Uncategorized
This unusual Israeli podcast covers everything from sentient AI to extending the human lifespan
If an alien spacecraft landed in Dr. Avi Loeb’s backyard tomorrow, he would readily step on, leave his family behind and take off to discover the great beyond.
Obviously, he’d be giving up a lot, but it’s for an essential cause, he says: Humans need to explore the possibilities for human life beyond earth.
“We know the sun will burn up the surface of the earth within a billion years,” he says. “We won’t be able to stay here.”
Loeb, an Israeli-American astrophysicist at Harvard University, shared these thoughts recently in a podcast conversation with Dr. Tal Patalon, head of Kahn Sagol Maccabi (KSM), the Research and Innovation Center of Israel’s Maccabi Healthcare Services. Loeb was Patalon’s guest on an episode of KSM’s popular English-language podcast, “A Matter of Life and Death.”
Now in its third season (and first in English), the podcast features physician-researcher Patalon in wide-ranging conversations about life, the future and the human experience with leaders and innovative thinkers from a broad variety disciplines and fields of knowledge — from the former head of the Mossad to musicians and professors. Patalon elicits insights and showcases her multidisciplinary approach to her work at KSM, and she also has a way of getting at the core of her guests’ personalities and belief systems.
“These are open conversations, not interviews,” Patalon said. “It’s all about relationships and learning from these people. These are really special individuals who help broaden your perspective and serve as inspiration for innovation.”
KSM itself conducts various types of health research, helping researchers and entrepreneurs with its massive clinical and medical data as well as deep understanding of technology and artificial intelligence. KSM also operates the largest biobank in Israel, with over 900,000 biological samples, enabling partnerships with companies in genetic research and support for a range of Big Data projects.
Patalon’s podcast embodies the out-of-the-box thinking that guides KSM’s approach to research and innovation. Her recent conversation with Loeb covered the AI revolution, extending human longevity, and Loeb’s work at The Galileo Project for the Systematic Search for Evidence of Extraterrestrial Technological Artifacts.
Loeb leads the Galileo Project’s search for physical objects associated with extraterrestrial technological equipment. He and his team use sophisticated instruments to image and collect data on objects in the sky that the government and astronomers have deemed outliers. The goal is to determine whether they are natural phenomena or technological in origin and from other planets.
“I am looking for relics of [extraterrestrial] civilizations that have perhaps predated us and sent out gadgets and probes to explore space,” Loeb said. “They would have had enough to have filled up the solar system with a million probes. Tech gadgets can survive the harsh environments of space.”
Loeb and his team identified an interstellar meteorite that collided with Earth off Papua New Guinea in 2014. Based on the speed of the object, Loeb determined that it came from outside the solar system, and the Department of Defense supported his assertion.
“It exploded. We are planning an expedition to scoop the ocean floor to collect the fragments,” Loeb said. “We know it was tougher than iron, so we will examine the fragments to see if the object was natural or an artificial alloy that could be a fragment of a spacecraft.”
Avi Loeb, an Israeli-American astrophysicist at Harvard University, talks about artificial intelligence, extraterrestrial life and technology as the featured guest on a recent podcast episode of “A Matter of Life and Death.” (Courtesy of KSM)
Loeb told Patalon how his work has made him think that humans are not necessarily that smartest and most accomplished species in the universe, and that modesty is in order.
“We are no smarter than the mean of the universe, no matter what we have accomplished. We have nothing to brag about,” he said.
Patalon agreed: “We are arrogant. Our world is tiny and fragile and we are destroying it. We should cherish what we have.”
However, Patalon disagreed with Loeb when it comes to how far the AI revolution should go. Loeb believes we are close to the point where AI will take over many roles in human life.
“There will be sentient AI systems. They will converse among themselves and create their own communities. A new consciousness will emerge. Death will be like unplugging a computer from a wall, so in the future it will be illegal to do so,” he said.
