Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE LANGUAGE RUNNING EVERY WEBSITE YOU USE IS A MINEFIELD AND THAT ALMOST NO ONE WAS EVER TAUGHT WHICH PARTS ARE SAFE An hour from Douglas Crockford, the man who invented JSON, on the good parts of JavaScript buried under a pile of...

slash1sol's profile picture

slash1s

8,282 subscribers

13,073 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE CLASSES YOU WRITE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CLASSES AT ALL 27 minutes from Jack Diederich, a Python core developer, on how much of your code is just a function wearing a costume. -> The moment it lands, the rule is brutal: if a class has two methods and one is __init__, you meant to write a function. Most people add structure to feel like real engineers. It just adds weight no one ever needed. Writing more code was never the skill -> writing less of it is. And when an AI agent happily generates ten classes for a job that needed three lines, the person who knows what to delete is the one who ships something clean. Anyone can add abstraction. Knowing when not to is the whole job. Bookmark it and Watch ↓
27:10

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE CLASSES YOU WRITE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CLASSES AT ALL 27 minutes from Jack Diederich, a Python core developer, on how much of your code is just a function wearing a costume. -> The moment it lands, the rule is brutal: if a class has two methods and one is __init__, you meant to write a function. Most people add structure to feel like real engineers. It just adds weight no one ever needed. Writing more code was never the skill -> writing less of it is. And when an AI agent happily generates ten classes for a job that needed three lines, the person who knows what to delete is the one who ships something clean. Anyone can add abstraction. Knowing when not to is the whole job. Bookmark it and Watch ↓

slash1s

269,515 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

IN 1999 MIT FILMED A MATH LECTURE THAT QUIETLY BECAME THE FOUNDATION OF EVERY AI MODEL YOU'VE EVER USED AND ALMOST NO ONE WAS TAUGHT TO SEE IT THAT WAY 39 minutes from Gilbert Strang, who taught this at MIT for over 60 years -- the linear algebra course an entire generation of engineers and data scientists grew up on. -> The shift it creates: you stop seeing matrices as boring grids of numbers and start seeing them as the language of space, data, and motion itself. School drilled you to crunch matrices by hand and never told you why. Strang shows you what they actually mean. Every neural net, every embedding, every model you prompt is linear algebra running underneath. The math you skipped is the engine of the thing you use all day. Memorizing the steps was never the skill -> seeing what the numbers do is. This is where it finally clicks. Most people fear linear algebra and move on. The ones who watched this see straight into how AI actually works. Bookmark & Watch it today, this one's a legend ↓
39:31

IN 1999 MIT FILMED A MATH LECTURE THAT QUIETLY BECAME THE FOUNDATION OF EVERY AI MODEL YOU'VE EVER USED AND ALMOST NO ONE WAS TAUGHT TO SEE IT THAT WAY 39 minutes from Gilbert Strang, who taught this at MIT for over 60 years -- the linear algebra course an entire generation of engineers and data scientists grew up on. -> The shift it creates: you stop seeing matrices as boring grids of numbers and start seeing them as the language of space, data, and motion itself. School drilled you to crunch matrices by hand and never told you why. Strang shows you what they actually mean. Every neural net, every embedding, every model you prompt is linear algebra running underneath. The math you skipped is the engine of the thing you use all day. Memorizing the steps was never the skill -> seeing what the numbers do is. This is where it finally clicks. Most people fear linear algebra and move on. The ones who watched this see straight into how AI actually works. Bookmark & Watch it today, this one's a legend ↓

slash1s

433,431 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

MIT GAVE DEBUGGING ITS OWN FULL LECTURE -- BECAUSE MOST DEVS STILL HUNT BUGS WITH PRINT STATEMENTS LIKE IT'S 1995 54 minutes that take the thing you do every single day, badly, and show you the tools schools never bothered to teach. -> The moment it lands, you realize "add a print, run it, add another print" was never debugging. It was guessing with extra steps. Most people never learned the real toolkit. A proper debugger, breakpoints, tracing what the program actually does instead of what you assume it does. In 2026 guessing isn't good enough -> the bug is buried in code you didn't even write, and printf won't find it for you. An AI agent will generate hundreds of lines in seconds. When one of them quietly breaks, finding it runs on exactly the skills in this lecture. Anyone can add a print statement. The person who can actually trace a bug to its source is the one who ships while everyone else guesses. Bookmark & Watch it ↓
54:10

