It makes sense that economic principles could be a useful guide in deciding what career to pursue, but what if they’re also the key to deciding whether to ask for a promotion, who to marry, or what house to buy? 

Daryl Fairweather is the chief economist at Redfin and the author of the book, Hate the Game: Economic Cheat Codes for Life, Love, and Work. Through the lens of behavioral economics and game theory, the book provides readers with practical strategies for navigating some of life’s biggest decisions. 

Daryl and Greg discuss how economic principles can be applied to real-life decisions, from careers to family planning, and insights into the housing market’s complexities including bidding wars, changes to how buyers’ agents are paid, and where the market might be headed. 

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

Can exposure to economics change the way people interact?

04:31 Economics provides a really useful framework for making decisions. We have utility theory, right? So you just go with the decision that has the higher expected utility. And I do not think many people think about decisions that way. They get caught up in things like sunk cost fallacies or status quo bias. So having that understanding of both economics and the behavioral part—incorporating the psychology into it—I think allows me, and I think a lot of other, hopefully more people who read the book, to feel more confident in the decisions. I think a lot of people know what the right decision is, but they do not really have the confidence to make it because they are not really thinking through it in terms of what will maximize my utility.

Don’t hate the player, hate the game

52:06 Just because the economy is unfair, and it is unfair for a whole host of reasons—it is not all, like, nefarious reasons. Sometimes games have these inherent flaws in them…[52:28] But if you see that you can navigate around it, you do not have to hate yourself for trying to make it in this economy. You can just see the economy for what it is, and its flaws, and still try to excel at it.

The housing market needs big interventions

29:17: I think we definitely need some, some big interventions in the housing market. We've seen a lot of policy changes in California, which if California alone fixed its housing problems, it would probably fix housing problems for the entire country…[29:40] But California's problems I think are deeper than just zoning. They have Prop 13, which gives a much lower property tax rate to existing homeowners…[29:59] So, I think there's a lot that we could do to make housing better than what it is right now because it is pretty dire.

How PhDs undervalue themselves

18:41 I think where a lot of PhDs make a mistake is they do not really understand how valuable they are, and they get stuck in the first job that they went to straight out of grad school, not realizing how many other opportunities there are where they could earn just as much money, or maybe even more money, and have even broader opportunities. But they just kind of, like, stay put because they do not see that broader world around them. They are very good at taking PhD students and turning them into professionals, but then they get the benefit that most of those people hang on for a very long time and do not really go and look at what their other opportunities are, because I think if they did, they would see that they would be very valued outside of just consulting.

Recommended Resources:

• Steven Levitt
• John List
• The Art of War
• Hal Varian
• Gary Becker
• The Family Firm: A Data-Driven Guide to Better Decision Making in the Early School Years by Emily Oster

Guest Profile:

• Author Profile on Redfin
• Professional Profiles on LinkedIn, X

Guest Work:

• Hate the Game: Economic Cheat Codes for Life, Love, and Work

How can you make philosophy accessible to everyone without stripping it of essential depth and complexity? Where can philosophy take hold in diet and everyday activities?

Julian Baggini is a philosopher, journalist and the author of over 20 books about philosophy. His latest are How to Think Like a Philosopher: Twelve Key Principles for More Humane, Balanced, and Rational Thinking, How the World Eats: A Global Food Philosophy, and The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten: 100 Experiments for the Armchair Philosopher.

Greg and Julian discuss making philosophy accessible to everyone, and Julian’s latest works. Julian discusses the importance of epistemic virtue, cognitive empathy, and the challenges of integrating philosophical thinking into everyday life. They examine the role of attention in good thinking, the merits and drawbacks of various food ethics movements, and the balance between technophilia and technophobia, even coining a new term for practical wisdom in technology use.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

System change beats consumer choice

40:38: We should be a little less neurotic about, Is this clean, dirty? Is this good, bad? Try and do the right thing. But actually, it is a system change that is most important. And so the most important thing you could do as an individual is influence organizations and things you are around with. What about your school? What is your school doing for food? I mean, crikey, I am in France at the moment, and I just got the local newsletter from the school. The local schools here—they have a local chef. They give a good chef. They favor local sourcing. They are 30% organic in their ingredients. They spend three euros a day on the food for the kids. And it is—wow, that is great. Right now, in a lot of English British schools, it is terrible, and that is partly because they do not have the resources for it. So, you know, you have got a school—get your school buying the right stuff and feeding the right stuff. That is going to affect like several hundred kids, which is much more than you can affect with your shopping basket.