From Patalon’s perspective as an active clinician specializing in family and emergency medicine, she is certain that AI will become integrated into the human body within five to 10 years. She expects to see augmented humans with constant glucose monitors and vitals-monitoring chips implanted under the skin.
“And 3-D printing of organs is developing fast,” she observed.
But unlike Loeb, Patalon believes that extending human longevity to an extreme degree is not the goal of AI. Rather, there is a consciousness above material reality, and a spirituality and soul beyond technology. She worries about the separation, depression and addiction associated with technology and wants to see more efforts put into helping people learn how to handle technological evolution. We can’t let AI run away with things and negate human consciousness and positive relationships, she said.
“A high-quality life means learning how to love unconditionally. That is the human future,” Patalon said. “Otherwise we are like animals.”
At the end of each episode of “A Matter of Life and Death,” Patalon asks her guest whether they think about death and what they would like their epitaph to be. Loeb thinks that people waste time and resources memorializing themselves by building monuments on Earth. Not particularly attached to his body, he said, he’d be be eager to download his consciousness to an avatar astronaut.
“I hope we will figure out how to live forever, but if I have to die, I would be happy for it to happen somewhere other than Earth,” he said. “On Mars there is no bureaucracy to suppress innovation.”
To listen to this and other podcast episodes, click here.
—
The post This unusual Israeli podcast covers everything from sentient AI to extending the human lifespan appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ to Convene at WH on Feb. 19, One Day After Trump’s Meeting with Netanyahu
US President Donald Trump speaks to the media during the 56th annual World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Denis Balibouse/File Photo
i24 News – A senior official from one of the member states confirms to i24NEWS that an invitation has been received for a gathering of President Trump’s Board of Peace at the White House on February 19, just one day after the president’s planned meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The meeting comes amid efforts to advance the implementation of the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire, following the limited reopening of the Rafah crossing, the expected announcement on the composition and mandate of the International Stabilization Force, and anticipation of a Trump declaration setting a deadline for Hamas to disarm.
In Israel officials assess that the announcement is expected very soon but has been delayed in part due to ongoing talks with the Americans over Israel’s demands for the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip. Trump reiterated on Thursday his promise that Hamas will indeed be disarmed.
Uncategorized
If US Attacks, Iran Says It Will Strike US Bases in the Region
FILE PHOTO: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi meets with Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi in Muscat, Oman, February 6, 2026. Photo: Omani Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
Iran will strike US bases in the Middle East if it is attacked by US forces that have massed in the region, its foreign minister said on Saturday, insisting that this should not be seen as an attack on the countries hosting them.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi spoke to Qatari Al Jazeera TV a day after Tehran and Washington pledged to continue indirect nuclear talks following what both sides described as positive discussions on Friday in Oman.
While Araqchi said no date had yet been set for the next round of negotiations, US President Donald Trump said they could take place early next week. “We and Washington believe it should be held soon,” Araqchi said.
Trump has threatened to strike Iran after a US naval buildup in the region, demanding that it renounce uranium enrichment, a possible pathway to nuclear bombs, as well as stopping ballistic missile development and support for armed groups around the region. Tehran has long denied any intent to weaponize nuclear fuel production.
While both sides have indicated readiness to revive diplomacy over Tehran’s long-running nuclear dispute with the West, Araqchi balked at widening the talks out.
“Any dialogue requires refraining from threats and pressure. (Tehran) only discusses its nuclear issue … We do not discuss any other issue with the US,” he said.
Last June, the US bombed Iranian nuclear facilities, joining in the final stages of a 12-day Israeli bombing campaign. Tehran has since said it has halted uranium enrichment activity.
Its response at the time included a missile attack on a US base in Qatar, which maintains good relations with both Tehran and Washington.
In the event of a new US attack, Araqchi said the consequences could be similar.
“It would not be possible to attack American soil, but we will target their bases in the region,” he said.
“We will not attack neighboring countries; rather, we will target US bases stationed in them. There is a big difference between the two.”