MIT GAVE DEBUGGING ITS OWN FULL LECTURE -- BECAUSE MOST DEVS STILL HUNT BUGS WITH PRINT STATEMENTS LIKE IT'S 1995 54 minutes that take the thing you do every single day, badly, and show you the tools schools never bothered to teach. -> The moment it lands, you realize "add a print, run it, add another print" was never debugging. It was guessing with extra steps. Most people never learned the real toolkit. A proper debugger, breakpoints, tracing what the program actually does instead of what you assume it does. In 2026 guessing isn't good enough -> the bug is buried in code you didn't even write, and printf won't find it for you. An AI agent will generate hundreds of lines in seconds. When one of them quietly breaks, finding it runs on exactly the skills in this lecture. Anyone can add a print statement. The person who can actually trace a bug to its source is the one who ships while everyone else guesses. Bookmark & Watch it ↓

slash1s

10,864 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

A DEVELOPER PROVED THE REGEX YOU'VE WRITTEN A THOUSAND TIMES IS SECRETLY A COMPILER AND THAT ALMOST NO ONE WHO USES THEM HAS ANY IDEA WHAT ACTUALLY RUNS 36 minutes from Paul Wankadia, the engineer behind a regex engine that compiles your pattern straight down to raw machine code -- walking through what really happens between the slashes. -> The moment it clicks, regex stops being magic punctuation you paste from Stack Overflow and becomes what it actually is: a tiny machine. Your pattern gets turned into a state machine, and that machine is what runs against every character of your text. That one idea explains everything you never understood. Why one regex returns instantly and a nearly identical one hangs your whole server. Why some patterns are safe and others are a denial-of-service waiting to happen. It was never random -- it's whether the machine underneath is built well or badly. Writing a regex was never the skill -> reading one is. And now that an AI agent hands you dense, clever patterns you'd never write yourself, the person who can see the machine underneath is the one who catches the one that takes down production at 3am. Everyone copies regex and prays. This is the talk that ends the praying. Save it. The next time a pattern "Just works," you'll actually know why ↓
36:09

A DEVELOPER PROVED THE REGEX YOU'VE WRITTEN A THOUSAND TIMES IS SECRETLY A COMPILER AND THAT ALMOST NO ONE WHO USES THEM HAS ANY IDEA WHAT ACTUALLY RUNS 36 minutes from Paul Wankadia, the engineer behind a regex engine that compiles your pattern straight down to raw machine code -- walking through what really happens between the slashes. -> The moment it clicks, regex stops being magic punctuation you paste from Stack Overflow and becomes what it actually is: a tiny machine. Your pattern gets turned into a state machine, and that machine is what runs against every character of your text. That one idea explains everything you never understood. Why one regex returns instantly and a nearly identical one hangs your whole server. Why some patterns are safe and others are a denial-of-service waiting to happen. It was never random -- it's whether the machine underneath is built well or badly. Writing a regex was never the skill -> reading one is. And now that an AI agent hands you dense, clever patterns you'd never write yourself, the person who can see the machine underneath is the one who catches the one that takes down production at 3am. Everyone copies regex and prays. This is the talk that ends the praying. Save it. The next time a pattern "Just works," you'll actually know why ↓

slash1s

191,595 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

A DEVELOPER PROVED YOU CAN FIND THE EXACT COMMIT THAT BROKE YOUR CODE IN A HISTORY OF 10,000 -- IN ABOUT 13 STEPS, AUTOMATICALLY.. 33 minutes from a Google engineer on git bisect: the built-in command that binary-searches your entire history to hunt down the one commit that introduced a bug. -> The moment it lands, "When did this break?" stops being an afternoon of guessing. You hand git a good commit, a bad one, and a test and it finds the culprit while you watch. Most people debug a regression by reading diffs by hand, blaming the obvious file, and hoping. Bisect doesn't hope. It cuts the search in half, then in half again, until only the guilty commit is left standing. Reading history by hand was never the skill -> letting git do the binary search for you is. And when an AI agent dumps hundreds of commits into your repo and one quietly breaks production, bisect is what finds the needle without you reading a single line. The bug isn't hiding. It's sitting in one exact commit. Most people just never learned to make git point at it. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓
32:07

