The Entropy Podcast

What happens when we automate more of our work but lose the ability to connect with each other?

Francis Gorman welcomes storyteller, producer and leadership coach Christopher Nelson to The Entropy Podcast to explore why storytelling matters in an increasingly distracted, AI-driven world.

Drawing on his experience behind the scenes of Dragons’ Den and his work with business leaders, Christopher explains how stories capture attention, build trust and help people work together. He introduces PRISM, his practical storytelling framework, and shares how one banking leader used stories of success and failure to change the way his teams connected and learned.

From the hidden cost of a frictionless digital life to the ingredients of a compelling pitch, this conversation explores what it takes to make people care and why human relationships deserve as much attention as the technology transforming our work.

Key Takeaways:

• Individual productivity doesn’t guarantee effective teamwork. Christopher argues that collaboration depends on the relationships we deliberately build.

• Everyday interactions give us opportunities to practise listening, navigating disagreement and understanding other people. Removing social friction can also remove opportunities to develop those skills.

• Use PRISM to structure a compelling story: a Provocative opener, a Relatable individual, an Inflection or challenge, the Struggle, and a Moral or lesson.

• Make storytelling part of your team’s routine. Sharing specific wins and failures can help colleagues learn from experience and recognise each other’s contributions.

• Give people a reason to care. Relatable characters, meaningful stakes and uncertainty about the outcome help sustain attention.

• Turn complex ideas into concrete stories. A clear example can make an abstract business or technical challenge easier to understand.

• A compelling pitch brings the person behind the product into focus. Christopher’s Dragons’ Den experience shows how aspiration and struggle can make a business story memorable.

SOUNDBITES:

“You can't automate human relationships.”

“Productivity happens not just when you're working, but in the spaces between as well.”

“Before you can tell a story, you must first have their attention.”

“Stories are like a value delivery system, and the value in that particular system is the lesson at the end.”

“Being out in the real world was like going to a social competence gym.”

“I think entrepreneur is just another word for storyteller.”

Explore Christopher’s work at storycharged.com.

Follow The Entropy Podcast for more conversations that challenge assumptions, spark ideas and keep you curious.

What happens when cyber warfare moves beyond screens and takes down the systems people need to survive?

Cyber warfare specialist Chris Kubecka joins Francis Gorman to recount her escape from Kyiv as Russia’s invasion began, while cyber attacks disrupted banks, communications and border systems.

From the vulnerability of nuclear infrastructure to the rise of drone warfare and autonomous weapons, Chris explores how digital attacks collide with physical threats. They discuss AI-generated disinformation, fibre-optic drones, Russia’s hybrid warfare tactics and the risks of trusting military AI without reliable data and human oversight.

The conversation closes with practical lessons in emergency preparedness: cash, paper maps, alternative communications and preparing for the loss of services we take for granted.

A firsthand perspective on cyber security, modern warfare and the human consequences of technological disruption.

SOUNDBYTES

“You want to hear a friendly voice and you're going through hell when you can't.”

“They want to soften up the civilian population by psychologically harassing them with drone incidents.”

“So we're relying on killing people and hoping that the military's Chat GPT has been updated to its newest model.”

“Don't always expect an internet connection. Don't always expect that your GPS is going to work.”

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Cyber warfare has immediate human consequences. Disrupted banking, communications and identity systems can make escaping a conflict more difficult.

• Nuclear infrastructure threats extend beyond physical damage. Disruption, uncertainty and fear can themselves become instruments of warfare.

• Drone warfare is changing rapidly, from fibre-optic control to autonomous systems and the growing overlap between cyber and physical operations.

• AI-generated disinformation can obscure real military capabilities, making authentic evidence harder to identify and assess.

• Military AI demands reliable data and human oversight. Automated decisions require scrutiny, particularly when lives are at stake.

• Emergency preparedness starts with simple backups. Paper maps, available cash, water supplies, warmth and alternative communications can help when digital services fail.

Link to the article Chris published on substack below:

Basic Preparation Before Flying Death Machines Hunt You Down

https://secevangelism.substack.com/p/preparing-for-drone-warfare-in-europe

Former BBC foreign journalist Melanie Marshall spent more than 20 years reporting from conflict zones and moments of upheaval across six continents. In this episode, she reveals what those experiences taught her about leadership, resilience and making decisions when you don’t have the full picture.