Iran says it wants recognition of its right to enrich uranium, and that putting its missile program on the negotiating table would leave it vulnerable to Israeli attacks.
Uncategorized
My university wants me to sign a loyalty oath — am I in America or Vichy France?
As a historian of modern France, I have rarely seen a connection between my everyday life in my adopted state of Texas and my work on my adopted specialization: the period we call Vichy France. Apart from the Texan boast that the Lone Star Republic is bigger than the French Republic, and the small town of Paris, Texas, which boasts its own Eiffel Tower, I had no reason to compare the two places where I have spent more than half of my life.
Until now.
Last week, professors and instructors at the University of Houston received an unsettling memo from the administration, which asked us to sign a statement that we teach rather than “indoctrinate” our students.
Though the administration did not define “indoctrinate,” it hardly takes a PhD in English to read between the lines. Indoctrination is precisely what our state government has already forbidden us from doing in our classes. There must not be the slightest sign in our courses and curricula of references to diversity, identity and inclusion. The catch-all word used is “ideology,” a term Governor Greg Abbott recently invoked when he warned that “Texas is targeting professors who are more focused on pushing leftist ideologies rather than preparing students to lead our nation. We must end indoctrination.”
This is not the first time in the past several months that I have been reminded of what occurred in France during the four years that it was ruled by its German occupiers and Vichy collaborators.
Very briefly, with Germany’s rapid and complete defeat of France in 1940, an authoritarian, antisemitic and collaborationist regime assumed power. Among its first acts was to purge French Jews from all the professions, including high school and university faculties, and to impose an “oath of loyalty” to the person of Marshal Philippe Pétain, the elderly but ramrod straight and clear-headed hero of World War I.
The purpose of the oath was simple and straightforward: By demanding the fealty of all state employees to the person of Pétain, it also demanded their hostility to the secular and democratic values of the French republican tradition. Nevertheless, an overwhelming majority of teachers signed the oath —even the novelist and feminist Simone de Beauvoir, who needed her salary as a lycée teacher, as did the writer Jean Guéhenno, a visceral anti-Pétainist who continued to teach at the prestigious Paris lycée Henri IV until he was fired in 1943.
Vichy’s ministers of education understood the vital importance that schools and universities played in shaping citizens. Determined to replace the revolutionary values of liberty, equality and fraternity with the reactionary goals of family, work and homeland, they sought to eliminate “godless schools” and instill a “moral order” based on submission to state and church authorities. This radical experiment, powered by a reactionary ideology, to return France to the golden age of kings, cardinals and social castes came to an inglorious end with the Allied liberation of the country and collapse of Vichy scarcely four years after it had begun.
The French Jewish historian Marc Bloch — who joined the Resistance and sacrificed his life on behalf of a very different ideology we can call humanism — always insisted on the importance of comparative history. But comparison was important not because it identified similarities but because it illuminated differences. Clearly, the situation of professors at UH is very different from that of their French peers in Vichy France. We are not risking our jobs, much less our lives, by resisting this ham-handed effort to demand our loyalty to an anti-indoctrination memo.
But the two situations are not entirely dissimilar, either. Historians of fascism like Robert Paxton remind us that such movements begin slowly, then suddenly assume terrifying proportions. This was certainly the case in interwar France, where highly polarized politics, frequent political violence and a long history of antisemitism and anti-republicanism prepared the ground for Vichy. In France, Paxton writes, this slow, then sudden transformation “changed the practice of citizenship from the enjoyment of constitutional rights and duties to participation in mass ceremonies of affirmation and conformity.”
As an historian of France, I always thought its lurch into authoritarianism was shocking, but not surprising. After all, many of the elements for this change had existed well before 1940. But as a citizen of America, I am not just shocked, but also surprised by official demands for affirmation and conformity. One day I will find the time to think hard about my naiveté. But the time is now to think about how we should respond to these demands.
The post My university wants me to sign a loyalty oath — am I in America or Vichy France? appeared first on The Forward.