A DEVELOPER PROVED YOU CAN FIND THE EXACT COMMIT THAT BROKE YOUR CODE IN A HISTORY OF 10,000 -- IN ABOUT 13 STEPS, AUTOMATICALLY.. 33 minutes from a Google engineer on git bisect: the built-in command that binary-searches your entire history to hunt down the one commit that introduced a bug. -> The moment it lands, "When did this break?" stops being an afternoon of guessing. You hand git a good commit, a bad one, and a test and it finds the culprit while you watch. Most people debug a regression by reading diffs by hand, blaming the obvious file, and hoping. Bisect doesn't hope. It cuts the search in half, then in half again, until only the guilty commit is left standing. Reading history by hand was never the skill -> letting git do the binary search for you is. And when an AI agent dumps hundreds of commits into your repo and one quietly breaks production, bisect is what finds the needle without you reading a single line. The bug isn't hiding. It's sitting in one exact commit. Most people just never learned to make git point at it. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

37,773 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

A DEVELOPER WHO HELPS MAINTAIN GIT ITSELF PROVED THAT USING GIT AND CONTRIBUTING WITH GIT ARE TWO DIFFERENT SKILLS AND ALMOST NO ONE LEARNS THE SECOND 55 minutes from Johannes Schindelin, one of git's most prolific contributors, on the workflow that gets your code accepted into a project you don't own. -> The moment it lands, committing to your own repo turns out to be the easy 10%. Landing a change in someone else's codebase is the part nobody taught you. Most people can save their own work. Far fewer can revise a patch five times, keep the history clean, and merge it into a project moving under them. Saving your code was never the skill -> getting it merged into someone else's is. And when an AI agent fires off a pull request nobody asked for, the person who knows how to really contribute is the one who gets it accepted instead of closed. Anyone can commit to their own repo. The person who can land a change in a project they don't own is the one who actually ships. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓
55:43

A DEVELOPER WHO HELPS MAINTAIN GIT ITSELF PROVED THAT USING GIT AND CONTRIBUTING WITH GIT ARE TWO DIFFERENT SKILLS AND ALMOST NO ONE LEARNS THE SECOND 55 minutes from Johannes Schindelin, one of git's most prolific contributors, on the workflow that gets your code accepted into a project you don't own. -> The moment it lands, committing to your own repo turns out to be the easy 10%. Landing a change in someone else's codebase is the part nobody taught you. Most people can save their own work. Far fewer can revise a patch five times, keep the history clean, and merge it into a project moving under them. Saving your code was never the skill -> getting it merged into someone else's is. And when an AI agent fires off a pull request nobody asked for, the person who knows how to really contribute is the one who gets it accepted instead of closed. Anyone can commit to their own repo. The person who can land a change in a project they don't own is the one who actually ships. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

12,750 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

A DEVELOPER MADE A REAL COMMIT WITHOUT EVER TYPING GIT ADD OR GIT COMMIT -- JUST TO PROVE THE COMMANDS YOU LIVE BY ARE A THIN SHELL OVER A DATABASE YOU'VE NEVER ONCE OPENED 55 minutes from Tim Berglund, a longtime Git teacher and GitHub evangelist, taking the tool apart down to the raw objects almost nobody who uses it every day has ever touched. -> The moment it clicks, Git stops being a pile of memorized commands and becomes what it actually is underneath: a tiny content-addressed database of blobs, trees and commits. git add and git commit are just polite wrappers around writing objects into it by hand. Every commit you've ever made was Git hashing a snapshot and filing it by fingerprint. Branches are just labels pointing at one of those objects. The work you thought you destroyed with a bad reset is still sitting in the reflog. Once you can see that graph, the commands that used to terrify you stop being scary at all. Memorizing commands was never the skill -> reading the object graph in your head is. And with an AI agent now committing and rebasing on your machine faster than you can follow, the one person who can untangle the mess it leaves is the one who knows what's really stored down there. There's a person on every team everyone runs to when Git breaks. This is the talk that quietly turns you into them. You'll reach for it the next time a rebase goes sideways. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓
55:19