Why attentiveness matters in philosophy

58:15: Attentiveness is important because I think in some debates, they become scholastic in the sense that a question arises in philosophy, it gets formulated, and people go after the answers, but people are not paying attention as to why we are asking the question in the first place.

Why thinking should be a team sport

43:17: So the so-called cognitive failures we have, it shows how stupid we are. Bad we are at abstract thought. Well, that's when we try and do things privately by ourselves, and I think in general, yeah, absolutely. Thinking with others—so this has become my mantra. I actually got a fridge magnet made with this on it: Think for yourself, not by yourself. Think for yourself is important. Do not just accept what you are told.

Rethinking what it means to think well

05:20: People often think that good thinking is a technical matter. You get your training in logic; you get to analyze whether a statement is fallacious, whether the conclusion follows from the premises, et cetera, et cetera—all of which are useful skills, to be sure. But there is a whole other side of good thinking, which is to do with what we call these epistemic virtues. It describes the whole attitude you bring to your thinking.

Recommended Resources:

• Epistemic Virtue
• Bernard Williams
• Philippa Foot
• Iris Murdoch
• Friedrich Nietzsche
• William James
• Peter Singer
• The Good Son
• Fyodor Dostoevsky
• David Hume
• John Searle
• Wason selection task
• Kieren Setiya
• Daily Rituals - How Artists Work
• Onora O'Neill
• T. M. Scanlon
• Miranda Fricker
• Richard Feynman
• Phronesis

Guest Profile:

• JulianBaggini.com
• Profile on Wikipedia
• Social Profile on Instagram
• Social Profile on X

Guest Work:

• Amazon Author Page
• How to Think Like a Philosopher: Twelve Key Principles for More Humane, Balanced, and Rational Thinking
• How the World Eats: A Global Food Philosophy
• The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten: 100 Experiments for the Armchair Philosopher
• The Great Guide: What David Hume Can Teach Us about Being Human and Living Well
• How Do We Know? The Social Dimension of Knowledge: Volume 89

It may be not much to look at, but the unassuming shipping container has had a massive impact on the global economy since its invention in the 1950s. The story of its rise as the dominant form of shipping is filled with dramatic turns and insights into the explosion of globalization.  

Marc Levinson is a journalist, economist, and a former senior fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations. His books like, The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger and Outside the Box: How Globalization Changed from Moving Stuff to Spreading Ideas explore the complex economic history and unexpected impact of how goods make their way around the world. 

Marc and Greg discuss the labor-intensive nature of shipping before containerization, the union battles, regulatory hurdles, and the economic implications of adopting a standardized container. They also examine the unforeseen consequences of global supply chains and the evolving power dynamics between shippers and transporters.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

The hidden globalization behind modern trade

47:48: The value of international trade of exports and imports is really based on transactions. Okay? One party is selling something to another party, and there is a price for that transaction. But what happens when you're looking at something on the internet? You're not paying any money to do that. You're just sitting at your computer. You do not know that the server that's offering you that page on the internet is actually based in a different country. That's an international exchange. It's not—there's not a transaction. This is not recorded as international trade, but it is. It's quite common now within large companies to have research operations in several countries. The researchers talk to one another all the time. They send each other emails all the time. And those ideas have economic benefit, but they do not have value that can be captured by national statistics. So we're having a much harder time keeping track of what is going on.

The unsung heroes behind global trade

28:27: The real heroes in the container story, I think, are the engineers from the ship lines and the container manufacturers and other companies who spent 10 years literally sitting in smoke-filled rooms, negotiating over things like: How many supports should there be inside the container? How thick should the end walls be? What should the door hinges look like? All of this seems really trivial, but economically, it made a big difference to the different companies...It made a difference to the cost of the container.

