Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

📣2nd drop THIS WEEK‼️ Turkeys 🦃 itz the Only thing that get STUFFED on the Holidays..... 🗣Can I Fill YOUR HOLE 🕳 up NEXT like 😈❓️❓️❓️ 🍆:💥CJBankz 25k💰XxX (New Orleans⚜️ 8/7-8/10) 😈💥 🍑:👑King CrimsonBlack ❤️🖤 📽:Gotham's Den LIKE ❤ SHARE🔄 SUBSCRIBE 📥 Wanna see MORE❓️⤵️

88,985 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Example of a true working set... You’re probably doing way more sets than you need Trust me ⁠ Back in high school and college, I would lift 7 days a week, doing anywhere from 30 to 50 sets per day I used to think those 30-50 sets were the key to growth, but over time, I realized that most of those weren’t true working sets ⁠ Here’s the thing... If you can do 4 sets of 8 reps with the same weight each set, you’re probably not pushing yourself hard enough A true working set should leave you near failure within the target rep range ⁠ For example, let’s say your plan calls for 2 sets of 6-8 reps After a few warm up sets, you try 135 lbs and hit 8 reps, but you know you could have done 6 more That’s still a warm up set since you’re not reaching failure in the 6-8 rep range You’d then go up to 145 lbs and aim to fail around 6-8 reps If 145 still feels too light, that’s another warm up set You keep going up in weight until you find the load that challenges you to fail within that 6-8 range If you don’t have a spotter, leaving one or two reps in the tank is okay ⁠ This is where true muscle growth happens, by pushing close to your limit Sleep and diet is actually where muscle growth occurs but you never push yourself hard enough in the gym and give your body a reason to grow, hypertrophy will never happen The gym is just the stimulus to give the muscle a reason to grow We then get bigger through sleep and diet ⁠ Back to the working sets... For example, in the video, I hit 540 lbs for 8 reps on this hack squat Looking back, I feel I had one or two reps left, but it’s a solid starting point and it was a new PR for me at the time The next week, I would aim for 540 for 9-10 reps or bump up the weight to 545-550 and try to hit 8 reps aka progressive overload ⁠ I typically keep my quad and hamstring workouts separate and do only about 4-7 sets per muscle group, but each set is intense, and I’m struggling by the last few reps on each set ⁠ Give this approach a shot, and I promise you won’t need nearly as many sets as you think

Bailey Schober | Men’s Fitness & Nutrition Coach

23,353 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

YouTube JUST announced this new thing called Hype and it's lowkey genius imagine you're scrolling and see a wonderful video from some small creator. you wanna do more than just like or share. enter Hype. okay, here's how it works you get 3 "Hypes" a week to boost videos you dig. it's like a supercharged upvote. more Hypes = higher on a special leaderboard. but here's the thing it only works for creators under 500K subs and vids less than a week old. plus there's a "small creator bonus" so the little guys can compete. why's this smart 1. turns passive viewers into active supporters (people want to support the up and comers!) 2. gives smaller creators a shot at blowing up 3. YouTube gets more engagement without messing with the algorithm 4. promotes niches so everything isn't watching the same thing (increase watch time) "In just the first four weeks of our beta tests in Turkey, Taiwan, and Brazil, users hyped over 5 million times across more than 50,000 unique channels" - YT Team it's not about killing the big creators. it's about giving the underdogs a chance to be seen. it currently being tested let's be real, social's been feeling stale. same big accounts, same content, rinse and repeat. you either dont get seen or you go ballistic. Hype. it's like CPR for the internet dream. suddenly, that person making weird videos in their bedroom could be tomorrow's viral sensation. just like the good ole days. it's bringing back that wild west vibe of early YouTube. when any random video could blow up overnight. i totally can see a hype-type feature for platforms like X/Twitter too. i hope it takes off. it's about keeping the internet weird, creative, and unpredictable. so yeah, Hype might just save us from an endless feed of polished corporate content and put the "social" back in social media. maybe its the domino we need to get other social platforms to do the same. let's see who/what the internet decides to make famous next. time to make the internet weird again.

GREG ISENBERG

755,463 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

John Mayer is a master of his craft. He’s also one of the best I’ve come across at using analogy and demonstration to articulate and demystify the creative process. Here’s a 14-clip (~7-minute) masterclass on mastery and creativity: TL;DW 1/ “Whenever I want to write a big song, I can't...That's when I get writer's block: when I try to write a song to fill the entire galaxy. I've never gotten a song that way. But if I write about something the size of a glass of water—a week later, I notice it's got the universe in it. So I'd rather have the universe in a glass of water than try to make a glass of water fit in the universe.” 2/ "What connects with people is you connecting with yourself." 3/ “Writer’s block is when the two people inside of you—the writer and the reader—when the reader doesn’t love the writer. It is not a failure to write. It is a failure to catch the feedback loop of enjoying what you’re seeing and wanting to contribute more to it.” 4/ “Don't shoot ideas down before you have them. 'That won't work' is the worst thing you can ever say. 'That didn't work' is cool, but 'that won't work' is not a way to go through life.” 5/ “I’ve seen the Cool metric change so many times. I'm not telling you don't chase Cool. I'm saying…by the time you reach what you think is cool, Cool is like, 'over here now.’ ‘The princess is in another castle.' You know what I mean? That's a Mario reference.” 6/ "I'm one-half consumer, one-half artist. So I try to put music out that I myself would want to hear as somebody on the other end." 7/ "I'm seeing a lot of motivation about you following your passion, but I'm not seeing any critical thought to what that is or how to be better at that. So, really the product is passion and that's strange to me. Because my product growing up was sitting in a room yelling, 'Mom, I'm practicing,' for hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours. 8/ "But then also read up...You know, this stuff doesn't just appear. It comes from somewhere. And as soon as you realize you love something—it's almost like catching up with some great TV show on season 9, and you can go, 'oh my God, that means there's 8 seasons before this." 9/ "Whatever you learn is the tip of the iceberg. Dive underwater and find the rest of the iceberg." 10/ "So listening to Stevie Ray Vaughan brought me back to people like Kenny Burrell and Albert King and Jimi Hendrix and Elmore James. So it became this family tree growing out of my CD player." 11/ "I came up with these guys as like references…It’s like if you're into the NBA and you wear different jerseys and you pretend you're a different player in the driveway—that's what I was doing..." 12/ "Which is a wonderful technique for being yourself. Failing to sound exactly like the person you want to sound like is a wonderful way to sound like yourself." 13/ After watching Cory Wong play guitar, Mayer told him, "You have an anatomy thing working on your right hand. Your hand is shaped in a way—you have long fingers, very sinewy hands—that you're able to play like that. That is an example of someone making the most of their anatomical gifts... And I wish more people could embrace finding what their strengths are anatomically—the way your hand is shaped, the way your mind works, whatever—and play to those strengths." 14/ Mayer picks up an acoustic guitar and demonstrates his songwriting process. “Well, I don’t always do it,” he admitted, “because it requires a stupid bravery all the time.” “You just stare at the corner of the wall," Mayer explains then improvises some vocals, “stare at the corner of the wall / try to get it going on / but I can’t sometimes / you just keep going ’til you get something,” he stops singing. “You gotta keep forcing it, forcing it, forcing it…it doesn’t matter [what comes out of your mouth].” Follow Billy Oppenheimer for more content like this!