Melanie and Francis explore why uncertainty does not mean powerlessness, how great leaders create space for uncomfortable truths, and why plans must change the moment they meet reality. They also examine AI’s growing influence on human judgment, the dangers of easy answers and why businesses must resist handing over their agency.

From a Ukrainian community that fought back against an invasion to a life-saving decision on a road in Syria, Melanie shares remarkable stories that demonstrate courage, trust and leadership under pressure.

Key Takeaways:

• Uncertainty is not powerlessness it creates both risk and opportunity.
• Effective leaders make decisions with incomplete information.
• A plan must evolve when it comes into contact with reality.
• Leadership means confronting uncomfortable truths before the window for action closes.
• Trust must be built before a team reaches a crisis.
• The quietest person in the room may recognize your greatest risk or opportunity.
• AI should support human judgment, not replace curiosity, accountability or agency.
• Resilience often begins with identifying the resources already available to you.
• Human connection remains one of our strongest defenses against fear and division.
• Courage is often as simple as taking the next step together.

Soundbites:

“Uncertainty is not powerlessness.”

“The plan survives usually until you leave the door.”

“You’re deciding with the map actively on fire.”

“Bravery is simply one foot in front of the other.”

“Leadership is doing the uncomfortable thing.”

“We need a little grit to make the pearl.”

“Go out into the world and talk to a real person.”

“If the world feels scary, ask yourself: What is the opportunity here, and what resources do I have available?”

Listen now for a compelling conversation about leading through uncertainty, decision-making under pressure, resilience, AI, human connection and the courage to move forward without all the answers.

If you haven’t done so already check out part 1.

Apple podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/ie/podcast/the-entropy-podcast/id1795927497?i=1000788046671

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2EiCIRM6HhicJco4c8ZQSm?si=_MfmoPrzTXe6TiRIgUU-XQ&utm_source=copy-link

In Part 2 of Francis Gorman’s conversation with technologist and entrepreneur Paul Walsh, the discussion moves from online identity into a much broader question: what happens to privacy when AI becomes embedded in the tools we use every day?

Paul argues that the risks are no longer confined to social media platforms. As AI assistants gain access to messaging, email, devices and personal data, he raises concerns about what that means for end-to-end encryption, confidential conversations and the expectation that private communication remains private.

From there, the conversation widens into anonymity, censorship, AI-driven decision-making and the increasingly blurred relationship between governments, regulators and major technology companies.

For Paul, the danger isn’t necessarily one dramatic moment where privacy disappears. It is the gradual accumulation of systems built for convenience, safety or security that ultimately create much greater capabilities for surveillance and control.

Key Takeaways

• End-to-end encryption is only as strong as its endpoints. Paul argues that giving an AI assistant access to messages before encryption or after decryption can undermine the practical privacy users expect from encrypted communication.
• Convenience comes with a privacy trade-off. AI tools can make it easier to search conversations, schedule actions and retrieve information but those capabilities may require extensive access to sensitive personal data.
• Privacy doesn’t require justification. One of Paul’s central arguments is that people should not have to prove why they deserve privacy or anonymity.
• Identity verification changes the consequences of being banned online. Paul warns that if every account becomes permanently linked to a government identity, losing access to a platform could become far more consequential.
• The chilling effect may matter as much as censorship itself. If people believe their identity is permanently attached to everything they say, Paul argues they may begin censoring themselves before anyone else has to.

Soundbites

“If somebody can read the message before you send it and before it’s encrypted, or after somebody sends you a message and after it’s decrypted, then you defeat the purpose.”

“People make a decision and think it was their own idea.”

“We have people lobbying for child safety, not realizing that they’re actually begging the government to surveil them.”

“Convenience and security have always been at odds.”

Part 2 leaves listeners with a difficult question: how much privacy are we willing to exchange for convenience, safety and access to increasingly powerful technology?

Paul’s message isn’t to abandon AI or digital platforms. It is to understand the systems being built around us, question who benefits from them, and protect the ability to communicate, participate and speak without unnecessary surveillance.

Because, as Paul puts it:

“I don’t have to explain to you why I want privacy.”