A DEVELOPER MADE A REAL COMMIT WITHOUT EVER TYPING GIT ADD OR GIT COMMIT -- JUST TO PROVE THE COMMANDS YOU LIVE BY ARE A THIN SHELL OVER A DATABASE YOU'VE NEVER ONCE OPENED 55 minutes from Tim Berglund, a longtime Git teacher and GitHub evangelist, taking the tool apart down to the raw objects almost nobody who uses it every day has ever touched. -> The moment it clicks, Git stops being a pile of memorized commands and becomes what it actually is underneath: a tiny content-addressed database of blobs, trees and commits. git add and git commit are just polite wrappers around writing objects into it by hand. Every commit you've ever made was Git hashing a snapshot and filing it by fingerprint. Branches are just labels pointing at one of those objects. The work you thought you destroyed with a bad reset is still sitting in the reflog. Once you can see that graph, the commands that used to terrify you stop being scary at all. Memorizing commands was never the skill -> reading the object graph in your head is. And with an AI agent now committing and rebasing on your machine faster than you can follow, the one person who can untangle the mess it leaves is the one who knows what's really stored down there. There's a person on every team everyone runs to when Git breaks. This is the talk that quietly turns you into them. You'll reach for it the next time a rebase goes sideways. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

237,718 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

A DEVELOPER FOUND SEVEN WAYS TO TAKE DOWN A PRODUCTION DATABASE THAT ALL LOOK EXACTLY LIKE NORMAL, INNOCENT CODE AND ALMOST EVERY TEAM IS SHIPPING AT LEAST ONE OF THEM RIGHT NOW 17 minutes from Josh Berkus, one of the people who actually maintains PostgreSQL, walking through the quiet mistakes that turn a healthy database into a 3am outage. -> The moment it lands, you realize none of these are exotic attacks. They're ordinary-looking decisions -- a query that locks a table, a connection that never closes, a setting no one ever questioned -- that work perfectly until the day they don't, and then they take everything down with them. The scary part isn't that the database breaks. It's how normal the code looks right up until it does. A query that runs in 5ms on your laptop and 5 minutes on prod. A migration that silently locks the whole table. A connection pool that runs dry the moment real traffic shows up. Every one of them passed review. Writing SQL that runs was never the hard part -> writing SQL that survives production is. And now that an AI agent is generating and firing queries at your real database faster than anyone can read them, every one of those seven landmines is one autocomplete away -- and the only person who can stop it is the one who already knows where they're buried. Your database doesn't go down because someone attacked it. It goes down because something that looked completely normal finally caught up with it. Save and Watch it today. You'll see the next outage coming before it lands ↓
16:51

A DEVELOPER FOUND SEVEN WAYS TO TAKE DOWN A PRODUCTION DATABASE THAT ALL LOOK EXACTLY LIKE NORMAL, INNOCENT CODE AND ALMOST EVERY TEAM IS SHIPPING AT LEAST ONE OF THEM RIGHT NOW 17 minutes from Josh Berkus, one of the people who actually maintains PostgreSQL, walking through the quiet mistakes that turn a healthy database into a 3am outage. -> The moment it lands, you realize none of these are exotic attacks. They're ordinary-looking decisions -- a query that locks a table, a connection that never closes, a setting no one ever questioned -- that work perfectly until the day they don't, and then they take everything down with them. The scary part isn't that the database breaks. It's how normal the code looks right up until it does. A query that runs in 5ms on your laptop and 5 minutes on prod. A migration that silently locks the whole table. A connection pool that runs dry the moment real traffic shows up. Every one of them passed review. Writing SQL that runs was never the hard part -> writing SQL that survives production is. And now that an AI agent is generating and firing queries at your real database faster than anyone can read them, every one of those seven landmines is one autocomplete away -- and the only person who can stop it is the one who already knows where they're buried. Your database doesn't go down because someone attacked it. It goes down because something that looked completely normal finally caught up with it. Save and Watch it today. You'll see the next outage coming before it lands ↓

slash1s

22,268 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

IN 2011 ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF AI STOOD AT AN MIT BOARD AND EXPLAINED WHY A MIND IS NOT ONE SMART THING -- IT'S A CROWD OF TINY DUMB PARTS THAT DON'T KNOW ANYTHING A lecture from Marvin Minsky, the man who helped invent artificial intelligence, on his life's idea: the Society of Mind. -> The idea that lands: there is no single "You" inside your head. Just hundreds of simple processes, each almost mindless, working together until thinking appears. No magic. No spark. Intelligence is what happens when enough dumb parts are wired the right way. Forty years later that's exactly what an AI model is: billions of tiny switches, none of them smart, somehow producing something that looks like it thinks. Being amazed by intelligence was never the point -> understanding how it's assembled is. Most people think a mind is a mystery. The ones who watched this see the machinery underneath. Bookmark & Watch it. This one's a legend ↓
2:05:14