Billy Oppenheimer

1,382,401 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

Just in $AMD Anush "Speed is the moat"|ROCm🎙️ In the race to define the future of AI, what's the one advantage that truly lasts? It's not proprietary tech, argues Anush Elangovan Elangovan, VP of AI Software at AMD , but the sustainable speed of innovation. He explains why AMD is rejecting the "walled garden" model for its open source ROCm stack, betting that an open community flywheel is the key to victory. Listen to understand how this open strategy is designed to out-innovate closed systems by empowering developers to solve everything from frontier-model challenges to the mundane, everyday problems that define the "last mile" of AI. AMD ROCm Software: Part 1 Transcript [00:00:00] Andrew Zigler: Joining me is Anush Elangovan, VP of AI software at AMD. And when people talk about AI compute, the conversation often stops at hardware specs, but it's more than just physical chips that win the game. It's also the software ecosystems supporting them. [00:00:18] Andrew Zigler: The prevailing strategy in the industry has been to build something like a walled garden. You know, something closed, proprietary locks, developers in. But AMD is betting on an entirely different play, open source acceleration, and with rock, their open source AI software stack. AMD is building not just hardware parity, but an innovation flywheel that's powered by the community with interoperability and the freedom to scale without all of that pesky lockin. [00:00:48] Andrew Zigler: And in this world, speed is your moat and how fast you can innovate while your platform remains open, flexible, and standardize across all of its applications. That's what we're gonna explore [00:01:00] today. So Anush, I'm really excited to have you here. Welcome to Dev Interrupted. [00:01:04] Anush Elangovan: Thanks for having me. Uh, super excited to chat about it. [00:01:07] Andrew Zigler: Amazing. Well, let's go ahead and dive right in with kind of what I laid it out with in the beginning, the idea of the moat and it being about speed. I wanna unpack that a bit because that came from you when you and I first spoke. And I, and I want to know, you know, how do you define speed inside of AMD beyond just things like hardware, benchmarks. [00:01:27] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So when we typically talk about speed, everyone's like, Hey, hardware benchmark specs, right? Like, uh, memory bandwidth or, or flops. And that is one important part of it, uh, AMD does very well. With that, we do have, a, a very good history of executing on that axis. [00:01:47] Anush Elangovan: But when I say speed is the moat, it is about, uh, how we prepare, how we build the muscle to run the race for a long time and run it fast. And it is [00:02:00] not about a single point in time that you've, you've beat some you know, benchmark and, and you declare victory. It's about building the ability to consistently develop and deliver. [00:02:13] Anush Elangovan: Both hardware and software innovation at scale and do it fast, right? Like, you know, we we're increasingly getting to a point where models come out and they're, uh, you know, a year or two ago it was like, Hey, they work on AMD on day zero, which is great, but now they are performing on AMD the day it releases, right? [00:02:32] Anush Elangovan: So, what does it take to Prefetch where the industry is going? Be prepared to intercept. At that point is what you know, I, I refer to as you know, the, the speed factor in, in creating this mode, right? And the mode is just shed all things that hold you back and run as fast as you can. [00:02:53] Anush Elangovan: Uh, because the pace of innovation that is, uh, being seen in, in AI [00:03:00] industries is just. Amazing. Right? And it's like, it's transformational at at how you generate electricity. It's transformational as at how you build data centers. It's transformational at how you deploy compute, networking. It's transformational at what kind of use cases you, you know, uh, use AI for. [00:03:17] Anush Elangovan: Uh, and for that, you need to be prepared to, see what comes tomorrow and be prepared to run the race tomorrow. [00:03:23] Andrew Zigler: Yeah, it's a really great perspective because it highlights that it's not just like a checkpoint that you run through. I like how you called out, like it's not just hitting that benchmark or being the best in class at that moment, in that snapshot, it's about having a. The throughput and about having that dedication to the idea and continuing to deliver on it. [00:03:43] Andrew Zigler: It's not just crossing the threshold, but it's also being the engine. And that's what, that's what protects a business. That is the moat, because the moat is that innovation layer, the faster and more, uh, future forward. That you can work and think, [00:04:00] you know, the better. Uh, we, we talk a lot about like future forward work styles. [00:04:04] Andrew Zigler: Like what are the things I could be doing right now today that are gonna be like, way more useful tomorrow? Let, let's abandon those, workflows that are older and that kind of like, that translates into. An advantage when you work that way. You know, what kind of things have you learned working with, uh, like across all spectrums of people who would use ROCm, right? [00:04:23] Andrew Zigler: You have like the developers, but then you also have the enterprises and you have this large span of adoptees, right? So what is the, what does that look like that you learn? [00:04:32] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, so, so the way I look at it is there are gonna be pockets of different, uh, you know, cadences, right? Like, so people who are deploying in enterprises, for example, right? The validation and how long it takes for them to deploy an LLM that's secure. It's, with guardrails, et cetera, maybe longer. [00:04:52] Anush Elangovan: but you still have to go through the process and you have to be prepared to like, walk that walk to deploy an enterprises. That doesn't mean it's [00:05:00] not fast, that's as fast as you can do for that industry, right? And if you are deploying AI in healthcare, right, it's, it's got its own, uh, cycle. [00:05:07] Anush Elangovan: but in each one of these, you want to see how, like, go down to the essence of what is it that you actually have to do. And, you know, I, I, I like how you framed it. It's like it's, you shed your prior assumptions of how things are done, right. And, and you kind of build up from a, uh, first principles, uh, approach to say, this is how I could use AI to unlock, whatever I'm doing. [00:05:33] Anush Elangovan: And, and, some of it, you know, it's good to really step back and look at. Just question every part of it, right? Like right now you're getting chat GPT and, Gemini competing for like, math, olympiads and, and, uh, college, uh, reasoning, uh, tests. Right? And, and those are like that, that is amazing and increasingly like complex tasks that they're trying to do. [00:05:58] Anush Elangovan: But there may also be like. [00:06:00] More mundane things that AI could, could get applied to. Right? And, and so when we think about shedding old ways, you wanna shed it not just in like the tip of the spear. It's like, you know, I'm gonna see what's the frontier model. It's also, it could be something as simple as. [00:06:18] Anush Elangovan: How do you choose a, a movie, uh, you know, like a recommendation system, right? Or, or, uh, an automated, uh, flight, uh, rebooking system. So the moment, you know, your flight is late, uh, right now it's a notification, right? It's like, oh, you got a text message saying your flight's late. And I got that like three times this week. [00:06:38] Anush Elangovan: But anyway, uh, and, and, and, and, I was just like, okay, so if I were to rethink this. All this MCPs that we have that should be hooked up into an MCP that says, your flight's delayed. Here are your options. If you want, you know, these are the paid options. Yeah. Here are the free options. This will get you back into your you know, Toronto airport [00:07:00] tonight. [00:07:00] Anush Elangovan: Or if you stay, here's a hotel plus this, plus this, plus. It's just like, go ahead is all I should say. Versus now I'm like, okay, can someone, you know, can I call a travel agent? Can I do this? Can I go online and log into And you know, so we gotta fundamentally rethink even those like small, nuances of, things that we do that can be automated out and AI is really, really good at doing something like this, right? Maybe I just explained an AI startup idea right now. Somebody should just start that. [00:07:29] Andrew Zigler: I think you did. Yeah, you definitely did. Someone, one of our listeners is definitely going to lift that off of you. I, I, I, you know, I hate being on the receiving end of those. You feel a little helpless and then you have to like, follow the whole flow. So I know what you mean. Like I, I like how you called out that the build and this like. [00:07:45] Andrew Zigler: Where speed is your moat and the innovation layer is protecting you, is what makes you better than your competitors. How you scale that and you bring that to market. So by understanding the problems that you're solving, uh, throwing away those older assumptions, but also [00:08:00] recognizing that like. We're building every single day, new things and new ways of using stuff that we're still figuring out the implications of. [00:08:08] Andrew Zigler: And so when you have a lot of velocity and you're introducing a lot of new ideas, and maybe you have that workflow now that automatically rebook your flight off of your late flight text message, and uh, I know I would certainly use it, but you know, what kind of philosophies guide the way that y'all think about building this ecosystem to manage that stability while letting folks. [00:08:29] Andrew Zigler: Play with the speed and the assumptions and the airplane re bookings. [00:08:34] Anush Elangovan: so, so I think, you know, we need to peel one layer down, right? and the philosophy is, Hey, we, we just discovered electricity, right? And you know what we're gonna do? We are gonna make motors, uh, or dynamos, right? Like engines. Uh, sure. We don't know if it's gonna be a Ferrari that you're gonna make, or it's a a a a dump truck. [00:08:57] Anush Elangovan: That's good for doing this. But let's [00:09:00] let, which is also required, right? You need a dump truck. You need a garbage truck. And, [00:09:04] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. You need the [00:09:04] Anush Elangovan: course you need, uh, a Ferrari for a midlife crisis, right? So, [00:09:09] Andrew Zigler: precisely. [00:09:10] Anush Elangovan: But, but my, uh, point is what do we build next? And, uh, and this is what I meant by like, okay, let's, let's take those baby steps to build the. [00:09:20] Anush Elangovan: Infrastructure that's required that we know we'll have to use, right? So, so if I just discovered electricity, okay, great. Now one, how do I save this electricity and how do I use it? So there's battery technology, so you need to do something like that, right? Like so. But then you also want to make it into an actionable thing. [00:09:37] Anush Elangovan: You want to make it for like automobiles, or you wanna use it for, you know, powering, uh, entire cities. So it is that transformational. So, uh, AI is that transformational. So, if you distill down, it'll, it'll come down to how do we think about, what we can do with this this fundamental technology that, We may not be aware of what it [00:10:00] is gonna unlock next, but at least you know the next step is clear, right? It's like a dense fog, you know, it's gonna be like, it, it's the right path. You see the light, but it's kind of like out there and, and the steps you're taking are concrete and you're like, okay, this is good. [00:10:16] Anush Elangovan: I, this is better than where I was or where we were. So we are moving forward. So you can build with the. Intuition from what you see in the short term and a tactical view, but towards what you think the future is gonna be. [00:10:28] Andrew Zigler: Right. You almost like we're all in this like fog of war, right? And like you said, you're reaching out and you're trying to step through it. You could think of it too, as like you're in the dark and your hands are up in front of you and you know that. You're, you're not gonna run your face into a wall because your hands are out in front of you, but you're not gonna maybe do much better than that. [00:10:45] Andrew Zigler: So that's kind of like, I think the eco, the, the industry, the world that we find ourselves in, uh, and we all have to, then this becomes the power of an ecosystem, of a group of people working together to create that layer of, [00:11:00] uh, of establishing the [00:11:01] Anush Elangovan: exactly. And I, I, I just, instead of, you know, saying fog of war I describe it as like, you're in this. Beautiful valley with like a morning, uh, fog that's in. You can smell the flowers. You, you hear the birds. You are like, okay, it's, we are in like, uh, utopian paradise and yes, I just need to like, continue the walk, right? [00:11:24] Anush Elangovan: and then move forward with that, conviction that you're in the right spot. [00:11:27] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. So let's talk about that ecosystem world. This nice, I love how you describe it, this grassy side of a hill in the morning that's covered in some mist and maybe we can't see 30 feet in one direction, but it sure is a beautiful hill and it smells nice. And so we're all here. And why is, in that world, why is. [00:11:44] Andrew Zigler: You know, open source, their strategic advantage that y'all are going for in the AI hardware market. And, and then how does like ROCm turn that into wins for people within that ecosystem? [00:11:56] Anush Elangovan: you know, the, the way we look at it is this, is kind of like how I view [00:12:00] AI and the ecosystem, right? But, but it is for everyone to enjoy. Uh, and so we do want to make sure that. You know, it is, uh, beneficial for everyone. [00:12:09] Anush Elangovan: The ecosystem can come in and, and innovate. It's an open innovation engine. and uh, it is very different from, you know, having a walled garden with, Hey, only I know how to do this and I'm gonna do it and throw it over the fence and you can use it or keep walking, right? So we'd like to be good citizens that way, but also. [00:12:30] Anush Elangovan: Uh, it is self-fulfilling in a way, right? Like it, the, the pace at which we innovate with open source is unmatched. Like, you know, our serving engines are like VLLM and, and sg l. Those things, uh, those frameworks are like super, super aggressive in terms of how fast they come out with features and how fast they can you know, get performant models out. [00:12:52] Anush Elangovan: And that compared with what, uh, you'd get from, you know, the likes of like T-R-T-L-L-M or something is always lagging, right? Because you [00:13:00] just can't keep up with you know, 200 commits a week just on one particular model to get that model really performant [00:13:06] Andrew Zigler: And, and, and in that world where, you know, everyone can enjoy the winds of this, what kind of customer stories or innovation stories have really stood out to you and excite you about building and creating this place for developers? [00:13:19] Anush Elangovan: Yeah. So I think the parts that are super exciting for me are when when we get to see a customer that is first skeptical. Then they start a little like, okay, fine, we'll give you a chance. Uh, we do a simple, uh, POC and then they're like, huh, this seems to work. Yeah, we told you it works. [00:13:42] Anush Elangovan: You don't have to change one line of code. Really? Yes, no need to change one line of code. Okay, let's try a production workload. So then they try it. Oh, you're more performant than the competition. Yes. We're more performant than, than the competition. So how much does it cost? And we're like, oh, it's your TCO is better with, uh, [00:14:00] AMD. [00:14:00] Anush Elangovan: So again, they're like, wow, okay, good. So now how do we deploy at scale? And then we go deploy it at scale. And when they give a thumbs up on that and they say, this is good, right? That's when you know, you, you see it go full circle from like, oh, we, we've never heard about AMD to like actually deploy to tens of thousands of GPUs In the order of a few months, right? It, it, it really is fascinating to see and very exciting and invigorating to [00:14:28] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. At like a great exposure to a lot of interesting problems. And, and then people using the infrastructure, the, the technology available to solve those problems. Really specific problems by the way, that's often why they're bringing their data and AI to it, uh, is because it is really specific and important for them. [00:14:45] Andrew Zigler: And there's a, a lot I think that other engineering orgs can learn and even emulate from AMD's success and, and having this open source ecosystem and it causing this acceleration within. You [00:15:00] know, uh, customers and enterprises that use and adopt the tools and, and, and that creates an advantage. And that goes back to why we're talking and like the real thesis of our conversation today. [00:15:10] Andrew Zigler: So how do you think engineering leaders that are listening to this and obviously tapping into this great success AMD has from an open source flywheel, how do you think other, other folks building in the same space can foster that open, first, that open source oriented culture in order to, you know, accelerate their innovation goals? [00:15:29] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So the startup that um, was acquired by AMD we, we built, I mean, we started off doing iot stuff and you know, smart ring and all that, right? But in the, the end of like, uh, and not the end, the last six years of the company was building ML compilers. [00:15:47] Anush Elangovan: And ml, ML compilers are like super, uh, complicated, sophisticated, advanced algorithms, dah, dah, dah. but it was all open source, right? So our VCs were like, wait, what do you mean your core [00:16:00] IP is open source? And um, the speed is the moat applied even then, right? It was just like, yes, if you have an idea that. [00:16:08] Anush Elangovan: Because someone saw this idea that you are, they're gonna be able to catch up, then you probably have the wrong idea anyway. But if they are, you know, you execute and they're gonna catch up, that you should assume they're gonna catch up. Right? So you gotta move forward. So keeping it open source is super important. [00:16:25] Anush Elangovan: But also to your question on like, you know, the learnings from an AMD standpoint, right? If there are, hard problems, I'd say dig in and work through it, right? Like there's no way but through it, right? That should be the simple mentality. And more, uh, frequently than not. you'll see that you'll just make it through in a, in, in good form. [00:16:52] Anush Elangovan: But if you doubt it and you're like, oh, I don't know if I should commit, if I'm, I, you know, what should just commit to do the right thing [00:17:00] every step, right? Every step, and just keep taking one step in front of the other. And in no time you'll see that you'll be running. Right. And, and yes, the first few steps will be like, yeah, everyone's complaining about your software quality. [00:17:15] Anush Elangovan: Everyone's complaining about this and that, and it doesn't work. And, and a few steps in, you know, you get, you get the hang of all the complaints that are coming in. You get the feedback loop. You're like, okay, what, what are you prioritizing again? One step in front of the other, right? You just keep knocking that out and then you get to a point where you're, it just becomes second nature, right? To do the, to do the right thing. And, and then yes, if someone gives you two options, you'll be like, fine. This is, uh, you know, there's always the resource trade off. There's always a human capital trade off, but what's the right thing to do? of course, I, I'm pragmatic about what we choose, but, but if the right thing for your long-term success is dig in, go first, principles, make it [00:18:00] happen. [00:18:00] Anush Elangovan: Well. Then just go for that. There's, there is no shortcut to [00:18:04] Andrew Zigler: acknowledging, you know, how it aligns with your mission, your core company goals, and what you're looking to achieve. And, and I, I love how you rightfully called out that in the open source world and you know, you have your technology that you've built, what you think is your moat upon, right? [00:18:22] Andrew Zigler: It's your code and, and to open source that, or to just make it where anyone could peer in is, you know. Scary in one regard, but two, it just kind of feels like you're handing away your throne room in some kind of sense, a very direct feeling sense. But the ultimately, you were really right to call out, and this is something I think about all the time, that the real power there is still the speed This the speed. [00:18:42] Andrew Zigler: That was the moat at the beginning of our conversation. It's the speed in combination with your. Very specific domain understanding of what you're building and what you're creating, and your new role as the steward of that world and how people plug into it, which [00:19:00] has frankly, a lot more influence and power than lording over a closed. [00:19:04] Andrew Zigler: You know, repository or an ecosystem, and like you said, like throwing things over the wall. Sure. There, there might be people always on the other side of that wall, but you're not gonna have a great connection with them. You're not gonna be able to really clearly understand them. I, I like your metaphor of the side of the field of the mountain a lot more. [00:19:23] Andrew Zigler: But, but in the, in this world, you know, where. That speed is, is the power and, and open source is just one way that you can harness that speed to get really far ahead and to innovate. , There's other parts of this equation that you can be experimenting with too, and I'd love to pick your brain about them as a software leader and, and, and one of them is about looking forward and kind of understanding that future that we're all building towards and beyond today's models and hardware. [00:19:48] Andrew Zigler: You know, what do you see as the next major bottleneck or opportunity in the AI compute space? As, as you know, enterprises and folks start to get a little more mature about what's available to [00:20:00] them. [00:20:00] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, I think, the bottleneck and opportunity is, uh, what I'd call, call walking the last mile of ai. Right. Uh, and like I I, I gave you an example, uh, previously, but, but it's similar to that. It's like there are cases where Humans have so many, uh, things to do in your day. You know, like the, if we sit down and actually had a customer focus like, okay, these customers lives, I'm gonna save four hours of this customer's life. And if you actually sit down and look at all of that, it'll be. Easily automatable, easily you know, uh, applicable, uh, for ai, right? [00:20:39] Anush Elangovan: Like, but then making it happen is gonna take a little bit, right? It's like maybe it's, uh, paying your utility bill, right? Or something like that, right? Or, or, your healthcare explanation of benefits. Uh, like, I'm sure you get an explanation of benefits, and I'm like, I, I don't even know what that thing is. [00:20:55] Anush Elangovan: It's just like EOB and like. [00:20:57] Andrew Zigler: it's a big, a big old PDF. Yeah, [00:21:00] exactly. [00:21:01] Anush Elangovan: Like, like, I'm like great straight to the, uh, shredder, right? And but that could be, you know, automated with the ai, right? It, it, it'd be like, Hey, the summary of this thing is you went and visited this day. Everything is okay. Everything is paid for, so don't worry, it's not a bill. [00:21:17] Anush Elangovan: That again, the same, uh, thing, but the sense of what that information overload is could be. Digested by ai, uh, accumulated over time and retrieved when you need it. Like, I don't, I actually don't even need to know this EOB right now, unless of course, whenever I need to know it, that maybe, you know, like for some benefits I need to figure out what do, what did I do over the past year and how do I apply it? Source:

