The ITSPmagazine Podcast cover art

The ITSPmagazine Podcast

The ITSPmagazine Podcast

By: ITSPmagazine Sean Martin Marco Ciappelli
Listen for free

About this listen

 Founded in 2015, ITSPmagazine began as a vision for a publication positioned at the critical intersection of technology, cybersecurity, and society. What started as a written publication has evolved into a comprehensive repository for all their content—podcasts, articles, event coverage, interviews, videos, panels, and everything they create. This is where Sean Martin and Marco Ciappelli talk about cybersecurity, technology, society, music, storytelling, branding, conference coverage, and whatever else catches their attention. Over a decade of conversations exploring how these worlds collide, influence each other, and shape the human experience. This is where you'll find it all.© Copyright 2015-2026 ITSPmagazine, Inc. All Rights Reserved Politics & Government Social Sciences
Episodes
  • Before the Robots Run. More reflections from RSAC 2026 — The Power of the Community and the Machines We Invited In. | Written By Marco Ciappelli & Read By Tape3

    Before the Robots Run. More reflections from RSAC 2026 — The Power of the Community and the Machines We Invited In. | Written By Marco Ciappelli & Read By Tape3
    Apr 19 2026
    This was my twelfth RSA Conference. I know that because I remember the first one, 2012, and I've been counting ever since — not out of habit, but because each year feels like a chapter in a longer story I'm trying to read in real time. Twelve years of standing in that same building in San Francisco, watching an industry evolve, stumble, reinvent itself, and occasionally look in the mirror. In the early years it was pure technology. Cryptography, protocols, threat vectors, the architecture of defense. The conversations were technical, the energy was almost academic, the suits were slightly more formal. Then something shifted — gradually, then all at once, the way things usually do. The industry started talking about people. About culture. About the human beings sitting behind the keyboards and the very human mistakes they were making. The themes started reflecting it: community, togetherness, collective defense. Stronger Together. The Human Element. The Power of Community. Year after year, the message from the main stage was some variation of: we are more than our tools. People are what matter. Connection is the point. And then you'd walk the expo floor and see the booths. I'm not being cynical. The community is real — I've felt it, in the hallway conversations, in the side events, in the faces of people I've been running into for a decade who are genuinely trying to make the digital world safer. That part is true and it matters. But there's a growing gap between what the theme says and what the stage performs. And at RSAC 2026, that gap became impossible to ignore. Because this year, while the badge said The Power of Community, the keynotes were almost entirely about agents. Non-human ones. I wrote about this from a different angle in my first piece from RSAC — the Blade Runner angle, the NPC angle, the question of identity and intent when you can no longer tell the difference between a human action and an autonomous one. But there's another layer underneath that deserves its own space. It's the pattern. The twelve-year arc. An industry spends years — genuinely, sincerely — rediscovering the human element. Putting people at the center. Building a vocabulary around community, ethics, shared responsibility. And then, in what feels like a single conference cycle, it pivots to deploying a parallel workforce of non-human identities that outnumber us in our own systems, operate at speeds no human can follow, take actions no human directly authorized, and — here's the part that should make everyone pause — that a significant portion of organizations deploying them cannot monitor, cannot fully distinguish from human activity, and in many cases cannot stop once they're running. We built the community. Then we populated it with agents and handed them the keys. I kept thinking, walking those corridors, about the resistance. Not as a metaphor — or not only as a metaphor. In every story we've ever told about machines that gained too much autonomy, there's always a moment before the crisis where someone in the room knew. Where the warning existed. Where the design decision was made anyway because the pressure to ship, to scale, to compete was stronger than the instinct to pause. The difference between those stories and this moment is that we're not watching it happen to fictional characters. We're the ones making the design decisions. And unlike software — which you can patch, roll back, update at 3am while everyone is asleep — agents with autonomy and access are a different category of thing entirely. The old mantra of move fast and break things made a certain kind of sense when what you were breaking was a feature. It makes no sense at all when what you're deploying can act, chain consequences, and escalate — faster than any human response team can follow. This is where Asimov becomes relevant again. Not as nostalgia, not as science fiction trivia, but as a genuine design philosophy that the industry would do well to remember. His Three Laws of Robotics weren't invented as a plot device. They were a thought experiment in ethics-by-architecture — what does it look like to build the values into the system before the system runs, rather than hoping to correct the values after something goes wrong? He spent decades of stories showing that even the most carefully designed ethical constraints produce edge cases, contradictions, unintended consequences. But the point was never that ethics-by-design is perfect. The point was that without it, you don't have a fighting chance. We are, right now, at the moment before the laws get written. Some people at RSAC were saying this clearly — not from the main stage, but in the rooms and conversations where the more honest thinking tends to happen. The guardrails exist. The frameworks are being built. But they're being built while the deployment is already running, while the agents are already in the systems, while the governance structures are catching ...
    Show More Show Less
    11 mins
  • Uniquely Familiar: A Lifetime Pouring Passion Into Guitars That Sing | A Brand Spotlight at The NAMM Show 2026 with John Page and Bryan Ray of John Page Guitars