IN 2011 ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS OF AI STOOD AT AN MIT BOARD AND EXPLAINED WHY A MIND IS NOT ONE SMART THING -- IT'S A CROWD OF TINY DUMB PARTS THAT DON'T KNOW ANYTHING A lecture from Marvin Minsky, the man who helped invent artificial intelligence, on his life's idea: the Society of Mind. -> The idea that lands: there is no single "You" inside your head. Just hundreds of simple processes, each almost mindless, working together until thinking appears. No magic. No spark. Intelligence is what happens when enough dumb parts are wired the right way. Forty years later that's exactly what an AI model is: billions of tiny switches, none of them smart, somehow producing something that looks like it thinks. Being amazed by intelligence was never the point -> understanding how it's assembled is. Most people think a mind is a mystery. The ones who watched this see the machinery underneath. Bookmark & Watch it. This one's a legend ↓

slash1s

43,005 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

AN MIT RESEARCHER PROVED GIT ISN'T HARD BECAUSE YOU'RE BAD AT IT -- IT'S HARD BECAUSE IT WAS DESIGNED THAT WAY 27 minutes from a PhD researcher in MIT's Software Design Group, using actual design theory to show why the tool that confuses everyone confuses everyone for a reason. -> The moment it lands, years of feeling stupid evaporate. The gap between what git's commands say and what they actually do was never in your head. It's baked into the tool. He maps the difference between what you think a command does and what git really does underneath. Once you see that gap, the confusion finally has a name and it stops being yours to carry. Struggling with git was never a skills issue -> it's a design issue, and knowing where the model lies to you is what turns panic into control. And as AI agents fire off commits and rebases you didn't write, the person who understands where git misleads is the one who untangles the mess. You were never bad at git. You were just never shown where it was built to trip you. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓
26:35

AN MIT RESEARCHER PROVED GIT ISN'T HARD BECAUSE YOU'RE BAD AT IT -- IT'S HARD BECAUSE IT WAS DESIGNED THAT WAY 27 minutes from a PhD researcher in MIT's Software Design Group, using actual design theory to show why the tool that confuses everyone confuses everyone for a reason. -> The moment it lands, years of feeling stupid evaporate. The gap between what git's commands say and what they actually do was never in your head. It's baked into the tool. He maps the difference between what you think a command does and what git really does underneath. Once you see that gap, the confusion finally has a name and it stops being yours to carry. Struggling with git was never a skills issue -> it's a design issue, and knowing where the model lies to you is what turns panic into control. And as AI agents fire off commits and rebases you didn't write, the person who understands where git misleads is the one who untangles the mess. You were never bad at git. You were just never shown where it was built to trip you. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

138,043 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

TWO ENGINEERS SHOWED THE GIT TRICKS THAT MAKE PEOPLE THINK YOU'RE A WIZARD -- THE ONES 95% OF DEVELOPERS HAVE NEVER ONCE TOUCHED 42 minutes from Johan Abildskov and Jan Krag, bending git with custom configs, attributes and hooks most people don't even know exist. -> The moment it lands, git stops being four commands you repeat in fear. The same tool you've used for years turns out to have a whole layer built to bend to you. Hooks that run your checks before a bad commit ever lands. Attributes that end the "it works on my machine" merge wars. Config that makes the painful parts just stop happening. Memorizing commands was never the ceiling -> shaping git to do the work for you is. And while everyone else fights the tool by hand, the person who set it up right is shipping clean three times faster. Most people use 5% of git and call it a day. This is the other 95% nobody showed you. Bookmark it and Watch today ↓
42:40