Mike

14,195 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

✨ has now gone from $0 to $1 million ARR in just 17 days! 💸 Revenue update: $87,000 MRR (which is $1M ARR) My first project ever to go up this fast 🤯 Only 3 ads left now: 📊 Stats update: 320,000 people have now flown in the game Whether the MRR is truly sustainable for a year we can only guess, but they ARE subscriptions and they do renew so as long as the game keeps improving it might happen? 🛸 Since I kept getting hacked by UFO invaders, I decide to sell the UFOs, and coincidentally new sponsor Basecamp wanted an UFO as the origin of 37 Signals (their original company name) comes from the 37 radio signals detected from space to detect extraterrestrial life, so I built them a custom UFO with their original snow globe logo on top which you can see flying around below And I have one new sponsor that sells Ozempic so got the text on the blimp "are you as big as a blimp? lose weight at 😂 I was ski'ing today so was AFK mostly but I did: ✅ Fix more XSS issues, which to be fair unless you explicitly ask it to find every single XSS loophole, AI doesn't really care about when it writes code, so you really gotta ask it to extra check your code cause honestly it can be full of security holes One unlucky (or lucky) thing is that this project took off completely unpredicted and it happened just when I was on travel with gf to France and Switzerland. I didn't wanna lock myself up in a room all day computering so I actually spend most of the days just doing fun stuff with her (as I should) and then in the evening when I got an hour (like now), scrambling and quickly getting things done That would never be possible if I coded it without AI though, it would simply take too much time. Without AI it would have taken me 10-100x more time and I would have simply not been able to build this and maintain it at the same speed AI really is a creativity and speed maximizer for me, making me just way more creative and more fast I still mostly use Cursor + Anthropic Claude 3.5 and trying 3.7 too now! I'm excited to get more time in the next few days so I can really add some new things, one thing I want is to put a big 3d leaderboard INSIDE the game with the scores on it for example

@levelsio

2,406,356 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF ELON'S CYBERCAB AND ROBOVAN PRESENTATION 00:00 Welcome 01:16 Cybercab & Future of transportation 04:33 Cost 05:53 Timeline 07:13 Self-driving technology 10:05 Inductive charging 10:24 The cities of the future 11:04 Robovan 12:13 Optimus Welcome Welcome to the We, Robot party. We have quite a show for you tonight. I think you're going to like it. As you can see, I just arrived in the Robotaxi, the Cybercab. And there's 20 more where that came from. So they've been traveling, there's no people in them. As you can see, the car is just going by with no people. We have 50 fully autonomous cars here tonight. So you'll see model Y's and the Cybercabs, all driverless. You'll be able to take a ride in the Cybercab. There's no steering wheel or pedals. So I hope this goes well, we'll find out. You see a lot of sci-fi movies where the future is dark and dismal, where it's not a future you want to be in. So, you know, I love Blade Runner, but I don't know if we want that future. We want that duster he's wearing, but not the bleak apocalypse. We want to have a fun, exciting future that, if you could look in a crystal ball and see the future, you'd be like, yes, I wish I could be there now. That's what we want. Cybercab & Future of transportation So, when we think about transport today, there's a lot of pain that we take for granted, that we think is normal. Like having to drive around LA in 3 hours of traffic. Yeah, people that live in LA, I mean, you know, try to get from Pasadena to El Segundo during rush hour. You can fly to another city faster than you can get to LA. And you have to drive the whole way, unless you're in a Tesla. Of course, our Tesla already does quite well at this supervised self-driving. So, supervised full self-driving is actually working quite well. I'm sure there's people in the crowd who are using that. So, we'll move from supervised full self-driving to unsupervised full self-driving where the car, you could fall asleep and wake up at your destination. But there's also a challenge for a lot of people that cars cost too much. I mean, when you factor in everything that goes into a car and the car insurance and the car payments, storage of the car, it's very expensive. You say, like, how many hours a week are cars used? Your average passenger car is only used about 10 hours a week out of 168 hours. So, the vast majority of the time cars are just doing nothing. But if they're autonomous, they could be used, I don't know, five times more, maybe ten times more. So you could actually, for the same car, would have five times as much value, maybe ten times as much value. There's 168 hours in the week, and like I said, only ten of them are used for driving. And then, a bunch of those hours are looking for a parking spot, which can be pretty annoying at times. So, with autonomy, you get your time back. This is a very big deal. So it's not just, it'll save lives, like a lot of lives and prevent injuries. I think we'll see autonomous cars become ten times safer than a human. I mean, if you think of times past where there used to be an elevator operator in every elevator but once in a while, they get tired and accidentally shear somebody in half. Now, we have automated elevators. You just get an elevator and you press a button and you don't even think about it and it just takes you to the floor. And if you did see an elevator operator with a big relay switch, you'd be like, that's weird. That's how cars will be. And it's not just the lives saved in injuries, but if you think about the cumulative time that people spend in a car and the time that they will get back that they can now spend, well, I guess, on their phones or watching a movie or doing work or whatever you want to do you can think of the car in autonomous world as being like just little lounge. You're just sitting in a comfortable little lounge and you can do whatever you want while you're in this comfortable little lounge. And when you get out, you will be at your destination. So, yeah, it's gonna be awesome. Cost So, in fact, I think the cost of autonomous transport will be so low that you can think of it like individualized mass transit. The average cost of a bus per mile for a city, not the ticket price, because that is subsidized, but the average price is about a dollar a mile, whereas the cost of Cybercab we think probably over time, the operating cost is probably going to be around twenty cents a mile. Including taxes and everything else, it probably ends up being 30 or 40 cents a mile. And you will be able to buy one. And we expect the cost to be below $30,000. And I think there'll be an interesting business model where, let's say somebody is an Uber or Lyft driver today where they can actually sort of manage a fleet of cars and like, sort of manage, I don't know, 10, 20 cars and just take care of them. Like a shepherd tends their flock. You have a little flock of cars and you're the shepherd and you take care of your flock of cars. I think that would be pretty cool. I think it's going to be a glorious future. It's going to be really something special. Timeline We do expect actually to start fully autonomous unsupervised FSD in Texas and California next year. And that's obviously, that's with the Model 3 and Model Y. And then we expect to be in production with the Cybercab, which is really highly optimized for autonomous transport in probably, I tend to be a little optimistic with time frames, but in 2026. So, yeah, before 2027, let me put it that way. And we'll make this vehicle in very high volume. But well, before that, you will experience a robotic taxi via the Model 3 and Model Y program and model S and X, too. But the Model 3 and Y will achieve unsupervised full self-driving with permission, in wherever regulators essentially approve it. In the US, and then to follow outside the US. And Cybertruck, too. All our cars are basically, all cars that we make. Let's not get nuanced here. Self-driving technology One of the reasons why the computer can be so much better than a person is that we have millions of cars that are training on driving. It's like living millions of lives simultaneously and seeing very unusual situations that a person in their entire lifetime would not see. With that amount of training data, it's obviously going to be much better than what a human could be because you can't live a million lives. And it's also, it can see in all directions simultaneously and it doesn't get tired or text or any of those things. So, it will naturally be, like I said 10, 20, 30 times safer than a human, just for all those reasons. And I want to emphasize that the solution that we have is, AI and vision. So, there's no expensive equipment needed. The Model 3 and Model Y and S and X that we make today will be capable of full autonomy, unsupervised. And that means that our cost of producing the vehicle is low. Now, we are going to actually over-spec the computer for the Cybercab. So, our AI 5 computer will be somewhat over-spec'd because I think there's actually also an opportunity, sort of like an Amazon Web Services, where if the car is driving for 50 hours a week, there's still over 100 hours left and there's a potential there to have a massive amount of distributed inference compute, where if you've got like a fleet of 100 million vehicles and a kilowatt of efficient inference compute, you have 100 gigawatts of compute, which is really quite substantial. And if it's there, you might as well use it so that I think will make sense. So, our autonomous future is here. As I said, we've got 50 Teslas driving autonomously. We're trying to give you a sense of what cities will be like in the future. And when you get in, you'll see like, it's really quite a wild experience to just be in a car with no steering wheel, no pedals, no controls, and it feels great. So we have enough vehicles here, so everyone should be able to try it out and experience the set that we've built here. It's a very big set. So it's like really we've used I don't know, 20, 30 acres or something like that. It's really big. So, it goes on, the ride's long. And we set it up to feel like a ride, like a park ride. So, it'll be cool and you'll get to experience it tonight. Inductive charging Something we're also doing is and it's really high time we did this is inductive charging. So, the robotaxi has no plug. It just goes over the inductive charger and charges. So, yeah, it's kind of how it should be. The cities of the future One of the things that is really interesting is how will this affect the cities that we live in. And when you drive around a city, or when the car drives you around the city, you'll see there's a lot of parking lots. There's parking lots everywhere, parking garages. What would happen if you have an autonomous world is that you can now turn parking lots into parks. And so, from we're taking the inglot out of parking lot. You're welcome. So, there's a lot of opportunity to create green space in the cities that we live in. So, like, that would be quite fantastic. Robovan Oh, and also, what happens if you need a vehicle that is bigger than a Model Y? The Robovan. We're going to make this and it's going to look like that. Now, can you imagine going down the streets and you see this coming towards you? That'd be sick. So this can carry up to 20 people, and it can also transport goods. You can configure it for goods transport within a city. Or transport of up to 20 people at a time. The Robovan is what's gonna solve for high density. If you want to take a sports team somewhere or you're looking to really get the cost of travel down to, I don't know, 5, 10 cents a mile, then you can use the Robovan. One of the things we want to do, and we've seen this with the Cybertruck, is we want to change the look of the roads. The future should look like the future. Optimus Speaking of robots. Everything we've developed for our cars, the batteries, power electronics, the advanced motors, gearboxes, the software, the AI inference computer, it all actually applies to a humanoid robot. The same techniques. It's just a robot with arms and legs instead of a robot with wheels. We've made a lot of progress with Optimus. And as you can see, we started up with someone in a robot suit. And then, we've progressed dramatically, year after year. So, if you extrapolate this, you're really going to have something spectacular, something that anyone could own. So, you can have your own personal R2-D2-C3PO. And I think at scale, this would cost something like, I don't know, $20,000, $30,000, probably less than a car is my prediction, long-term. It'll take us a minute to get to the long term. But fundamentally, at scale, the Optimus robot, you should be able to buy an Optimus robot for, I think, probably $20,000 to $30,000, long-term. And what can it do? It'll basically do anything you want. It can be a teacher or babysit your kids, it can walk your dog, mow your lawn, get the groceries, just be your friend, serve drinks whatever you can think of, it will do. And, yeah, it's going to be awesome. I think this will be the biggest product ever of any kind, because I think everyone of the 8 billion people of Earth, I think everyone's going to want their Optimus buddy. And there's going to be maybe two. And then, they'll be producing products and services. I predict, actually, provided we address risks of digital superintelligence, 80% probability of good outcome, look on the bright side, the cup is 80% full, the cost of products and services will decline dramatically. And basically, anyone will be able to have any products and services they want. It will be an age of abundance the likes of which people have not, almost no one has envisioned. It will be something special. So now, one of the things we wanted to show tonight was that Optimus is not a canned video. It's not walled off. The Optimus robots will walk among you. Please, please be nice to the Optimus robots. You'll be able to walk right up to them and they'll serve drinks at the bar. I mean, it's a wild experience just to have humanoid robots and they're there, you're just in front of you. So yeah, with that, let's party!