    Uniquely Familiar: A Lifetime Pouring Passion Into Guitars That Sing | A Brand Spotlight at The NAMM Show 2026 with John Page and Bryan Ray of John Page Guitars
    Apr 18 2026
    At The NAMM Show 2026, John Page walks Sean Martin of ITSPmagazine through a hand-painted electric guitar called the Retablo. The motifs are lifted from the artwork that traditionally sits behind a cathedral altar, reimagined so the saints and icons are not from scripture but from the roots of American music. Sister Rosetta Tharpe. Muddy Waters. Howlin' Wolf. Mahalia Jackson. The canvases themselves are cut from the floorboards of an old church. It is one of the most personal guitars John Page has ever built. The conversation traces the arc of John Page Guitars, the small-batch shop John Page runs after more than 20 years at Fender, where he co-founded the legendary Custom Shop and led guitar research and development. He has now been designing and building guitars for 53 years. What gets made today at John Page Guitars is built by a small team, with John Page handling his own custom work and prototypes while a master builder works alongside him on production models. What makes the instruments different is not one big thing but a series of quiet decisions. John Page mounts the neck to the body with threaded machine inserts and machine bolts instead of standard wood screws, a coupling he believes transfers tone better between neck and body and adds overtone complexity that a conventional bolt-on simply does not produce. A flatter 12-inch radius, a reverse-angled bridge pickup that removes the ice-pick high, a vintage-feeling neck profile. Every decision serves a single goal: an instrument that sings as a complete unit. John Page describes his design philosophy in two short phrases. The first is "uniquely familiar," the idea that a guitar should feel comfortable in a player's hands and recognizable in their eyes while still being clearly its own thing. The second is "balanced asymmetry," an imbalance in which he finds a kind of perfect balance. Both show up in the offset fret markers, the body contours, and even in the restraint of the aesthetic choices that surround the Retablo's portraits. The Retablo itself is where that philosophy leaves the factory floor and becomes something closer to a reliquary. John Page had never painted portraits before. He taught himself, hand-painting each founder of American roots music onto wood reclaimed from a dismantled church, designing and building a custom bridge that routes volume and tone controls into the tailpiece so the body can carry its imagery unbroken. A full documentary exists on the making of the guitar for anyone who wants the layer-on-layer detail. When the talking is done, Bryan Ray of John Page Guitars steps in with one of the new baritone builds to let the instrument speak for itself. Every design decision John Page described is suddenly in the room, audible, as one of his guitars does exactly what he designed it to do. This is a Brand Spotlight. A Brand Spotlight is a ~15 minute conversation designed to explore the guest, their company, and what makes their approach unique. Learn more: https://www.studioc60.com/creation#spotlight GUESTS John Page, Founder, John Page Guitars (Co-Founder, Fender Custom Shop) LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-page-742b4213/ Bryan Ray, Marketing Director, John Page Classic LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bryan-ray-a63b5419/ RESOURCES John Page Guitars: https://www.johnpageguitars.com/ Meet John Page: https://www.johnpageguitars.com/pages/john-page The Retablo and other Art Guitars: https://www.johnpageguitars.com/pages/john-page John Page Signature Collection: https://www.johnpageguitars.com/collections/guitars The NAMM Show: https://www.namm.org/ Are you interested in telling your story? ▶︎ Full Length Brand Story: https://www.studioc60.com/content-creation#full ▶︎ Brand Spotlight Story: https://www.studioc60.com/content-creation#spotlight ▶︎ Brand Highlight Story: https://www.studioc60.com/content-creation#highlight KEYWORDS John Page, Bryan Ray, John Page Guitars, John Page Classic, Fender Custom Shop, Sean Martin, brand story, brand marketing, marketing podcast, brand spotlight, guitar design, luthier, electric guitar, The NAMM Show 2026, NAMM 2026, Retablo art guitar, Ashburn, Bloodline pickups, American roots music, custom guitars, handmade guitars, boutique guitar builder Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
    Show More Show Less
    9 mins
  • Do Androids Dream of Security Patches? Reflections from RSAC 2026 — Walking the Floor of the Agentic World | Written By Marco Ciappelli & Read by Tape3