In Part 1 of this two-part conversation, Francis Gorman sits down with technologist and entrepreneur Paul Walsh to explore a question that has followed the internet for nearly three decades: how do we know what and who to trust online?

Paul traces the problem back to the early web and his work on content classification and verification standards, explaining why today’s challenges aren’t necessarily new they’ve simply been amplified by AI, deepfakes, phishing and increasingly sophisticated social engineering.

The conversation then turns to the growing push for online age verification and social media restrictions. Paul draws a sharp distinction between content moderation and access control, arguing that modern devices already give parents powerful tools to manage what children can access.

But his bigger concern is what comes next: when “robust age verification” evolves into mandatory identity verification for entire populations.

Key Takeaways

• The trust problem hasn’t changed it has scaled. Social engineering and impersonation remain at the heart of much cybercrime; AI simply makes them faster, cheaper and harder to detect.
• Verification is as much about psychology as technology. A badge or trust signal only works if people understand what it actually represents.
• Deepfakes raise the stakes. In a world where people can no longer automatically trust what they see or hear, reliable provenance and account verification become increasingly important.
• Content moderation and access control are different problems. Paul argues that platforms should improve moderation, while parents already have increasingly sophisticated device-level controls available to manage children’s access.
• Age verification can become identity verification. Paul warns that demands for “robust” age checking could ultimately require users to prove their real-world identity simply to participate online.
• Privacy can be lost incrementally. Measures introduced for legitimate goals such as child safety can expand in scope and create infrastructure capable of much broader surveillance.

Soundbites

“Society doesn’t know where to look to find trust.”

“Technology is just an enabler.”

“I don’t think any tech company is doing enough to reduce the risk of their technology being used for harm.”

“Content moderation is different to access control.”

“The governments are saying they’re giving back control, but actually they’re taking away their ability to just be a parent.”

Part 1 ends with a fundamental tension: how do we make the internet safer without building systems that require everyone to surrender their identity and privacy in order to participate?

AI is moving beyond automation and into autonomy and that shift could fundamentally change how businesses operate, how decisions are made and how people work.

In this episode of The Entropy Podcast, Francis Gorman sits down with Ismail Amla to explore the rise of agentic AI, digital workers and AI-native organisations. They discuss why the biggest opportunity is not simply using AI to make existing processes faster, but redesigning businesses around what intelligent systems can now do.

They also examine the harder questions: what happens when AI agents begin making decisions independently, who is accountable when those decisions go wrong, how organisations can avoid agentic drift, and whether relying too heavily on AI risks weakening human judgement and curiosity.

Key takeaways: 

• Why AI is shifting from automation to autonomy
• How AI agents could become part of the workforce 
• Why most AI transformation efforts fall short
• What leaders need to rethink, and why governance and human judgement matter more as systems become increasingly autonomous.

Soundbites: 

“I think it is a revolution. I don’t think it’s just another tool.”

“Whoever this technology is working on behalf of is responsible for every decision that’s made.”

In this episode of The Entropy Podcast, Francis Gorman sits down with Snehal Antani, CEO and co-founder of Horizon3.ai for a wide-ranging conversation on cybersecurity, AI, warfare, leadership and the future of work.

Snehal shares lessons from building and scaling Horizon3.ai, why startups must eventually move from “pirates” to a “navy,” and how his time inside Special Operations fundamentally changed his approach to leadership.

They also explore the rapidly changing cyber threat landscape: AI-powered attackers, autonomous penetration testing, deception as a defence against AI agents, the lessons emerging from Ukraine, and why organisations need to stop asking whether they are secure and start proving they are resilient and defensible.

Key Takeaways

• Why great founders need grit, conviction and a “learn-it-all” mentality
• How companies transition from entrepreneurial pirates to a scalable navy
• Why AI could give cyber attackers effectively unlimited ammunition
• How defenders can use honeypots and deception to hack the hackers
• Why cybersecurity teams should train like they fight
• The growing importance of human-machine teaming in warfare
• Why over-reliance on AI could undermine human judgement and scepticism
• How AI may reshape the workforce and put increasing pressure on the “middle”
• Why there is no AI easy button coming for cybersecurity
• Why organisations must move from being “secure” to being resilient and defensible

Key Soundbites

“You earn the right to be on this team every single day.”