Mario Nawfal

241,051 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

I used to think Brand was bullsh*t, so imagine my surprise when I was asked to speak at Meta's Performance Marketing Summit about Brand to a room of performance marketers How'd this happen? Many moons ago, I co-founded Chubbies. It's a nine-figure brand now: 8 straight years of top and bottom-line growth, EBITDA up 40% yoy But we almost went out of business first — running the exact playbook a lot of performance marketers are running right now CAC creeping up every year. Only 'growing' when we discounted harder, longer, wider. Same ads, same people, growth on loan from the algorithm Then we incorporated Brand into our 'performance' media, and revenue re-accelerated. More importantly, so did profit Here are 3 mistakes I made, 3 things I learned, and 3 actions you can take on Monday: Here's what I had wrong: 1. I thought brand was logos, fonts, or a brand book nobody opens 2. I thought spending ANY dollars on ads that didn't drive a conversion was the dumbest thing a performance marketer could do 3. And when I finally tried it, I chased the wrong thing — we went for meme-lord reach, piling up views with no connection back to the brand Here's what I know now: 1. Brand is the moat. It's pricing power. It's why people buy from you without you competing on price and features 2. The "trough of despair" everyone's scared of? It doesn't show up — because you fund brand by reallocating your least-efficient dollars, not by adding budget (and other reasons) 3. And it's accountable. Build a behavioral funnel, drive a real action like branded search, measure it with a geo-holdout. It's not a vibes contest More on this "trough of despair" being a nothing burger: 1. The brands we do this for don't see the trough. A ~$75M denim brand grew contribution dollars roughly 50% year over year — with new customers and total revenue climbing the whole time 2. An outdoor brand ran brand media alone — and the lift showed up everywhere its customers shop: its own site, Amazon, TikTok Shop, and strongest of all, 2.5x incremental revenue on a major brick-and-mortar retailer's shelves 3. A six-month geo-holdout showed brand driving 1.93x incremental revenue — while the saturated direct-response they'd been relying on was returning a blended 0.91x Les Binet's research concurs: grow your share of search, and good things follow So, three things you can do Monday: 1. Find the marginal return on your least-efficient dollars. Those can move to brand with no short-term revenue drop 2. Look at the creative you ship. Would your friends be hyped to see it — or "ugh, he's selling me something"? You want a healthy mix 3. Build your behavioral funnel. Define the action at every stage so brand stops being soft and starts being math The full vid is attached. Case studies in the comments. If you still think "performance" brand is bullsh*t — let's discuss What's the data you'd need to see to change your mind? Tell me where you're stuck/skeptical and let's get into it below