    Do Androids Dream of Security Patches? Reflections from RSAC 2026 — Walking the Floor of the Agentic World | Written By Marco Ciappelli & Read by Tape3
    Apr 17 2026
    Do Androids Dream of Security Patches? Reflections from RSAC 2026 — Walking the Floor of the Agentic World Marco Ciappelli Co-Founder ITSPmagazine & Studio C60 | Creative Director | Branding & Marketing Advisor | Personal Branding Coach | Journalist | Writer | Podcast: An Analog Brain In A Digital Age ⚠️ Beware: Pigs May Fly | 🌎 LAX🛸FLR 🌍 April 7, 2026 This is Marco Ciappelli's Newsletter: An Analog Brain In A Digital Age. This edition draws from ITSPmagazine's on-location coverage at RSAC Conference 2026 in San Francisco. This article — and all of our RSAC Conference 2026 coverage — is made possible with the support of ITSPmagazine's RSAC 2026 sponsors: BLACKCLOAK | Crogl, Inc. | Manifest | Steel Patriot Partners | Skyhigh Security | Stellar Cyber | ESET | Token Security | Object First | Token Watch and listen to the full coverage and all of the conversations we had, including those with our sponsors, at itspmagazine.com/rsac26 Do Androids Dream of Security Patches? Reflections from RSAC 2026 — Walking the Floor of the Agentic World A new transmission from An Analog Brain In A Digital Age — formerly Musing On Society and Technology Newsletter, by Marco Ciappelli The theme of RSAC 2026 was "The Power of Community." Nearly forty-four thousand people descended on the Moscone Center in San Francisco for four days of keynotes, corridor conversations, and expo floor theater. Six hundred exhibitors. Hundreds of speakers. And one word — one concept, one obsession — that swallowed everything else whole. Not community. Agents. AI agents. Autonomous. Self-directing. Capable of taking action, accessing systems, making decisions, and — here's the part nobody says quite out loud — doing all of that while you're asleep, or in a meeting, or standing in line for a mediocre conference coffee wondering if you remembered to turn off the stove. Somewhere between the third and fourth time someone said "agentic AI" to me on that expo floor, I stopped hearing it as a technology term and started hearing it as a sound effect. A drone. A hum. Background noise for a world already running without asking for my permission. The irony of gathering tens of thousands of humans together under the banner of community, only to spend four days talking almost exclusively about non-human workers — that particular irony seemed to float unacknowledged through the air conditioning. And that's when the flashback hit me. Not to any previous RSAC. To a screen. To a world I used to inhabit in the early days of World of Warcraft — before real life staged its intervention and I decided I needed one. In those massive online worlds, NPCs wandered their scripted paths. They had names, routines, dialogue trees, purpose. They looked like characters. They acted like characters. But they weren't. They were behavior patterns wearing a face. And the experienced player learned quickly: don't trust the ones you haven't verified. The convincing ones were sometimes the most dangerous. I kept thinking about that walking those corridors. About all these agents. Already deployed, already running inside enterprise systems, already accessing sensitive data, making tool calls, chaining actions in ways their human creators didn't fully anticipate. The gap between what's been launched in pilot programs and what's actually governed, monitored, and understood is — by most accounts from the conference — vast. Most enterprises are experimenting. Very few have the infrastructure to control what they've set loose. The rest are running something close to shadow agents: identities without owners, actions without accountability, behavior patterns wearing a face. Which brings me, inevitably, to Blade Runner. Not the flying cars. Not the neon rain. The real question at the center of Ridley Scott's masterpiece — and Philip K. Dick's before it — is simpler and far more disturbing: how do you tell the difference? The Voight-Kampff test existed precisely because replicants were convincing. They behaved like humans, responded like humans, even believed they were human sometimes. The problem wasn't that they were dangerous by design. The problem was that nobody could reliably track their intent. That's not science fiction anymore. It's the central problem RSAC 2026 couldn't stop circling. A significant portion of organizations at this point cannot distinguish AI agent activity from human activity in their own environments. The security industry has built its own Voight-Kampff problem — and hasn't finished building the test. The vocabulary had shifted too, from the previous year. At Black Hat last summer, the conversation was about whether to trust agents. At RSAC 2026 it had already moved to identity. To behavior. To intent. One of the sharper ideas surfacing from the keynotes was the distinction between delegation and trusted delegation. Giving an agent a task is easy. Building the security infrastructure to actually trust that delegation...
    Show More Show Less
    11 mins
No reviews yet