How companies are rethinking trade risk

41:08: I think companies have really devoted a lot more effort in the past couple of years to understanding how their supply chains work and looking for vulnerabilities. There are a couple of basic choices that they have got. One is that they can just keep more inventory, keep more stuff in the warehouse here in the States. Well, that is costly. First, you have to pay for it, and then you have to pay to store it. And it may go out of date depending upon what business you are in. But that is one way of reducing this risk

Recommended Resources:

• Malcom McLean
• John R. Meyer

Guest Profile:

• Professional Website
• Professional Profile on LinkedIn

Guest Work:

• The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger
• Outside the Box: How Globalization Changed from Moving Stuff to Spreading Ideas
• Great A&P and the Struggle for Small Business in America

It might sound counterintuitive but digital transformation is not about technology. So, what does it mean for companies to keep up in an ever-evolving digital age? Well, according to today’s guest, it’s about having a “strategic imagination.”

David Rogers, an instructor at Columbia Business School, is an OG thinker on digital transformation. His books, The Digital Transformation Playbook: Rethink Your Business for the Digital Age and The Digital Transformation Roadmap: Rebuild Your Organization for Continuous Change, laid the foundation for an entire strategic approach to taking companies into the digital age. 

David and Greg delve deep into the misconceptions about digital transformation, emphasizing that it's not merely about technology but about strategic imagination and continuous organizational change. They discuss the evolution of digital transformation over the past decade, the importance of a well-defined strategic vision, and the roles of agile methodologies, hypothesis-driven experimentation, and cohesive leadership.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

Digital transformation is about contexts

56:33: The question of digital transformation. It is not about bolting technology onto an existing company. It is about—really, it is about—how do we adapt an organization so that it can thrive in a digital context, right? The digital is actually about the context, not about what you are doing, even necessarily per se, inside the business. And to me, the most defining characteristic of the digital era is this accelerating change and accelerating and growing uncertainty that organizations have to cope with.

What makes an effective leader?

25:16: Effective leaders do not orient their job around making decisions primarily. What they are primarily trying to do is to define what truly matters, to then communicate that to others, achieve that kind of alignment and clarity that we are pulling in the same direction, and then to empower others—to enable the rest of the organization to do it.

Digital transformation is not about technology

10:28: Digital is not about the technology inside your company. It is not about the behaviors of the market and the customers. But it is more the context we are in, which is one of—not a change that happened in 1994 to 1996, or some other change. Oh, the shift to mobile. Oh, the shift to this. Let’s shift to the cloud. It is just one after another, and each wave of technology change is catalyzing the next. It is not just, “Oh, why are they each coming?” Well, each one is building on the one right before it. And so we are dealing with this pace of change and level of uncertainty; therefore, in your context, for any organization, that is unprecedented and certainly not what big organizations were built for and organized for in the 20th century.

Strategy as thinking discipline

34:39: Strategy is something you need to embed in every level of organization as a thinking discipline, which is about defining: what are we trying to achieve? What do we believe is a way—or the best way—to achieve that at this point in time.

Recommended Resources:

• James Hackett 
• Daniel Kahneman
• Praveer Sinha, Tata
• Steve Blank
• Bob Dorf

Guest Profile:

• Faculty Profile at Columbia Business School
• Professional Website
• Professional Profile on LinkedIn
• Newsletter on Substack

Guest Work:

• The Digital Transformation Roadmap: Rebuild Your Organization for Continuous Change
• The Digital Transformation Playbook: Rethink Your Business for the Digital Age
• The Network Is Your Customer: Five Strategies to Thrive in a Digital Age 

What drives humans to seek and discover the previously unknown? Does the wanderlust that so many of us share in common have a scientific explanation? 

Science journalist Alex Hutchinson is the author of The Explorer's Gene: Why We Seek Big Challenges, New Flavors, and the Blank Spots on the Map, as well as the book Endure: Mind, Body, and the Curiously Elastic Limits of Human Performance. His work focuses on expanding our understanding of human performance, particularly in relation to fitness, sports, and outdoor activities. 

Alex and Greg delve into what it means to have the “Explorer’s Gene,” the evolutionary benefits of seeking novelty, and the psychological aspects of exploring, including the balance between the impulse to explore and the necessity to exploit known resources.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

Why is defining exploration so tricky?

33:56: What do you mean by exploring? Well, on one extreme, it can be like, well, if you are the first person to do this ever, then you are exploring. And that is a very narrow definition that not many of us will ever satisfy. The other definition is like, hey, I am changing the channel on TV and therefore I am exploring the airwaves. And that is also not very meaningful. Then, like, everything we do is exploring.