Preston Rutherford

12,336 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

MrBeast: "If you knew what I knew, you could get 10 million subscribers in six months" "Your videos suck. You think your videos are good, but they suck. They just do. And the sooner you learn how to make good, great videos that people actually want to watch, the sooner you'll get views." MrBeast shares his early reality: "When I was 14, I thought my videos were the best in the world. They weren't, they were terrible. To be successful, you kind of have to have a little bit of that ego where you think your content's great. But also, if you have sub-1,000 subscribers, there's a good probability your videos just suck. They just do." He explains what to do about it: "You need to make hundreds of videos. Improve something every time. And just get to the point where they don't suck. When you make good content, you'll blow up. It's not the algorithm. It's not anything. Most people who are in my position just made terrible videos, and that's okay. Because you've got to make a bunch of videos and improve over time to be great." MrBeast uses an analogy: "You don't just pick up a baseball and become an MLB-level athlete within a year. It takes many, many, many years. YouTube's kind of the same way." On analysis paralysis: "A lot of people get analysis paralysis. They'll sit there and plan their first video for three months. If you have zero videos on your channel, your first video is not gonna get views. Period. Your first 10 are not gonna get views. I can very confidently say that. So stop sitting there and thinking for months and months on end. Just get to work and start uploading." He gives the formula: "All you need to do is make 100 videos and improve something every time. Do that, and then on your 101st video, we'll start talking. Maybe you can get some views. But your first 100 are gonna suck." How to improve something each time: "The second video: put more effort into the script. The third one: learn a new editing trick. The fourth one: figure out a way to have better inflections in your voice. The fifth one: study a new thumbnail tip and implement it. The sixth one: figure out a new title. There's infinite ways. The coloring, the frame rate, the editing, the filming, the production, the jokes, the pacing, every little thing can be improved. There's literally no such thing as a perfect video." On the algorithm: "What YouTube wants is for people to click on a video and watch it. That's what it is at its core. By studying the algorithm, you'll learn that you're more studying human psychology. What do humans want to watch?" MrBeast shares a simple reframe: "Anytime you say the word 'algorithm,' just replace it with 'audience' and it works perfectly. 'The algorithm didn't like that video?' No, the audience didn't like that video. Literally, that's it. If people are clicking and watching, it gets promoted more. The algorithm just reflects what the people want." On titles: "Short, simple, and just so freaking interesting that you have to click. If someone reads it, are they like, do they have to watch it? Is it just so intrinsically interesting that it's gonna haunt them if they don't click?" He adds nuance: "Keep it below 50 characters. Above 50 characters, on certain devices it goes dot, dot, dot, and that's the worst thing because then people don't even know what they're clicking on." MrBeast shares the extremity principle: "The more extreme the opinion, typically the higher the click-through rate. 'Fiji water sucks', that'd do fine. But 'Fiji water is the worst water I've ever drank in my life', way more extreme, would do way better. But then you have to deliver. The more extreme you are, the more extreme you have to be in the video." On the first 5 seconds: "Before you film a video, what is the thumbnail? What is the title? Then what's the first 5 seconds? Then what's the first 30 seconds?" He explains why autoplay changed everything: "On YouTube now, videos automatically play. So many people don't even see the thumbnail because it autoplays so quickly. The thumbnail is irrelevant for them. I have to visually convince you to click on the video in the first 5 seconds. Before, the hook was important because you had to convince people to watch. Now you have to convince people to click and watch at the same time, with the first 5 seconds." On matching expectations: "Your title and thumbnail set expectations. At the very beginning of the video, to minimize drop-off, you want to assure them that those expectations are being met. If you click on a video called 'Tether is a scam' and at the very beginning, he starts talking about literally anything else, you're like, 'Oh, this is BS. This isn't what I clicked on.' But if at the very start you go, 'Tether is a scam and I'm gonna teach you why,' then it's like, okay, you match the expectations. Then you want to exceed them." He emphasizes the importance: "The thing people undervalue the most is literally the first 10 seconds of the video. That 15% difference in viewership between losing 35% of viewers in the first 30 seconds versus losing 20%, that really does make the difference between 2 million views and 10 million views. You just had a more strategic intro that hooked them." On removing dull moments: "You basically want to remove every dull moment. Find the 10 most critical people you know, make them watch the video, and just roast it. If I talk to a camera for 10 seconds without a cut, a lot of people will get bored. Having a B-cam and C-cam three seconds in, cutting to a different angle, now it's more interesting even though it's essentially the same thing." On keeping viewers watching: "Give them why they clicked. Tell them why they should watch. Then just stick on topic. That right there isn't even super complex, but I would already put you in the upper echelon of YouTube. A lot of people drag it out. It's like, 'I'm going to eat $100 ice cream, but first...' and then it's them birthday shopping for their mom. That's not why I came here." On quality over quantity: "It's much easier to get 5 million views on one video than 50,000 views on 100 videos. A lot of small YouTubers just post videos that aren't bad but aren't great, and none of them ever pop off, so they never get an audience. It might be better to upload half or a third or even a fifth of the videos, but make the videos you upload so freaking good that the algorithm has to promote it." He warns against the consistency trap: "When you set a consistent schedule and you're constantly having to upload videos that aren't as good as you'd like because you gotta hit 'Oh, this Monday I said I'd upload', that's a dangerous trap. The viewers notice the quality isn't as good and it makes them less likely to watch. I think it hurts your longevity." On the real metric that matters: "A big thing that everyone underestimates, what was your experience with your last video? If people loved the last video of yours that they watched, they're more likely to watch your next one. When people watch your video, you don't want them to go, 'Okay, that was good, but that's enough of you for the day.' What you want is them to go, 'Holy crap, that was crazy! Oh my god, what's that?' and they watch 10 videos. That's how you get high view counts. People watch 10 videos, not one." On thumbnails: "You want it to be simple. When they're scrolling, you want them to instantly understand what you're conveying and feel some type of emotion. Make it so interesting, or spike their curiosity so much, that if they don't click it, they'll wonder before they go to bed what happened?" He gives an example: "If you uploaded 'I rode a skateboard with 1,000 other people on it', and people are falling off the side, it's about to go off a big ramp if you don't click that, you're gonna be so curious. Later in the day, when you're daydreaming, you'll think, 'What happened to those 1,000 people on that skateboard?' That's the mindset you should have when making thumbnails." On knowledge being the only barrier: "It's all knowledge. It really is. I could start a new channel tomorrow without using my face or my voice, without ever promoting it, and in six months have 20 million subscribers. I just could. It's purely knowledge. If you knew what I knew, you could get 10 million subscribers no matter where you are right now within six months." He addresses the skeptics: "90% of the people watching don't agree with that. Everyone has excuses. 'Nah, YouTube just doesn't work like that, Jimmy.' But I mentor a lot of people. I see it all the time. It is possible. It is simply knowledge. The second you accept that it is knowledge and you start your journey of learning figuring out what makes a good video, what does my audience want, how can I elevate and then you take that knowledge and just assume 'I will never understand what the perfect video is' and every single day be devoted to learning and improving as much as possible there you go." On money not being the barrier: "There are tons of viral ideas that don't require money. It does not require money to go viral. One of my most-viewed videos was spending 24 hours in a desert, we just grabbed a tent and some stuff and went to the desert. It got 60-70 million views. People say, 'I could be MrBeast if I had money.' A, I didn't start off with money; I was poor, I had no money. It took me seven years just to buy a camera saving up from YouTube. And B, some of our most-viewed videos literally anyone can do." On why no one will outwork him: "No one's ever gonna do what I do better than me. It's just not humanly possible. I reinvest every penny I make. I work every hour I'm awake. I devote every atom in my brain to solving this. I hire the best people on the planet. I've been doing this for 14 years. And I think in decades, not years. I'm gonna be doing this for another 20-30 years. If I thought someone was doing better than me, I'd just start sleeping less so I could work even more." But he doesn't recommend it: "I don't have a life. I don't have work-life balance. My personality, my soul, my being is making the best videos possible. That is why I exist on this planet. And I don't recommend it. You should have work-life balance. You should not devote your entire life to this one thing. I have a mental breakdown every other week because I push myself so hard. I don't recommend it." The only question that matters: "Subscribers don't matter. Views don't matter. I mean, they do. But everything you want as a creator comes from making the best videos possible and thumbnails. The video part's the hard part. Ask: 'How can I make my videos better?' Do that every single day for years. And then you'll probably get views."

Jaynit

125,413 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Samkelo Zwane x Thabo Cele✍️🏾 Another solution the team can or could have built on. ■ There was control and a lot of forward passes. There is a way to balance the many attacks, our attacking transactional moments and dominance on the ball. ■ When you have the right profiles to improve your ideas, you need patience after you identify them. Be patient and focus on key areas like what needs to be improved, not who needs to be removed. ■ Players grow with the confidence they get from playing. The understanding between players grows with more games they play together. ■ You are not going to get the best out of players who are scared to make mistakes because they don't get a chance to grow from those. ■ The next problem would be using a 10 that does not only bring creativity but also goals we criticize and rely heavily on strikers. ■ You have solved the problem of unsustainable passing patterns or poor space management and lack of control from midfield. You also have players on the bench who provide enough tactical flexibility in case you want to freshen up the midfield. Those players can't all be started. Hence, you need a midfield partnership you will stick with longer and improve. When the team changes its spine as frequently as we did, it interrupts your abilities to identify problem areas after bad results because there is no consistency in the team. When forced changes like suspensions and injuries hit us, you don't know if we lack compactness due to a new CB pairing[injury/suspension] or a new double pivot[random change]. You end up solving the wrong problems and having a team that always looks unsettled even when they have more of the ball. We look shaky in most defensive moments. In this game vs Chippa, we dominated the game and created a lot of chances. We won, and our Nedbank Cup journey gained more momentum. ■ We changed Zwane and put Mshini in the next game, and the quality in midfield was elevated instead of dropped. ■ This gave the technical team 2 of our best possible midfield pairings. We now have working solutions in midfield, but our obsession with having players that offer more running than solutions on the ball meant we are changing this partnership again in the following game and suddenly the quality we've been seeing disappeared. Points started dropping. ■ One of the reasons I want the coach to get the players he wants is to allow us to judge the team on the application of tactics more, not proper selection. As supporters, we won't be happy to see the team drop results when we are not using our squad to the best of its potential. ■ Drop a player for another who will perform functions in midfield better than those you're dropping. We can't repeat similar tactical blunders going into the 2025/26 campaign. ❤️✌🏾

El Capitano⚪

19,729 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

MrBeast found four other lunatics online. Three college dropouts. One high school dropout. One guy who quit his job. They talked on Skype every day for 1000 days straight. 7am to 10pm. Then sleep. Then do it again. One of them became the biggest YouTuber on the planet. He spent 10 minutes explaining what they studied: Here's why having the right people accelerates everything. "Imagine working solo. 12 hours a day for a year. You make a mistake, you learn from it. You grind." "Now imagine four friends equally grinding on something similar." "Friend one makes a mistake on Friday. Teaches the other four. Friend two makes a mistake the next week. Teaches everyone." "You're all learning from each other's mistakes. Constantly studying 24/7. Downloading each other." "After a year, you're like 2 years ahead of the guy who was solo." They studied thumbnails obsessively. "We'd take a thousand thumbnails and see if there's a correlation between the brightness and how many views it got." "Something a lot of people forget: on phones, thumbnails are really small. People edit thumbnails full-blown on their computer. When you shrink it down, you can't see anything." Your title and thumbnail set expectations. Then you must exceed them. "At the very beginning of the video, to minimize drop off, you want to assure them that those expectations are being met." "If you're putting a million Orbeez in a pool, don't start the video with you shopping for your mom's birthday present." "Just say: this is 100 million Orbeez. We're going to fill this pool and this entire backyard with them." "Match the expectations. Then exceed them. Blow their mind. Be like: you're also getting even more." Anyone can clickbait. The difference is delivery. "We say we put 100 million Orbeez in the backyard. We put 100 million Orbeez in the backyard." Here's the algorithm truth no one wants to hear. "Anytime you say the word algorithm, just replace it with audience." "The algorithm didn't like that video? No. The audience didn't like that video." "If you're not retaining a viewer, would it make sense to promote it? Why would you promote a 10-minute video that people watch on average a minute and a half?" "Literally all the algorithm does is reflect what the people want. If you deny that, you just make terrible videos and are trying to find a scapegoat." His reinvestment strategy was relentless: "For the last eight or nine years, every dollar I've made, I just spent it the next month on content." "I just did that every single month. It just kept getting bigger and bigger. And here we are." Meanwhile, he lived in a $700/month duplex. Split with a roommate. $360 each. "Living your life chasing a nicer and nicer car and a bigger and bigger box to live in is kind of a dumb way to go about life." He only moved because someone broke in and stole everything. "I had to get a little nicer house for security reasons." On obsession: "Since I was 13, there probably hasn't been a single hour that's gone by that I've been awake where I haven't thought about YouTube." "I'm just focused on making the best videos possible, period." "I don't care about making money. I don't care about time. I just want to make the best videos on the planet." The effort is insane. "Sometimes we're filming for 3 or 4 days. 10 hours a day. 30, 40 hours of filming plus months of setup." "Most creators probably film for a couple hours and set up for a day." "We brainstorm video ideas relentlessly. Hours every day." "By always doing all those things, it just distinctively sets it so far apart that in my head it's like: why would you not watch it?" Viewers aren't stupid. "They can tell when you half-ass a video or if you really put in effort." "If they can tell you're putting in a lot of effort, they're going to be more likely to click on future videos." "Once you build that trust, they get to a point where it doesn't matter what you upload. They just know it's high effort. They're just conditioned to watch because you have a good track record." On why most creators burn out: "A lot of people aren't willing to put in 10-hour days because they don't like what they're doing." "If you don't enjoy it, you're going to burn out. You're doing this for years, not months." "I just had the blessing of finding what I loved at a young age." "To get to this level, it takes a decade. Most people don't find what they love till their young 20s. So they'd be where I'm at in their 30s." "I just lucked out and found it when I was really young." One insight changed everything: "Only 10% of the world speaks English. 90% of the world can't even watch your content." "When I realized that, I was like: wait a minute." "We started doing dubs like 6 months ago. It's crazy how viral some of these videos go. 51 million views in Spanish." "The guy who does my dubs is the same guy who dubs Spider-Man." Here's the math most creators get wrong: "It's much easier to get 5 million views on one video than 50,000 views on 100 videos." "Takes way less effort." This 10 minute video will teach you more about content, obsession, and why most creators stay small than every course combined. Bookmark & give it 10 minutes today, no matter what.