TWO ENGINEERS SHOWED THE GIT TRICKS THAT MAKE PEOPLE THINK YOU'RE A WIZARD -- THE ONES 95% OF DEVELOPERS HAVE NEVER ONCE TOUCHED 42 minutes from Johan Abildskov and Jan Krag, bending git with custom configs, attributes and hooks most people don't even know exist. -> The moment it lands, git stops being four commands you repeat in fear. The same tool you've used for years turns out to have a whole layer built to bend to you. Hooks that run your checks before a bad commit ever lands. Attributes that end the "it works on my machine" merge wars. Config that makes the painful parts just stop happening. Memorizing commands was never the ceiling -> shaping git to do the work for you is. And while everyone else fights the tool by hand, the person who set it up right is shipping clean three times faster. Most people use 5% of git and call it a day. This is the other 95% nobody showed you. Bookmark it and Watch today ↓

slash1s

105,248 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

ChatGPT can write you a thousand trading strategies from one sentence. 999 will quietly bleed your account dry. Every single one of them looks like a winner. One method pulls the real one out. Quant desks have run it for years. It's called loop engineering. It's not a smarter prompt. It's a loop: generate a strategy, test it, score why it failed, feed that back, and run it again until one survives data it has never seen. Man Group runs $150 billion. They built an AI that writes and tests hundreds of strategies a week. And second agent whose only job is to hunt the ones that secretly overfit and kill them before a cent goes live. > describe an idea -> backtest 5 years in 12 seconds > read why it died -> feed that back in > run it again until one survives data it never saw AI can write a thousand strategies. Loop engineering is the only thing that tells you which one was ever real. 89% of retail lost money in 2025. Almost none of it from bad ideas. All of it from trading the first guess and never running it through backtest loop. Horizon just put the whole thing in a chat box, free while the beta's open: You're not losing to smarter traders. You're losing to the ones who opened the tab. Anyone can generate a strategy now. Almost no one runs the loop that proves it. That gap is the whole edge. You'll mean to check it later. Later is a "waitlist closed" page.
0:43

ChatGPT can write you a thousand trading strategies from one sentence. 999 will quietly bleed your account dry. Every single one of them looks like a winner. One method pulls the real one out. Quant desks have run it for years. It's called loop engineering. It's not a smarter prompt. It's a loop: generate a strategy, test it, score why it failed, feed that back, and run it again until one survives data it has never seen. Man Group runs $150 billion. They built an AI that writes and tests hundreds of strategies a week. And second agent whose only job is to hunt the ones that secretly overfit and kill them before a cent goes live. > describe an idea -> backtest 5 years in 12 seconds > read why it died -> feed that back in > run it again until one survives data it never saw AI can write a thousand strategies. Loop engineering is the only thing that tells you which one was ever real. 89% of retail lost money in 2025. Almost none of it from bad ideas. All of it from trading the first guess and never running it through backtest loop. Horizon just put the whole thing in a chat box, free while the beta's open: You're not losing to smarter traders. You're losing to the ones who opened the tab. Anyone can generate a strategy now. Almost no one runs the loop that proves it. That gap is the whole edge. You'll mean to check it later. Later is a "waitlist closed" page.

cvxv666

173,703 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

one of the most deranged parts of the Western media class propaganda in 2006, and you will see it again now with the ground invasion, was that Israel was winning, as their defeat was obvious. Galloway: "What a silly person you are, look at the other half of the screen!"
2:25

one of the most deranged parts of the Western media class propaganda in 2006, and you will see it again now with the ground invasion, was that Israel was winning, as their defeat was obvious. Galloway: "What a silly person you are, look at the other half of the screen!"

☀️👀

160,130 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Gabor Maté: The parts of you filled with hatred, addiction, and self-loathing all deserve compassion. They came along to protect you. Most of us treat our darkest inner states like enemies to be defeated. The shame, the compulsions, the voice that says you're not enough. We want to cut them out. Gabor Maté sees it differently. "The parts most filled with hatred, the parts that are addicted, the parts that are even full of self-loathing, they all deserve compassion. They all deserve to be held and understood. And they all came along for a reason." That reason, he explains, is survival. When a child isn't getting their needs met or worse, is being hurt, they face an impossible situation. They can make one of only two unconscious assumptions about their world. The first: this is a terrible world, I'm all alone, everybody is against me. The second: there is something wrong with me, and if I work hard enough, maybe I can fix it. Which one can a child actually live with? "To assume that the world is that dangerous is just unbearable for the child. It's also turning the anger towards the adults against yourself which is a lot safer. It's not very safe to be angry with your parents all the time when you're 2 years old." So the child chooses self-blame. It's the only assumption that gives them any sense of agency. If it's my fault, then maybe I can do something about it. That self-loathing voice was a coping mechanism. A piece of the psyche that stepped forward to make life bearable. The work, then, isn't to silence or destroy these parts. It's to finally see what they were trying to do and to offer them the understanding they never received.
0:54