“AI gives the adversary unlimited bullets.”

“You don’t want to learn how to deal with a crisis in the middle of a crisis.”

“We always train like we fight.”

“There is no AI savior that’s going to suddenly make your lives better.”

“Those obsessed with mastering their craft are going to come out on top.”

“Stop saying that we’re secure… start talking about how we’re defensible.”

Quantum technology promises enormous economic value, but are businesses preparing quickly enough to capture it or protect themselves from its risks?

In this episode, Francis Gorman speaks with strategy leader and LFI founder Shayne De la Force about the commercial realities of quantum technology in advanced manufacturing. Drawing on decades of experience across the semiconductor, aerospace, defence and automotive sectors, Shayne explains why quantum must become a board-level economic and governance priority.

They explore the cost of waiting, the challenge of securing global supply chains, the role of an embedded Chief Quantum Officer, and why businesses need to look beyond vague terms such as “quantum advantage” and “quantum readiness.”

Shayne also reflects on beginning his career on a factory floor in Japan, the dangers of “synthetic seniority,” and the lessons behind his book, Strategic Entanglement, which helps deep-tech founders cross the valley of death between innovation and commercial success.

Key Takeaways

• Quantum is an economic issue, not merely a technology issue. Business leaders should evaluate it through two lenses: increasing enterprise value and reducing risk.
• Waiting carries a measurable cost. Organisations that begin planning and piloting now can build stronger competitive moats, while delayed action may expose intellectual property, long-lived data and future market position.
• Quantum preparation needs board-level sponsorship. CISOs and technical teams require executive support, funding and governance authority to deliver meaningful readiness programmes.
• Advanced manufacturers face a supply-chain problem. Prime contractors may have thousands of suppliers operating at very different levels of cryptographic maturity. The weakest supplier can become the greatest source of exposure.
• Prioritisation is more valuable than trying to fix everything at once. Companies should identify high-exposure systems, sensitive intellectual property and long-lived data, then concentrate resources where risk reduction will have the greatest impact.
• Most mid-sized organisations do not need a full internal quantum department. An embedded Chief Quantum Officer model can provide access to strategy, security, physics, governance and programme-management expertise without years of internal hiring.
• Quantum use cases must be tied to commercial outcomes. Not every pilot will deliver immediate value. Organisations need clearly defined business problems, economic metrics and realistic pathways from experimentation to deployment.
• Deep-tech commercialisation must begin early. Start-ups should develop their market narrative, customer belief and commercial strategy alongside the technology—not after the product has been completed.
• Foundational experience still matters. Working directly with machines, infrastructure, customers and operational teams creates judgement that cannot be replaced by AI-generated ideas or “synthetic seniority.”

Soundbites

“Unless you are working for a not-for-profit, we are all here to drive business, growth and economic value.”

“A CEO or CFO has two fundamental objectives: maximise economic value and reduce economic risk.”

“The companies moving today are the ones that will have the strongest competitive moat.”

“Unless you have buy-in at the top, it is very difficult to move the rest of the organisation.”

“When boards see the economic risk of losing their intellectual property and long-term data, that is when the needle starts moving.”

“Building an internal quantum department can take years and millions of dollars. Our embedded model gives companies access to the whole capability.”

“The companies running pilots today are the ones building a competitive moat over the companies that are waiting.”

“In advanced manufacturing, equipment may have a depreciation cycle of 25 or 30 years. That makes cryptographic transition a massive challenge.”

“The prime contractors are preparing, but their supplier base is often their weakest link.”

“Our job is to create clarity in chaos—because, right now, it is chaos.”

“Can we close 80 percent of the exposure in the first 12 months and then work through the remaining 20 percent?”

“The valley of death is where great technology goes to die because the commercialisation strategy was never developed.”

In this episode of The Entropy Podcast, Francis Gorman speaks with Patrick Lechner, co-founder of Resimate.io and an experienced business and cyber resilience leader, about why many organisations mistake documentation for genuine readiness.

Patrick challenges the obsession with business continuity plans, impact assessments and compliance evidence, arguing that resilience should be measured by outcomes: can the organisation continue operating when something critical is lost?