Jaynit

71,945 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

I exposed how Andy Burnham and the Labour Party weaponised the worthless Oldham Independent Assurance Review to try and whitewash the cover up of the Pakistani Rape Gangs. Had they had their way, there would be no national inquiry. Which is why, now that a Labour Party insider has been appointed to chair the inquiry, Burnham and his kind want us all to shut up and go away. When I refused, and detailed the want to be Prime Minister's role in the cover up, he attacked me and accused me of "misleading allegations". He then attempted directing people to yet another official timeline that he and his team have retrospectively concocted. So I've thrown down the gauntlet. Andy Burnham, Greater Mancester Mayor and so called King of the North, stop hiding behind your friends in the Manchester media and name a time and place for public debate. By the time I'm done with you, even your die hard supporters will understand what your Assurance Review really was - a whitewash designed to protect politicians, not children. Name the time and place Andy lad. _________ Most of you who follow my work do not subscribe to my newsletter. Even if you subscribe for free, with my ongoing legacy media blacklisting, it is the most difference you can make to this campaign. 👉 Politicians did not wake up one day and decide to do the right thing. Journalists did not suddenly decide this is newsworthy. We are not where we are because of them. We will not get where we need to be if we leave it to the very same people that were part of the cover up to deliver justice. Stand with me. I'm Raja Miah. For seven years, I led a small team that exposed how politicians protected the rape gangs. Before that, I spent over a decade safeguarding children and protecting communities from extremists. My work is free because the truth must circulate. But truth without numbers is easy to crush. The government does not fear facts. It fears scale. I need 1,000 new subscribers this January. Not next month. Not when it's convenient. This January. Starmer and the Labour Party fear thousands reading, sharing, and backing the same work because numbers mean witnesses, pressure, and consequences. That's why I am blacklisted by the legacy media. That's why this matters. That's why we need these 1,000 before February. Every subscriber is a number they can't erase. Every reader widens the circle they can't control. One thousand more voices means one thousand more people they cannot silence when the next cover-up attempt comes. 🔴 Subscribe to the newsletter. It's free: 👉 If you can afford it, please support for 75p a week (£3/month or £30/year). Not for perks. Not for access. But because numbers with backing become power. A few supporters can be ignored. One thousand cannot. This is how this campaign survives. This is how we see this through. This is how voices like ours stops being managed and starts being feared. 🔴 Prefer a one-off contribution? 👉 👉 No sponsors. No parties. No institutions to lean on. Just numbers. Growing fast enough that shutting this down becomes impossible. We don't need everyone. We need 1,000. We need them this January. We need you. Raja 🙏

Raja Miah

47,971 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Great to hear such kind words from Saagar Enjeti (who pronounced my name right!). I appreciate the coverage both he and Emily Jashinsky did on the hearing. Thank you! I really hope this was video of an anomalous craft but, at this point in time, I'm still skeptical. The full clip (link in replies) is 8:29) H/T: Heather | Nice People Saagar: "I do want to give some credit to some of the people who are saying that this video is not actually showing a UFO. Now again, I will let you make up your mind for yourself. But this actually comes from a guy who I very much respect, Joe Murgia, UfoJoe. Let's put it up here on the screen. Basically, he looked into it. They talk about the Hellfire missile. What he says (I was quoting one of That UFO Podcast's listeners/viewers), specifically, is that, quote, 'Contact occurred, with the missile passing through. The apparent "deflection" was a guidance system searching for a laser spot again, causing control surfaces to thrash. The three "trailing" objects align better with debris or internal components ignited by electrical damage rather than missile fragments. [IR] artifacts are possible but unlikely.' "Let's go to the next part here. And they say, the overall conclusion is that, 'The evidence is most consistent with a slow-moving or stationary balloon carrying an electrical payload, struck by a Hellfire that failed to detonate. Anomalies arise from fuse mechanics,' etc. "I will let others determine the facts, but that was some of the original, kind of, quote 'debunking' that I saw on it. You can make up your minds for yourself, in terms of what it comes from. It was Rep. Eric Burlison, by the way, who is the person who revealed it. And it's one of those where it was presented as received from an independent...from a whistleblower, according to him. But the circumstances are a bit weird. He said he received it without any metadata or any of that. He says independent review is ongoing. "So I do think it's important to at least present the fact that some analysts and others are saying that it could have been a balloon, which they say about all of them. And so, you know, I want to be totally fair about...that's part of the reason independent review is very important. Part of the reason, throwing it to the experts, et cetera, and actually taking this stuff seriously." (I hope we get more people chiming in and sharing their analysis and opinions. I'm not a video analyst so I rely on people who know more than me. Which is mostly everyone.) Saagar: "But nonetheless, it was great to see George Knapp and some of the others there recounting some of their experiences. I do think some of us are still getting very fed up with the fact that it's still so slow moving. I attended the first UFO hearing, what, two years ago, at this point...with Dave Grusch, right? I was there, I was in the room. I thought it was a big moment. I thought something was coming. And then, you know..." (We all thought we were reaching a breaking point, No pun intended. But that hasn't happened.) Saagar: "The NDAA continues to not have some of the UFO disclosure pieces, even though it's been pushed by members of the overall U.S. Senate. So we rely on Rep. Anna Paulina Luna or other people who are making extraordinary accusations. I'm very willing to believe, but we gotta see more evidence, we got to see more stuff come from the government." Emily: "Interesting disagreement playing out on X right now between UfoJoe and Lue Elizondo who, on NewsNation last night, made a very interesting argument. Which is, that the Hellfire missile UFO is evidence of, quote, 'technology that is making our premier missile system completely useless.' And if you're wondering why, in relation to what Saagar just described about the NDAA, why are members of Congress - and even, remember Secretary Marco Rubio as a senator?" Saagar: "Yeah, he was an OG. That's right." Emily: "Why are, quote, 'mainstream' members of Congress interested in getting answers to questions like these? Well, it's because they're seeing videos and hearing analysis from people like Lue, who worked at the Pentagon. You can debate Elizondo, whatever. But saying this is evidence of technology that's making our premier missile system completely useless. Now, UfoJoe disagrees." (I disagree because, to me, it appears that the missile disabled this object. So it accomplished its mission. Others, vehemently disagree. Here's one: ProPixel Video Analysis and Research. And this guy... Then you have MarikvR (anomalous) and Mick West (not anomalous), with opposing views. ~ Emily: "[UfoJoe] says, 'Early on, I agreed. Right now, I do not. I retain the right to change from my mind. Did Lue present any analysis or mention anybody who has done analysis besides the stuff shared on here by us?' But that gets to what Saagar was just saying, which is that, years into this third task force meeting, the bombshells are highly disputed. You know, it's not like this bombshell dropped yesterday, and everybody was like when that New York Times story originally dropped back in, what, 2017?" Saagar: "Oh, yeah, 2017. That's why I'm here, literally. That's the only reason, that's what got me in." Emily: "But we haven't had another moment like that, really." Saagar: "It's been a while. Dave Grusch was very important, I think, as well." Emily: "That's true, that's true." Saagar: "I just gotta see more. And, you know, credit to Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell and George Knapp, and all these guys. They're the ones who are at the vanguard. They're pushing the conversation. They're singularly..." Emily: "Responsibly." Saagar: "They're getting it, responsibly vetted. And that's why I include all of the information. You can make up your mind for yourself. I think more scrutiny, pressure on these, you know, the Democratic, Republican establishment to get the stuff out there is just so vitally important, if you want to get to the truth. "Because at this point, you know, you have Congresswomen and others, people making major accusations. Or allegations. Which I'm totally willing to believe, but we have to see more evidence in the future. That's the number one important thing. So, yeah, call your congressman or senator. Get them to the make sure the NDAA is gonna have that. What's it to them, right? It's like, so low on their priority list that if even twenty people call about it, maybe they'll do something? You never know. You truly never know you."