Gabor Maté: The parts of you filled with hatred, addiction, and self-loathing all deserve compassion. They came along to protect you. Most of us treat our darkest inner states like enemies to be defeated. The shame, the compulsions, the voice that says you're not enough. We want to cut them out. Gabor Maté sees it differently. "The parts most filled with hatred, the parts that are addicted, the parts that are even full of self-loathing, they all deserve compassion. They all deserve to be held and understood. And they all came along for a reason." That reason, he explains, is survival. When a child isn't getting their needs met or worse, is being hurt, they face an impossible situation. They can make one of only two unconscious assumptions about their world. The first: this is a terrible world, I'm all alone, everybody is against me. The second: there is something wrong with me, and if I work hard enough, maybe I can fix it. Which one can a child actually live with? "To assume that the world is that dangerous is just unbearable for the child. It's also turning the anger towards the adults against yourself which is a lot safer. It's not very safe to be angry with your parents all the time when you're 2 years old." So the child chooses self-blame. It's the only assumption that gives them any sense of agency. If it's my fault, then maybe I can do something about it. That self-loathing voice was a coping mechanism. A piece of the psyche that stepped forward to make life bearable. The work, then, isn't to silence or destroy these parts. It's to finally see what they were trying to do and to offer them the understanding they never received.

Kevin Tanaka

27,388 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

There was a parent who lost a child to the needle. Not lost to death, which at least lets you grieve and one day stop. Lost to the street. To the years of disappearing, the phone that stops being answered, the front door left unlocked every single night for a decade on the chance the child might finally come through it. And the parent never stopped. Did not move on. Did not decide the child was too far gone. Drove to the worst parts of town to scan the faces under the overpass. Searched for years, going gray with it, burying the hope a hundred times and digging it back up every morning, because a parent does not get to stop loving a child just because the child is lost. And then came the day it finally happened. The child, hollowed out, certain they were beyond all loving, looked up, and there was the parent's face. And neither of them could speak. They just held on, and they wept, the kind of weeping that has years of grief and years of longing pouring out of it at once, the child sobbing the only word they could find, sorry, sorry, and the parent saying the only word that mattered, which was not "where have you been" and not "do you know what you did to me," but only, over and over into their hair, you're home, you're home, you're home. Now understand. That is not just a real story about a parent and a child. That is God, and that is humanity. No one is forgotten by the Father. He did not fold His arms and wait at home for you to crawl back and prove you were worth it. The moment you were lost, He came after you. And the cost He paid to reach the very bottom of your pit was not patience, and it was not effort. It was His Son, sent down below all of it, so there would be no depth where His face was not already waiting for you to find it. So hear this, wherever it finds you. You were never forgotten, not for one second, not in the worst of it. The door has been unlocked every night since the day you left. He is still driving the worst parts of town. He is still scanning the faces under the overpass. He is still weeping over the ones who are certain they have fallen too far to ever come back. And the moment you turn around, you will not hear "where have you been." You will only hear, said over and over into your hair, the one thing that has been true since before the foundation of the world: you're home, you're home, you're home. Stop running. Come home.
0:39

There was a parent who lost a child to the needle. Not lost to death, which at least lets you grieve and one day stop. Lost to the street. To the years of disappearing, the phone that stops being answered, the front door left unlocked every single night for a decade on the chance the child might finally come through it. And the parent never stopped. Did not move on. Did not decide the child was too far gone. Drove to the worst parts of town to scan the faces under the overpass. Searched for years, going gray with it, burying the hope a hundred times and digging it back up every morning, because a parent does not get to stop loving a child just because the child is lost. And then came the day it finally happened. The child, hollowed out, certain they were beyond all loving, looked up, and there was the parent's face. And neither of them could speak. They just held on, and they wept, the kind of weeping that has years of grief and years of longing pouring out of it at once, the child sobbing the only word they could find, sorry, sorry, and the parent saying the only word that mattered, which was not "where have you been" and not "do you know what you did to me," but only, over and over into their hair, you're home, you're home, you're home. Now understand. That is not just a real story about a parent and a child. That is God, and that is humanity. No one is forgotten by the Father. He did not fold His arms and wait at home for you to crawl back and prove you were worth it. The moment you were lost, He came after you. And the cost He paid to reach the very bottom of your pit was not patience, and it was not effort. It was His Son, sent down below all of it, so there would be no depth where His face was not already waiting for you to find it. So hear this, wherever it finds you. You were never forgotten, not for one second, not in the worst of it. The door has been unlocked every night since the day you left. He is still driving the worst parts of town. He is still scanning the faces under the overpass. He is still weeping over the ones who are certain they have fallen too far to ever come back. And the moment you turn around, you will not hear "where have you been." You will only hear, said over and over into your hair, the one thing that has been true since before the foundation of the world: you're home, you're home, you're home. Stop running. Come home.