So, somewhere in the middle, there is a definition that I think is useful. And part of that definition, I think, is that it is—you know, a meaningful form of exploration inevitably involves some struggle. It involves the risk of failure. It does not have to be physical struggle, but it involves some risks, some challenge.

Is technology making us passive explorers?

33:02: Technologies make us more passive in our explorations. There is something lost in the quality of our experience, in how much we enjoy it, and then also in how much we learn about the world from those experiences.

Why are we drawn to solving uncertainty?

24:37: The subjective sense that life is good—like the feeling that you are happy and good and satisfied—is a manifestation of the fact that you are reducing uncertainty quickly. That this is like you are learning about the world, things are going well. And so, when we talk about exploring and curiosity, we are looking for opportunities to get this steepest slope that we can surf down, where we are reducing uncertainty quickly.

Why a changing world demands exploration

18:56: If the world was stationary—in the bandit literature, they talk about stationary bandits and restless bandits. So, stationary bandits are like, if the slot machine pays off 62% of the time, it is always going to pay off 62% of the time. If the world was like that, then there might be a case for locking yourself in a closet, or at least some equivalent of, like, you do not need to explore quite so much—let us just figure out a comfortable way of living and let us do that. The problem is, the world never stays stationary. So, what worked yesterday may not work as well today, and almost certainly, eventually there will come a time where it is not working. We have to keep adapting. And so, in these lab areas, you can show that the more restless the world—the greater the changes in the reward functions around you—the more valuable exploration is.

Recommended Resources:

• Daniel Ellsberg 
• John Maynard Keynes 
• Bernard Suits 
• Mark Miller 
• “Your Brain on GPS” by Alex Hutchinson | The Globe and Mail 
• Mindwandering: How Your Constant Mental Drift Can Improve Your Mood and Boost Your Creativity by Moshe Bar

Guest Profile:

• Professional Website
• Professional Profile on LinkedIn
• Author Page at Outside Magazine

Guest Work:

• The Explorer's Gene: Why We Seek Big Challenges, New Flavors, and the Blank Spots on the Map
• Endure: Mind, Body, and the Curiously Elastic Limits of Human Performance 

Being easily distracted by the latest technologies has been a consistent feature of the human race since the time of Plato. But is the technology to blame? Or is the key to being more productive and present in life have to do with forming healthy habits around the technology?

Nir Eyal, writer, consultant, and former lecturer in marketing at Stanford, is the author of Indistractable: How to Control Your Attention and Choose Your Life and Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products. In his work, Nir explores the psychology behind habit-forming technology.

Nir and Greg discuss the positive applications of habit-forming technologies, the timeless nature of distraction, the importance of forethought in combating impulsiveness, and practical strategies for becoming “Indistractable.” 

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

The antidote to impulsiveness is forethought

15:32: Studies have found that 90% of your distractions are not external triggers. They do not come from the outside world. Ninety percent of the time you check your phone, you check your phone not because of a ping, ding, or ring, but because of an internal trigger. Because 90% of distractions begin from within. They start because of these internal triggers. What are internal triggers? Internal triggers are uncomfortable emotional states—boredom, loneliness, fatigue, uncertainty, anxiety. This is the source of 90% of our distractions. So what that means is, when you let those impulses take over, right? The antidote to impulsiveness is forethought. When you allow yourself to check social media or watch something on the news or whatever it is that is not what you want to do, because of an immediate sensation, that tends to be, 90% of the time, the source of the problem. That is when it becomes something of, “Oh my gosh, what was I doing? I wasted the whole day worrying about somebody else's problems online,” as opposed to what I really need to do. Whereas if you plan that time in advance, it is fine. There is nothing wrong with it.

How do you become indistractable?

50:42: The first step to becoming indistractable is mastering internal triggers, or they will master you. So you can have the best tools, the best life hacks, the best—all that stuff. But if fundamentally you do not know how to deal with that sensation, you do not know how to process boredom, loneliness, fatigue, uncertainty, anxiety—if you do not know what to do with that sensation—you are always going to find a way to escape.