Joe Murgia

22,075 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

RESCUE OF THE KEEPER OF TARA EARTH This is going to sound like absolute fiction, but the story still needs to be told. Let me preface by saying I’m not just sane, but an autodidact polymath with multiple quantum physics patents under exclusively my own name, not part of any collaboration. So by dismissing my testimony as someone who is just nuts is really reading a book strictly through its cover. This all actually happened, even if you’ve never heard of anything like this before. What we don’t know about ‘the real worlds’ out there you could barely fit in all of our skies, we’ve been that isolated here. Everyone in this preschool dimension have preconceived notions about who ‘god’ is, inflated to the realm of all-knowing and all-powerful, able to create whole worlds, complete with millions of species of flora and fauna, and all in just 6 days. And while it is true such powers do exist, they are not without collaboration with other ‘gods’ to make that all happen, no matter how grandiose your captors want to make themselves seem. Just one species of your apples or oranges here represents possibly trillions of years of development and perfection. They didn’t just magically appear. “God” is a psyop term that stands for the word “perfect”, of which there is no such thing. The term perfect is strictly subjective, because what may seem perfect to a caveman is going to seem rudimentary kid’s stuff to George Jetson. The real term for the creator of all things is not ‘god’, but rather Prime Creator. “God” is actually DOG spelled backward and got its name from the Dog Star, also known as Sirius A, the headquarters of the Anuhazi Elohim’s breakaway group that call themselves The Michaelube, Suns of Ba’al. The ‘Arch Angels’ want you to believe they are the creator god of all things in this world. That was a lie 560m years ago and it is still a lie today. In reality, Tara Earth existed more than 4 billion years prior to the Anuhazi’s arrival to take the Human Elohim Project spirit essences hostage. They DID in fact help create Tara earth, just like you did, because they are fractals of Prime Creator. But to present themselves as ‘one guy with a long white beard who created the world and everything in it’ is word magic and gaslighting, designed to demoralize and subjugate Humans. For more on the why to this psychopathic plan, see my article: 👉 HISTORY OF THE CHIMERA. With that said, there are MANY beings in the world around you that are secretly ancient ‘gods’ of past eras who really do have more powers than humans do. I know, because I’ve met some and dealt with others during my years of education from the keeper of our simulation. There are also beings here who have roles to play to keep our world functioning correctly so Tara is able to continue offering a holographic platform for your manifestation adventure, who also have god-like powers, such as the keeper mentioned above, and others that are part of the team I refer to as the ‘crew’. You would call them angels, I call them people. Scary powerful people, but still people. Among the ‘crew’ is the main ‘keeper’ of the simulation that you wind up referring to as god down through the ages, because once in a while humans get to meet the keeper and witness the power for themselves which is very obviously not human. But the keeper doesn’t have a long flowing white beard, doesn’t sit on a throne in the sky and certainly isn’t perfect. But like you, a work in progress. Always seeking greater balance. That is the one common denominator among all fractals of Prime Creator, regardless if they are currently playing ‘bad guy’ roles, or ‘good guy’ roles. Understand there are beings here constantly at war against the keeper that has control of the universal elements of the hologram. Also understand, like the other beings who came here from much higher dimension with ‘god-like’ powers, they fractalize themselves into many, many different bodies, so it is effectively impossible to ever ‘kill’ each other. You would have to not only find all the many hundreds or thousands of them, but have a fool-proof way of killing them all at the same exact moment, making sure they are gone-gone, not just that one avatar holding their spirit awareness. That’s not going to happen. Not to any of them from what I’ve witnessed. Which means simply, as far as you are concerned, they are eternal beings, continuously here since 560m years ago in some case, depending when each one of them arrived. The ‘gods’, and the keeper, live in mortal bodies that age and die. But their positions are always held by the next one of themselves that can step into that role to maintain continuity of their offices. These are all the same person and can appear exactly identical to each other, or they can take on totally different appearances as well. I’m not sure why or how, but I’ve seen them both ways. After I was contacted by the keeper and informed of my role where I was in contract to supply protection and help to the crew back in 2013, eventually I was activated for that help in September of 2017. Both the keeper and a portion of the worldwide crew support staff as it were, had been taken hostage in California. I was tasked to bring them out to safety. I won’t go deeply into the details of this, but it was a serious situation where the invader races had stripped the keeper of all access to banks and cash, making it impossible to remain safe inside of the place they had been using as headquarters, literally casting them into the streets. And before you imagine this would be ‘impossible’, the keeper can’t just manifest stacks of cash out of thin air, and also there were a massive amount of beings all working together to neutralize them so they could possibly remove them from the levers of power of the simulation. That’s really all I can offer for details about that for now. The alphabet agencies were keeping the entire crew isolated in that one city, living in a car, camping in the woods and basically making it impossible to look after Tara. The keeper was able to get donations through various support mechanisms, but were shut out of getting off the streets. They brought in specialists to help them all escape, but the agencies wound up permanently disabling them, or taking them out altogether. That’s when I was contacted for assignment. Not being one of ‘the gods’ like they are, I was naturally terrified of having anything to do with this mission because I had no powers I was aware of that could provide anything they couldn’t. Which is really a fantastic understatement, since the keeper and crew can translocate anywhere in the world in seconds, have ‘thousands of avatars’ scattered out as vessels they can use in any city around the world, and basically everything they can do we can’t are about as intimidating as they can be. But I was told I was the only one who could rescue them. And while that may sound like the perfect scenario for a deluded mind seeking validation with illusions of grandeur, like a classic mental patient would come up with in their insane mind, this is what I was actually told, and I do mean in real life. To this day I find it as confusing to believe as you will trying to believe me now. Nonetheless, I carry certain powers I have been fitted with for my contract here on earth that I have had no education about at all. And the main one I’ve learned of now is I have a frequency shield that blocks out ‘the gods’ from doing harm. As long as the keeper and crew were within that field, the invaders were rendered powerless. Wow, even I want to roll my eyes at that. But I watched it play out first hand now multiple times after I got the crew off the streets in a ‘place of safety’ over the next couple of years. As long as I was at the safe house, nothing nefarious happened. When I went shopping every other week for groceries in town over 10 miles away, that’s when all hell would break out back at the compound. Those stories too would seem impossible to you to believe, just like everything else I am covering here, so I won’t go deeply into them. But they included black helicopters, 10’ long rattlesnakes sealing off the safe house & even assassinations. I was even requested to get to town and back as quickly as possible and not to linger due to these threats. I was told that my frequency shield while blended to the natural frequency shield the keeper and crew all have reached ‘87.3 miles’ apart (or so, going by memory now. But it was a very specific number). But even though the overall power of our combined fields still increased within that distance, the closer I was to the group, the more powerful the shield. I’m just telling you what I was told. You can believe it or not. I certainly wouldn’t believe it had I not actually witnessed it myself, so I’m right there with you if that’s your position. That brings us to the story I intended to pass along to you here; regarding that flight from ‘homeless bondage’ out across the deserts that spanned well over 1000 miles I was brought in for. The keeper and crew had been held hostage and homeless for 2 ½ years by the time I got the call requesting me to sell everything I owned and fly half way around the world for their rescue. Their lives had been hell, trust me. I arrived late at night where they picked me up and the hard part of the journey began. I will skip the details of the truly insane things I witnessed starting then for another time after the separation, for obvious reasons having to do with breadcrumbs and the very real fluid war we’re inside of still. But I will tell you about the ‘angels’ that were with us for that escape I would only learn about myself after 2 days of running. In the video below you will see what appear to be asteroids or a meteor shower, but they are traveling horizontally, not downward at all. We’ve seen this now since late 2024 a few times. This time I saved one of the videos taken on 2/19/2025 in Germany so I could actually show people what I saw first hand on that second night of our escape. We had covered whole states by this time, but we couldn’t stop and rest until we made it to a ‘frequency zone’ that was somehow outside of the reaches of the keeper’s enemies. I’m under the impression that there are certain key cross-leyline areas on earth that are too high in frequency for the low-vibration invader races to penetrate with their hyper-advanced psychotronic & scalar weapons, and that had been our destination ever since our escape that began at about 3:30-4am in the dead of night when the least amount of eyes would be surveilling us. Boy do I have outrageous stories about just how absolute that surveillance really is too. It is like they are not just tracking us, but using time travel to put agents in areas we would be arriving to, posing like homeless people and everyday folks. While in real life they were monitoring my every word in secret. I was surveilled many times during the weeks in that city while arranging for the escape and it blew my mind every time. The asteroids that really look more like comets in the video is what the "guardian angels" that had been secretly escorting us from overhead looked like, WHEN they were uncloaked. They only showed up in my visible view at the moment we broke over a ridge at about 3:30 in the morning 2 days later after our run began, at the exact same moment I could see the city lights way off in the distance below that was the ‘safe zone’. Suddenly overhead three giant comets appeared immediately above my head. I was in the lead vehicle the whole way, because the keeper was following my taillights. This is the only way they can navigate at night, because they don’t see like you and I do, looking at solid shapes and images, but everything through their eyes are light waves. I couldn’t make up something like that if I spent 10 years trying to write this article, mostly because it is still not believable to me now, 8 years later. These 3 comets were massive, what looked to be around 50 feet across, with tails of flame coming off that must have been 150-200 feet behind streaking VERY low across the sky. As I came down the hill to the desert floor for the final 10 miles between us and the safe zone (small town lights), the ‘comets’ started coming straight down toward ground, one at a time. They appeared they were going to crash into the highway, now traveling vertically at hypersonic speed, then just stopped 50 ft away from impact and vanished. You would have to try to imagine being in the total dark desert with only very faint, far-away lights off in the distance, only to have 3 comets traveling RIGHT DIRECTLY overhead suddenly uncloak, then turn straight down to get an idea of how insanely frightening they appeared, since their trajectory was to strike directly in front of your vehicle on the highway, as if you were about to slam right into them as they hit like giant bombs that would certainly blow up on impact and basically vaporize you and your moving van, to appreciate how absurd this event was. I was only about 150 feet away from where they were set to strike, so there was no hitting the brakes and avoiding anything. They were right there. Which means it was sort of like watching 'god' just fill the night's sky with fire. I saw 3 of them myself, but I was informed there were an additional 9 ‘angels’ that my own frequency wouldn't allow me to see according to the keeper. It is because this story is so unbelievable that I avoid talking about it, as you can imagine. Since 99 people out of a hundred are only going to accuse you of being insane upon hearing it, some possibly trying to have you committed at the same time, and the other person is likely already crazy themselves, so they just glaze over it. Until you see something like that with your own eyes, I'm pretty sure you will *never believe it could be a real thing. But this is what we call angels look like when they are decloaked and traveling at night. I don’t personally know if they were inside vehicles, or they are just simply traveling in their own Merkabah fields. That part was never explained to me. I was told they were with us 'flying overhead the entire journey' since we escaped California and were basically ‘signing off’ as I gathered it, now that we had reached the safe zone. You can believe I'm crazy all you want to, but now you can see them with your own eyes in this video, sure as hell not acting like meteors, but acting more like flaming time crafts (‘space’ ships). Are you crazy too? - On X, to search for my articles, simply type in the name of the piece, enter one space, then from: plus my username in parenthesis such as shown here: CASTING THE APOCOLYPSE (from:iontecs_pemf) Off-site, you can look up any of my writings through this link below for my other more than 100 recent articles and many thousands of comments on X, regularly updated thanks to Justin This message will only be seen by your eyes if not shared, and if you want to reference this article again later, you will need to cut and paste it in your own notes off line, as it will surely be erased. This is the most accurate translation of these events I am aware of at this time.

W.R. Schock, QBD

62,162 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Howard Marks manages ~$190 billion and has penned some of the world's best investment writing. Warren Buffett loves his writing too: "When I see memos from Howard in my mail, they're the first thing I open." Here’s our conversation—with its top 13 insights: 1) For Howard Marks, heaven is seven little words: “I never thought of it that way.” Get the reader to say them and you win. 2) Einstein supposedly said there are four levels of intelligence: bright, brilliant, genius, and simple. Insecure writers try to flaunt their expertise with jargon; secure writers share what they know in surprising yet simple ways. 3) Something about putting words to paper freezes people up. Hence, Howard Marks tries to write as he speaks. Lesson: Take your written voice closer to your conversational voice. You’ll discover a new freshness and speed in your work. 4) Most writing rings hollow. No stories or thought-out principles inside. Howard Marks’ challenge to writers: Have experiences, cultivate convictions, and then your writing will come alive like never before. Thoreau said it best: “How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.” 5) Find your creed. What do you believe in? What do you think will work? What will not work? What are the rules that govern your decisions? People listen intently when you speak from a "principled voice." 6) Be eclectic in your subject matter and sources. Tackle the same point from different angles to create a richer reading experience. For example, in his memos, Howard Marks has explained investing via the prism of gambling, poker, sports, and more. 7) Howard Marks’ knack for analogies has made him one of Warren Buffett’s favorite writers. Takeaway: Come up with more surprising comparisons. Make cross-disciplinary connections. 8) What Howard admires in Buffett’s writing: its accessibility, folksy simplicity, and humor. A great example is Buffett’s description of the 2008 financial crash: “It's only when the tide goes out that we find out who's been swimming naked.” 9) Writing is anti-BS because the reader can keep re-reading until the hole in your logic becomes clear. You will get away with some BS in conversation, but if you want to discover and fix the holes in your ideas, write them down. 10) The old sayings don't get to be old sayings for nothing. A heuristic, story or book that has been around for long probably has something valuable to teach you. 11) The more complex the idea, the simpler your explanation must be. Nietzsche agrees with Howard Marks: “The more abstract the truth you wish to teach, the more you need to seduce the senses to it.” 12) The world is governed by cyclical forces. Even if history doesn't always repeat, it rhymes. This is why old books will teach you as much about the future as the past. 13) Writing prompt: Reconcile two things that seem to be at odds or show the hidden fault lines between two things that seem to be compatible. The reader will feel rewarded. She might even say the seven magical words: “I never thought of it that way.” I've shared the full conversation below. If you'd rather listen on YouTube, Spotify, or Apple, check out the replies below.

David Perell

255,352 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

New car day part three…….I have a new car. This is a long one so grab a coffee and sit down - TLDR there’s more photos in the replies 🤣 and how much I paid is at the bottom of this essay 💷 Many of you guessed correctly, saying it’ll be a W211 E-Class Estate so I apologise if this is a bit anti climatic 😬 Jsl91 🦁🏎🥊 not only guessed the car but the bloody interior colours too! For reference though: It’s a 2007 ‘57’ Mercedes-Benz E320 CDI Elegance Estate which has the later 3.0 V6 CDI and 7G Tronic automatic gearbox fitted. It has a really nice upgraded spec from base spec including soft Nappa, electrically adjustable, memory and heated leather front seats, memory steering column and mirrors, very rare sunroof option, Bi-Xenon Headlights, COMAND APS infotainment upgrade with Bluetooth calling and the 7 seat option which seems odd but fold down perfectly flat as if they are not there. It’s averaged a new owner every 4.25 years which for a 17 year old car I really don’t think is bad, has a very decent MOT History and I have the last 10 years Service History physically documented on paper with the car. Prior to that is apparently with all with main dealer so I need to get them to send me it which will make it a full service history between Main Dealer and independents. Bit of an odd buying experience though, the dealer selling it insisted on picking me up from the Station and knew when I was coming in as I kept him updated - he was 30 mins late, I gave benefit of the doubt and assumed he’d of been having the car cleaned or something. No, it’s actually dirtier than I’ve ever let my cars get and needs a very, very good valet - of which I intend to do tomorrow afternoon myself 🧽 When did it become ok to sell a filthy car? We then drove 15 minutes back to a nondescript area of Wakefield where we pulled up on the side of the road and all of a sudden changed ownership on his phone. He then gave me his bank details and I transferred the money as the car had driven faultlessly on that test drive back to ‘his premises’. The guy was nice enough but it felt like he couldn’t wait to get rid of me, money hit his bank, he gave me the new keeper slip, shook my hand and said nice doing a deal with you, got out and walked off 👀 If I hadn’t done my due diligence I’d of genuinely thought the car was stolen or something. I then taxed the car, set my phone and Bluetooth transmitter up and got on the way home. It is an absolute pleasure to drive in fairness, that 221bhp V6 Diesel is powerful but lazy which suits the car so well. As you can see from the photos it averaged 44mpg on my 126 mile journey home. I stopped at Shell in Boston to fill it up with Diesel, something I can’t imagine I’ll be doing all too often ⛽️ Only other issues I can see is the scratches on the front bumper (I knew about) and there’s a scratch on the bonnet I’m hoping will polish out. It’s also due a service. It has a full set of Davanti Tyres on its tiny 16” Elegance wheels, all of which have tonnes of tread. Headlights could do with a polish maybe too. Oh and I paid £1695.00 for it 🤯 Really looking forward to sticking my dateless 3x3 plate on it and taking on our North Norfolk Coast getaway next week 😊 More photos in the replies below if you’ve gotten this far 😅