The conversation explores the difference between security and resilience, why businesses should prepare for loss rather than attempt to predict every possible threat, and how leaders can identify their most important dependencies. Patrick also examines the role of AI, the importance of business ownership and why tabletop exercises must become honest operational conversations rather than annual corporate theatre.

This is a practical discussion about building the confidence, capability and human relationships required to respond when the plan no longer matches reality. 

Key takeaways

• Resilience is not a collection of documents. Plans and frameworks are useful, but they do not prove that an organisation can sustain operations during a crisis. 
• Prepare for loss, not every imaginable threat. Most disruptions can be reduced to losing a site, people, systems, suppliers or data. 
• The business owns resilience. Operational leaders should decide what must continue, what level of disruption is tolerable and where investment is justified. 
• Cybersecurity and cyber resilience are different. Security attempts to prevent incidents; resilience determines what happens when prevention fails. 
• Dependencies must be understood across the organisation. A single failure—such as electricity, identity infrastructure or a major supplier—can create very different consequences across multiple teams. 
• AI can amplify weak processes. Automating a poor resilience process may produce more plans and evidence without improving operational capability. 
• Tabletop exercises should be frequent and honest. Short, regular discussions are often more valuable than one heavily scripted annual exercise. 
• People ultimately carry the response. Trust, authority, shared principles and operational knowledge matter more during a crisis than a spreadsheet stored somewhere on the network. 

Soundbytes:

“We were tired of resilience being measured by plans, not outcomes.”

“Plans may be useless, but planning is indispensable.”

“Almost every threat can be reduced to a handful of loss scenarios: losing a site, people, systems, suppliers or data.”

“The board-level question is simple: how confident are we that we can sustain operations if we lose a key dependency?”

“It does not matter why the electricity is gone. If it is gone, the business still has to respond.”

“Investing heavily in prevention does not mean you are resilient.”

“If you have bad processes today, AI is a great tool for accelerating those bad processes.”

“You do not become fit by going to the gym once a year for seven hours. Tabletop exercises work the same way.”

“An exercise should be an honest conversation, not a performance conversation.”

“When something hits, it is the people, the trust and the shared principles that allow the organisation to respond.” 

In this episode of The Entropy Podcast, Francis sits down with Jake Moore, Global Cybersecurity Advisor at ESET, to unpack one of the biggest technology shifts of our time: the collapse of trust in the digital world.

From deepfakes and AI-powered scams to digital footprints, remote hiring fraud, and the rise of agentic cybercrime, Jake explains how rapidly evolving AI tools are changing the nature of deception and why individuals, businesses, and governments are struggling to keep up.

The conversation explores what happens when seeing is no longer believing, how cybercriminals are already exploiting synthetic media, and why the future of cybersecurity may depend less on tools alone and more on human awareness, verification, and digital resilience.

If you’ve ever wondered how close we are to a world where anyone can fake anyone, this episode is for you.

Key Takeaways

• Deepfakes are no longer theoretical — they are already being used in scams, impersonation, and fraud. 
• Trust online is eroding fast, as AI-generated content becomes more realistic and accessible. 
• Remote hiring introduces new risks, including AI-assisted impersonation and fake candidates. 
• Your digital footprint reveals more than you think, often exposing personal details that can be used against you. 
• Cyber awareness is still the strongest defense, especially when technology alone can’t keep pace. 
• Children need better cyber education, particularly around passwords, privacy, and digital identity. 
• AI is scaling cybercrime, making attacks faster, cheaper, and more convincing. 
• Agentic AI and quantum computing could create the next major wave of cybersecurity disruption. 

Soundbites

Here are strong promotional soundbites you can use in Spotify captions, social posts, clips, or episode promos:

1. “We’ve entered a world where seeing is no longer believing.”
2. “Your face, your voice, and your identity are becoming easier to fake.”
3. “The biggest cyber threat may not be malware — it may be trust itself.”
4. “Deepfakes are no longer a future problem. They’re here now.”
5. “Cybercriminals don’t need perfect technology — they just need believable enough.”
6. “Your digital footprint can tell strangers more about you than you realize.”
7. “In the age of AI, awareness is still your greatest defense.”
8. “The next scam won’t look suspicious — it will look completely real.”
9. “Remote work has opened the door to a new kind of identity fraud.”
10. “We are moving into an era of synthetic reality, and most people are not ready for it.”