Humans adapt and adopt with every new technology

07:29: The solution is not to abandon the technology. The solution is to make it better, to do what we as Homo sapiens have always done. We have always done two things in the face of dramatic technological innovation. What we have done is to adapt and to adopt, right? We adapt our behaviors. We adapt to new social norms. We adapt to the downsides of these behaviors by changing our manners, and then we adopt new technologies to fix the last generation of technologies.

Recommended Resources:

• Akrasia
• Paul Virilio
• Peter Gray
• Amy Edmondson | unSILOed
• Robert D. Putnam

Guest Profile:

• Official Website 
• Professional Profile on LinkedIn

Guest Work:

• Indistractable: How to Control Your Attention and Choose Your Life
• Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products

There is a shift happening in the complex world of proof. Simulation and probabilistic approaches are increasingly accepted as ‘good enough’ in areas traditionally dominated by exact proofs. Persuasion depends on the degree of certainty needed.

Adam Kucharski is a professor at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and also the author of three books, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty, The Rules of Contagion: Why Things Spread--And Why They Stop, and The Perfect Bet: How Science and Math Are Taking the Luck Out of Gambling.

Greg and Adam discuss the versatile concept of 'proof', examining how it applies differently across mathematics, law, medicine, and practical decision-making. Adam discusses the challenges of proving concepts under uncertainty, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the role of intuition versus formal modeling in various fields. They also explore the crossover of epidemiological principles into finance, marketing, cybersecurity, and online content dynamics, illustrating the universal relevance of contagion theories. 

The episode highlights how simulation and probabilistic approaches are increasingly accepted in areas traditionally dominated by exact proofs.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

The gap between science and policy

09:25: One of the challenges we had in COVID is this dimension of a problem where all directions had a lot of enormous downsides, and countries were having to make that under pressure. And even one of the things that I think I did not really appreciate at the time was, even later in the year, when a lot of these questions about the severity, a lot of these questions about transmission, had really been resolved because we had much better data. We still had a lot of this tension demanding, "Oh, we cannot be sure about something," or "You know, we need much, much higher evidence." And I think that is the gap between where kind of science lies and where policy lies.

It’s not the content, it’s the contagion

37:59: I think a lot of people think about the content, but obviously it is not just, "It is something goes viral." It is not just about the content. It is not about what you have written; it is about the network through which it is spreading. It is about the susceptibility of that network. It is about the medium you use. Do you have it that lingers somewhere? Is it just something you stick on the feed and it kind of vanishes? So, there is a direct analogy there with the different elements and how they trade off in ultimately what you see in terms of spread.

What human networks can’t teach us about machines

46:35: One thing that is really interesting about computer systems is the variation in contacts you see in the network is enormous. You basically get some hubs that are just connected to a huge number of computers, and some are connected to very few at all. So that makes the transmission much burster.

It is not like—so humans have some variation in their contacts—but most people have about 10 contacts a day, in terms of conversations or people they exchange words with. Some more, some less, but you do not have people generally have like 10,000 contacts in a day, whereas in computers you can have that. So it makes the potential for some things to actually persist at quite low levels for quite a long time because it will kind of hit this application and then simmer along, and then hit another one and simmer along.

Recommended Resources:

• Euclid
• George E. P. Box
• William Sealy Gosset
• P-value
• Ronald Ross
• Jonah Peretti
• Duncan J. Watts
• Amazon Web Services
• Monty Hall

Guest Profile:

• AdamKucharski.io
• Faculty Profile at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
• Social Profile on BlueSky

Guest Work:

• Amazon Author Page
• Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty
• The Rules of Contagion: Why Things Spread--And Why They Stop
• The Perfect Bet: How Science and Math Are Taking the Luck Out of Gambling
• Substack Newsletter
• Google Scholar Page
• TED Talks

How do individuals navigate moral typecasting? What is the dual nature of empathy in the context of human pain and suffering? When is there a disconnect between the perceptions of what is right and what is moral?

Kurt Gray is a Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he directs the Deepest Beliefs Lab and the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding. In the autumn of 2025, he will join the faculty of the Department of Psychology at Ohio State University. He’s also an author, and his books are titled Outraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common Ground and The Mind Club: Who Thinks, What Feels, and Why It Matters.