Sam Hosier

30,161 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

25 million people, every single year, download Shaan Puri’s podcast. What has Shaan figured out about storytelling? He spilled the beans in our new chat. Here's how he does it: 1. A story is a five second moment of change. A story is not a sequence of events; it's about transformation. Weave in U-turns and unexpected flips. 2. Write like you talk. Natural, conversational, led by stories. 3. A formula for a great story: Intention + Obstacle. At all moments, the listener should know what the hero wants and what's stopping them from getting there. This one's from Aaron Sorkin, who wrote The Social Network. 4. Work backwards from the emotion you're trying to create in the reader. Then let the structure follow. 5. Aim for strong reactions. If you can get the reader to widen their eyes, raise their eyebrows, and/or burst out laughing, they will share your work. 6. Don't write to the faceless masses. Write to one specific person. BuzzFeed writers used to write to "Debbie at her Desk," the bored woman at her desk who wanted a 5-minute distraction. 7. “Likeability” is downstream of vulnerability. The more honestly you share your challenges, the more invested your reader gets. Write your heart out. 8. Don't be the 9,000 IQ guy. Stop competing in imaginary intelligence contests and start telling stories. Big words alienate but tight narratives pull people in. 9. Forget resumes and portfolios. Create a “binge bank” instead. A binge bank is a set of videos or essays that people can binge on. Stack up material so that when people do go down your rabbit hole, they come out the other side a fan. 10. Mere practice gets you nowhere. But intentional practice leads to exponential progress. Always learn from your attempts and make intelligent tweaks on the next try. 11. Comedy is great, but definitely don't make every sentence a joke. 12. Comedy is a pretty easy way to improve your writing. The essence of all comedy is surprise. Study your favorite comedians. Read books like How to Write Funny and The Hidden Tools of Comedy. 13. For better storytelling, Shaan recommends two books: Storyworthy and Building a Storybrand. 14. How to make headlines juicy: use specific and odd numbers, focus on the first three words and the last three words, use "you" whenever possible, and know that longer is typically better than shorter. 15. Your writing should only be as long as it is interesting. An uninteresting 20 second reel will fail; an interesting 30-minute essay will win. But you must be honest while gauging how objectively interesting your piece is…in a world with infinite content. 16. Most people think writing is about transferring information but writing is just as much about transferring emotion. Emotion gets people to take action (like, share, buy…). The first 40-minutes of this conversation with Shaan Puri is all about storytelling. Then there's an hour more about the genius of Dave Chapelle and how to write with zest. If you'd rather listen on YouTube, Spotify, or Apple, check out the replies…

David Perell

386,591 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

📢 BREAKING: New Evidence Discovered To FREE Tyler Robinson IMMEDIATELY!! 🚫💥🎤 NO EXPLODING MIC!! Charlie Kirk: Operation 322 has been completed for 6+ months and has existed for 9+ months. The top podcasters, quite a few CK commentators, and a bunch of the Charlie Kirk investigators know my work, however...... My 8-hour five-part series is extremely scary to most people. They are afraid to tell you of what really happened. Afraid, because they probably feel like this is unstoppable. And they would be right. But it doesn't mean that we should throw away our responsibility to say and do what is right regarding the death of Charlie Kirk. We don't get to be afraid when the Constitution of the United States of America is on the line for our children and their children. We don't get to be passive and quiet when our government uses advanced technology to assassinate one of its own. I am still the only Charlie Kirk independent investigator who is covered the fact that Charlie Kirk was a government employee with his security clearance when he was assassinated. Most people don't know, and this is another story that I broke, that Charlie struck up his own contract with the Chinese/TikTok well before Israel could get a foot in the door. In fact, Charlie explicitly struck up his own deal with TikTok so that he could cut Israel out of the distribution of his message. I am still the only Charlie Kirk investigator to cover this important information. When you combine the fact that he was a government employee with the security clearance, working for the military at the USAF BoV, and now striking up his own deal with China to snub Israel? That sounds like motive for both governments to assassinate Charlie Kirk... And that is exactly what they did. And then they purchased TikTok. And all of the things that Charlie Kirk refused to do, Erika Kirk made sure to reverse course and give Israel exactly what they wanted... Turning Point USA, now known as AIPAC Jr. Israel and the United States of America had more motive to kill Charlie Kirk than Tyler Robinson did. They also had more assets in the area than Tyler Robinson did. The US Army spy plane specialty-equipped with launched effects for the deployment of drones... This spy plane dipped down to 200ft before and after the Charlie Kirk assassination. 200ft is the perfect height to deploy and pick up drones in an Army spy plane specifically equipped to do just that. This is just part one of three videos that I am going to put out tonight... Once you see this video, you cannot unsee it. Once you know the infrared beam was on the back of Charlie's head, and you can see that it was the back right side of his head, the discussion of whether he was shot in the back of the head is over with. Charlie Kirk was absolutely shot in the back of the head. Charlie Kirk operation 322 shows you exactly how this ritual assassination unfolded in exactly who was responsible that day. The series also gets into the why, which if you're into the esoteric information, the ties to the Epstein class are undeniable for Erika Kirk. Charlie Kirk: Operation 322 is the only series that ties Erika Kirk directly to Israel's Elbit Systems, the defense contractor that killed her husband with the Bird of Prey drone platform, while she was in New York doing real estate. 🔑 While she was getting her license and likely managing apartments for models, Israel's Elbit Systems was charged that same year for funneling money through the United States of America to Romania for a real estate project and its consultants. This is information that I broke in Charlie Kirk: Operation 322. That is the only place you will find it on the internet. Charlie Kirk was subverted by everybody around him. Two simultaneous shots took Charlie Kirk's life prematurely. Let's use this information to get Tyler Robinson out of prison. 🔑 Stay tuned for the next video for the SHOT TO THE TORSO... #FreeTylerRobinson

WeAreNotGoingToMars

391,619 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Technically is dead; long live Technically Some bittersweet news for you all today: after 5 years writing Technically and more than 100 posts about everything from APIs to data warehouses to Facebook DNS hacks, today I am (for the most part) shutting the Technically Substack down… …and replacing it with Technically 2.0, an amazing software product I’ve been working with David Krevitt on for the past 6 months. But first… For a newsletter that started with an innocent tweet while I was bored in Haneda airport, this thing has come pretty far. 70K+ subscribers, yada yada. But you’re here for the story so here it is. It was December 2019, I was traveling before moving to SF to start at Retool, and like I said, I was bored. Late 2019 – what an amazing time to start a newsletter! There weren’t that many of them out there. And then came 2020. Everyone was stuck at home with nothing to do but sign up for more and more Substacks, and talk about them on the internet. Every day, another one of your friends was announcing a newsletter on Twitter. It was the golden era, no doubt, and many people like me combined hard work, a good idea, and the old fashioned “right place right time” streak of luck to build a really nice Substack business. I’ll never forget the day Ben Thompson referenced Technically in Stratechery. I must have gotten 50 texts from friends. Everyone was reading Stratechery at the time…it was like becoming a made man. There was this almost communal vibe in the air with these newsletters. Everyone was reading the same stuff, talking about the same stuff. It was a scene is what it was. But by 2022 things were changing. People were outside again, and had less free time to read newsletters. Interest rates were going up, and people were working more (even in offices). In the paid Substack group chats, most of us were reporting stalling or negative growth, even though we hadn’t changed anything on our end. And with 50% churn rates on these subscriptions, if you weren’t growing you were dying. I’m listening to Neil Young’s “After the Gold Rush” as I write this and it couldn’t be more fitting. Although I imagine Mr. Young himself would disapprove of the whole paid newsletter endeavor. What happened to newsletters? David and I call what’s going on “Substack Fatigue” – people are just tired of reading yet another newsletter, let alone paying for one. Newsletters are just not the thing anymore. There are some fast growing news ones focused on AI, but the same story is going to play out in a few years when everything cools down. Political newsletters are fully investing in video and podcasts. Newsletters are not the thing anymore. We rode a cultural wave and the wave is over. You don’t have to die, but you have to adjust. The wrench in this whole story is that Technically was only (very) part time for me. I’m pretty sure at one point I was generating the most revenue on Substack for someone who wasn’t focusing on their newsletter full time. Which is a sick flex no doubt, but was also a huge problem, because I just didn’t have the time or mental capacity to make the big moves required to reverse the trend. Technically started to slowly lose paid subscribers every month, but I was at peace with that. I was entering a new phase in my life, settling down a bit, enjoying spending time on cooking, cocktails, and music. Approaching 30 and feeling really good about everything. It’s OK for some things to be temporary, and I was content with Technically to continue to be useful to people…just not make as much money. But in the back of my head, I always knew that Technically had a lot more potential, and deserved more than I could give it. That there’s no reason this thing couldn’t be a $1M+/year business. I continue to believe that technical literacy is going to be one of the defining social problems of our era, and the progress in AI only makes this even more critical. It should be way more than a newsletter, it should be how everyone learns what the fuck is going on in this digital world. I needed some help. But I had a bad track record of getting people to work on Technically with me. It’s hard to share custody of your child. And I am extremely particular. I’m not always the easiest to work with. Worked with some contractors here and there, but never found a more long term partner. I’m extremely grateful that David Krevitt reached out to me when he did or this paragraph would end here. Instead, after regaling you with my boring tale for many paragraphs now, I can finally share what we’ve been working on since last year. It’s called Technically 2.0. It’s all of the content you know and love, but built as a piece of software specifically aimed at helping people get more technical. No more newsletter – it’s a learning platform now, complete with reading lists, bookmarks, a dictionary, and guided learning tracks. Our goal was to make a Wikipedia kind of experience: click around to follow your curiosity on whatever software you’re learning about. You can sign up on the Technically site ( You’re going to have to pay for it, but if your experience is anything like that of the other thousands of people who already have, you won’t regret it. Enjoy the soothing sounds of David's voice as he walks you through it in the video below. It’s hard to say goodbye completely to something you’ve been doing every week for 5 years. Any readers with their own long running newsletters will understand the odd, para-social relationship you develop with your audience. So I’m going to keep publishing on Substack a little – monthly roundups of the new stuff we’re publishing on Technically 2.0, plus some good sponsored posts. So while the newsletter might be dead, it is also only just beginning (or something). Hope to see you on the other side, ~ ❤️ Justin

sisyphus bar and grill

29,390 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr