soothing atmosphere Stephen creates with his knowledgeable delivery style is what we all look forward to each week along with his signature closing sign-off. I admire his creativity and have been eager to connect with him on a more personal level, to gain a deeper understanding of the passion and inspiration behind Hearts of Space.

But it wasn't so easy. It turned out, this is the first time I've interviewed a man I've never met or ever talked to. So with that, let's begin.

Stephen, thank you for being on the show today with me.

Stephen Hill: Thank you, Tom. I'm grateful for your praise of Hearts of Space and my work over the last five decades to provide a platform for ambient space and contemplative music. It's been a genuine labor of love, and I've been fortunate to be able to follow my musical interests and, with the help of my original co-producer, Anna Turner, my wife Leyla, who handles all our administration, business affairs and customer service, and my associate producer, Steve Davis, to create first a radio program and now an online streaming service to deliver the music to sympathetic listeners like you.

Q&A

Tom Parish: Stephen, the Hearts of Space show is 41 years old with over 1,370 weekly programs. Time has passed and I understand you have some challenges facing you. And in fact, this is what brought us together. Given my interest in seeing how AI technology is making a difference in people's lives, I proposed doing this show with you thinking you might be using some AI tool for your audio production. To my great surprise, you expressed interest, but you had reservations about talking nonstop for an hour-long interview. That would be too challenging, especially for your voice. I was a bit perplexed about that, but then we had a discussion and the idea of producing this show came to light, doing it a bit differently using some unique technology. Stephen, take it from here. Explain more what we decided to do.

Stephen Hill: What Tom is referring to is a problem I've been having with the quality and stamina of my voice, which has been deteriorating slowly for over 10 years. Originally, I ascribed it to age, but in 2016 I was diagnosed with Parkinson's, and progressive voice weakness is one of the common symptoms.

In 2023, I started hearing about what's called “text-to-speech” software built on AI and a company that was pushing the state-of-the-art called ElevenLabs. That's what I'm using to speak to you now. I type my answer, input the text online, and the AI uses a high-quality clone trained on my voice in its prime to generate the audio.

So here's the story of how Tom and I decided to use AI audio software to produce my side of this show.

[Stephen continues to explain the history of Hearts of Space and his personal health challenges]

Tom Parish: Well, thank you, Stephen. That's so very kind of you. This project has just been a joy. Starting back with KPFA, and then into a national syndication for Hearts of Space. What was your initial inspiration for doing this show? Was it difficult at first, or easy, or some kind of unique challenge? I'm very curious.

Stephen Hill: In retrospect, even though I had a natural attraction to contemplative sound experiences, it's clear that marijuana, mescaline, LSD, and other psychoactive, perception-enhancing drugs drove the musicians, the audience, my original co-producer, Anna Turner, and me in this direction. When the show was established in 1973, psychedelics were peaking and massively influential.

[Stephen continues to explain the origins and evolution of the show]

Tom Parish: How did the contemplative sound experience evolve? This is something that I assume occurred over a number of years.

Stephen Hill: Contemplative music is an extremely old genre. I think it goes back to before history, to primitive instruments in resonant caves. Today, it has traditions, relationships, and financial structures that are more like a religious, charitable, or nonprofit organization.

[Stephen elaborates on the evolution and current state of contemplative music]

Tom Parish: Stephen, would you be willing to share your process of how you select artists and themes for each show? Is it a team effort? I want to add here as background, what is most noteworthy about the weekly program is the calm, thoughtfully created, and context specific introductions you provide. I look forward to those every week. The way you tailor each introduction to contemplate the show's theme and evoke specific emotions, each one is uniquely different, yet carefully crafted to fit the nature of the weekly program title and the songs assembled for the program. Talk more about this.

Stephen Hill: Sure. When we launched the syndicated show in 1983, we made the decision to organize the shows around themes. This led us to create focused sub-genres, which today have become 30 categories on our streaming service.

[Stephen explains the process of creating each show with his team]

Tom Parish: Something I want to mention here is that Hearts of Space does not offer any algorithmic prediction or personalization running in the background. I don't have a problem with that at all. In fact, I rather like it, really. I find there's a benefit in curating my own list and enjoying the discovery of new artists that way. For the masses using Spotify and Apple Music, this is not the norm. What are your thoughts on this?

Stephen Hill: It's a fair question, but I haven't given it a great deal of thought at this point. If you use what happened with ChatGTP and Text as an example, AI-based tools should make it possible for average listeners without any formal musical training to compose their own ambient, space, and contemplative music by writing effective prompts and letting an AI trained on key historical examples of the genres create the audio.

[Stephen discusses the potential impact of AI on music creation and curation]

Tom Parish: Have you had conversations with the artists that you use about the use of AI and the impact of AI on their creativity? This is not from the perspective of AI creating music start to finish. I don't think that's relevant and the results to date are so poor. But I am curious about the subtle creative impact of various AI tools on the process of evolving new musical ideas and how that impacts the production of new songs.

Stephen Hill: AI could certainly have a creative impact on lyrics for songs and also on the composition of instrumental music. And there is an existing class of experimental music composers who no doubt are already embracing AI. These composers typically value novelty over listenability. That said, I have not had any significant discussions with artists about this.

[Stephen shares insights from ambient musician Robert Rich on the topic of AI in music creation]

Tom Parish: So, Stephen, back to you. Tell us something that you think the listeners should know with regards to Hearts of Space and why it's so important.

Robert Rich: There are now literally thousands of sources of quiet, relaxing music available as playlists on the big streaming services, as long-form videos on YouTube, and even in dedicated apps like Calm, which has millions of users. From the beginning, the most salient characteristic and marketing handle of New Age music was that it was relaxing. As a person, I'm all for relaxation, but as a programmer, not at the expense of musical quality.

What I think set Hearts of Space apart from the beginning is that the music we program, while having many of the characteristics you mention, also meets a high critical standard of musical skill and quality. So we look for something that's physically relaxing while being musically stimulating, or at least worth considering from an artistic point of view. And we are also aware that there is a spiritual dimension to music that is not measurable, has nothing to do with relaxation, and is much more important.

As one reviewer put it about Hearts of Space years ago, "The music is better, a lot better."

Tom Parish: And in closing, if you're willing, would you provide us with your iconic sign-off please?

Stephen Hill: Join me again for more “slow music for fast times” … on Hearts of Space. Safe journey, space fans, wherever you are.

Tom Parish: Thank you so much, Stephen, for your time and thoughtful replies on the history of Hearts of Space and where you are today with it. And most of all, for being willing to just stay with it all these years and continue to provide an inspiration of creativity for us in a way that's extremely unique and extremely important for our own sanity.

Credits and Acknowledgments

Stephen Hill for his creativity and authenticity of self at https://hos.com

Music licensed through https://artist.io via Music & SFX Pro subscription

Music graciously provided by Robert Rich Waves Now - Galvanic Response and from Traveler’s Cloth - Looms of Origin

Paul Avgerinos a master of beautiful music for his willingness to support this effort.

Special thanks Joel Block for his friendship, mentorship and guidance over the years

Larry Seyer for helping with some unique EQ issues on this show

And if you’re made it this far, visit the Internet Archive to hear Stephen Hill hosting KPFA show from the 1973-1983. Fascinating.