Greg and Kurt discuss Kurt’s work at the Deepest Beliefs Lab and the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding. Their conversation covers key topics such as how moral disagreements are rooted in differing perceptions of harm, the impact of evolutionary psychology, and the role of empathy in bridging divides. Kurt also shares insights from his classroom experiences on fostering understanding among students.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

How can pain and suffering change your view about empathy?

43:00: There are two ways, right? That pain and suffering could change your views of empathy. And I should say there are some people who do experience a lot of pain and suffering and then do not feel sympathy...[43:16] Everyone suffers. Just like, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, dust yourself off and get hard, get tough. But for the most part, if you suffered a lot in life, you can kind of recognize that it's tough sometimes to be a human being and that you have more sympathy for others, at least more so than people who never suffered in their lives, right? But I think the way that pain causes you to have less empathy is if you're in pain right now. Right? So if you are standing in, you know, a pile of razor blades, it's hard to be really empathic for someone—you know, someone's situation, right?—because you're so focused. Like, pain just overwhelms your entire consciousness. So never try to get empathy from someone who is actively in pain, but I think instead, reach out to people who, you know, have gone through a similar thing.

Moral understanding begins with human contact

40:46: The more you have sustained contact with people who are different than you, you show more moral understanding.

When recognizing pain depends on perception

27:13: When it comes to the ability to suffer, pain like that is ultimately a matter of perception. Like, you can, you know, agency—someone is intending—you can see that more on the surface, right? Like, I am going to think and I will do something—that is agency. But if you start crying, like, are you a method actor? Are you actually in tears? Are those crocodile tears? So, questions of pain are easy to accept when it is your family or your friends. Perhaps when someone is very different than you, or maybe you are locked in a conflict with someone and they are crying, right? It is much harder to take their pain as authentic.

Understanding starts with stories not arguments

30:53: Stories are a way of sharing one true thing, shall we say, right? This thing happened to me, and it's not a talking point I heard on the radio. It actually happened to me, and let me tell you about it so that you can better understand me. I think it's powerful because it's not the thing that you're going to use to persuade in policy, let's say—although, often, stories are persuasive in policy—but instead it's a way of saying, here's where I'm coming from. Can you understand where I'm coming from? And that's a great place for a conversation to start. Right now, I understand you're a person, I'm a person, and let's explore our perspectives rather than argue about complex policy issues.

Recommended Resources:

• Jonathan Haidt
• Moral Foundations Theory
• Daryl Davis
• Luigi Mangione
• David Goggins
• Daniel Kahneman

Guest Profile:

• KurtJGray.com
• Deepest Beliefs Lab
• The Center for the Science of Moral Understanding
• Profile on LinkedIn
• Social Profile on Instagram
• Social Profile on X

His Work:

• Amazon Author Page
• Outraged: Why We Fight About Morality and Politics and How to Find Common Ground
• The Mind Club: Who Thinks, What Feels, and Why It Matters
• Atlas of Moral Psychology
• Google Scholar Page

You know what they say — Silicon Valley wasn’t built in a day, nor was it built by just a small group of tech gurus. In fact, the origin story of the Valley is a complex story involving government, industry, and academia.

Margaret O’Mara is a history professor at the University of Washington. Her latest book, The Code: Silicon Valley and the Remaking of America gives an in-depth, behind-the-scenes look at the making of the tech empire, and how it’s grown into an economic engine. 

Margaret and Greg discuss the significant role the government played in the early days of Silicon Valley, key historical figures in the region’s rise to prominence and factors that set it apart from other tech hubs like Boston, and how the ecosystem has evolved alongside politics, technology, and cultural shifts. 

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

How storytelling built Silicon Valley’s legacy

31:59: I think there's the story of the products, and then there's the story of the place, the story of the guys in garages. The story of this entrepreneurial genius, and that's a great, great story. It's part of the story. It leaves out this bigger landscape of government and society and people who are non-technical people, the Regis McKenna’s of the world, who are so instrumental in making all this happen. But it's—I mean, I know as a historian—storytelling is powerful. That's how you help people understand and relate. And so Silicon Valley has been such a good storyteller.

Why everyone should understand tech history

04:27: It's really important for all of us as users of this technology to have a way to understand it and understand its history. Even if we don't know, even if we aren't programmers ourselves.

Meritocracy alone hasn’t changed the face of power

53:16: We're seeing the people at the very, very top of power and influence are more homogenous than ever, which is showing that this meritocracy, this idea, just doesn't—only goes so far. So understanding the history kind of helps, I think, is really important in kind of getting why. Okay, why has this not changed? Why is this so baked into the model? But it also doesn't mean that we should just throw up our hands and say, well, this is the way it is.

Federal research grants built founders not just labs

11:57: Research money for universities is not only seeding basic research in labs and then seeding spinoff companies and commercializing technologies from those labs, but it's also educating people. When you look, kind of dollar for dollar, about, you know—when you look at Stanford, for example, if you just look at the tech space—I think biotech is different. Medical sciences are different because you have more of that kind of pipeline from lab to startup in that space. But when you're looking at computer hardware and software, it's more about the people that went to Stanford that went on to found companies, right? Everyone from Hewlett and Packard to Brin and Page and everyone in between. That is, it's kind of a people factory, so that's part of it. And that federal money is paying for people for science and engineering programs. So that's a really important component.

Recommended Resources:

• Frederick Terman
• Vannevar Bush
• Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 by AnnaLee Saxenian
• Robert Noyce
• Burt McMurtry
• Terry Winograd
• Bill Draper
• Pitch Johnson
• Regis McKenna
• Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Guest Profile:

• Faculty Profile at University of Washington
• Professional Website

Guest Work:

• The Code: Silicon Valley and the Remaking of America 

Are there ways to change your personality? What traits are easier to change than others? How does environment and life events tend to influence the Big Five traits of your personality?

Olga Khazan is a staff writer at The Atlantic magazine and also the author of the books Me, But Better: The Science and Promise of Personality Change and Weird: The Power of Being an Outsider in an Insider World.

Greg and Olga discuss the concept of personality change, focusing on the Big Five personality traits: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. Olga shares her personal journey of attempting to modify her own traits, the challenges faced, and the various techniques used, such as meditation, improv, and volunteering. They also talk about the implications of personality change in different environments, the heritability of traits, and the broader significance of these changes for personal and professional growth.

*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*

The case for volitional personality change

12:03; Everyone will change slightly, even if they do not do anything. So you can just, like, buckle up and enjoy the ride, I guess. The maturity principle — like people become less neurotic, more conscientious over time — so those are positive changes, and most of us will kind of enjoy those. But volitional personality change, which is what my book is really about, is trying to make a more pronounced change in a shorter period of time. And the kind of type of thing I am talking about is, like, starting therapy. Like most people, if they have a problem, they do not kind of sit back and say, "This problem will eventually go away, so I am not going to get therapy." You know, they are like, "I want to go see a therapist because I want this process to resolve faster — like, want to get over this problem sooner." And so, it is similar with volitional personality changes: you are noticing a problem in your life, and you are taking steps to change it faster than it would change naturally.

Why extroverts are often happier

22:40: Extroversion is important. Most studies show that extroverts are happier. That's just because they have more social connections... There's just something about being seen by other people, feeling like you're part of a community, feeling like you matter, that is really beneficial for health and can't be replicated by reading a book or watching a TV show.

Neuroticism and safety vs. risk

25:37: Neuroticism will keep you very safe because you will never do anything. But you have to ask yourself whether you want a life where you've never taken any risks. 'Cause that's also part of it.

What improv can teach you about being open

20:37: What improv is really good at is, if you are someone who is very controlling of situations or likes to be in control, it completely breaks you of that immediately because there is absolutely no way to control what's happening in improv. Everything is so made up and so confusing, and so you have to like to be in the moment and just pivot on the spot with whatever's happening. And for me, that really helped with extroversion, but also kind of just some of the parts of me that were kind of not willing to be extroverted.

Recommended Resources:

• NathanWHudson.com
• PersonalityAssessor.com
• Brent Roberts
• William James
• Brian Little
• Dale Carnegie
• How to Win Friends and Influence People

Guest Profile:

• OlgaKhazan.com
• Profile on LinkedIn
• Wikipedia Profile
• Social Profile on X
• Social Profile on Instagram

Her Work:

• Articles in The Atlantic
• Amazon Author Page
• Me, But Better: The Science and Promise of Personality Change
• Weird: The Power of Being an Outsider in an Insider World
• Substack Newsletter