Kirk Rollins

21,168 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

A WRITER WENT ON STAGE AND CALLED IT YEARS EARLY: THE MACHINE ON YOUR DESK WOULD SLOWLY STOP BEING YOURS AND ALMOST NO ONE WOULD NOTICE THE MOMENT IT FLIPPED 54 minutes from Cory Doctorow, arguing the copyright fights were just the warm-up -- that the real battle is whether general-purpose machines, the kind that run whatever you tell them, are even allowed to keep existing. -> The moment it lands, you see the move. Nobody takes your computer away. They sell you one that looks like yours but answers to them -- locked down, logging, checking with a server you'll never see before it obeys you. For years that was DRM and locked phones. Now it's intelligence itself. Rent your AI from the cloud and the most powerful tool on your desk was never yours: it reads your prompts, sets your limits, keeps your data, and can cut you off tomorrow. You don't own the computation. You're licensed to borrow it. Using the smartest model was never the whole game -> owning the machine that runs it is. And the post below is what winning that war looks like now: one box, private AI running on it, every byte of client data kept off the cloud, and the line item that drains everyone else's account quietly turned into income. A rented computer obeys whoever signs the check. The one you own obeys you. In the AI era, that's the entire difference. The full breakdown below. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓
54:04

A WRITER WENT ON STAGE AND CALLED IT YEARS EARLY: THE MACHINE ON YOUR DESK WOULD SLOWLY STOP BEING YOURS AND ALMOST NO ONE WOULD NOTICE THE MOMENT IT FLIPPED 54 minutes from Cory Doctorow, arguing the copyright fights were just the warm-up -- that the real battle is whether general-purpose machines, the kind that run whatever you tell them, are even allowed to keep existing. -> The moment it lands, you see the move. Nobody takes your computer away. They sell you one that looks like yours but answers to them -- locked down, logging, checking with a server you'll never see before it obeys you. For years that was DRM and locked phones. Now it's intelligence itself. Rent your AI from the cloud and the most powerful tool on your desk was never yours: it reads your prompts, sets your limits, keeps your data, and can cut you off tomorrow. You don't own the computation. You're licensed to borrow it. Using the smartest model was never the whole game -> owning the machine that runs it is. And the post below is what winning that war looks like now: one box, private AI running on it, every byte of client data kept off the cloud, and the line item that drains everyone else's account quietly turned into income. A rented computer obeys whoever signs the check. The one you own obeys you. In the AI era, that's the entire difference. The full breakdown below. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

240,684 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

IN 1986 MIT FILMED A LECTURE THAT OPENS BY TELLING YOU COMPUTER SCIENCE IS NOT A SCIENCE AND HAS ALMOST NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPUTERS 72 minutes from Hal Abelson and Gerald Sussman, the lecture an entire generation of engineers calls the one that rewired how they think. -> The line that lands: computer science is about computers the way astronomy is about telescopes. The tool was never the point. The real subject was always one thing -- controlling complexity. Everything else is detail. Forty years later it reads like a prophecy. AI writes the syntax now. What's left is exactly what they taught: taming complexity nobody can hold in their head. The language was never the skill -> the thinking was. This is where you learn it. Most people chase the newest framework. The ones who watched this think on a level frameworks can't touch. Bookmark & Watch today it, this one's a legend ↓
1:12:24

IN 1986 MIT FILMED A LECTURE THAT OPENS BY TELLING YOU COMPUTER SCIENCE IS NOT A SCIENCE AND HAS ALMOST NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPUTERS 72 minutes from Hal Abelson and Gerald Sussman, the lecture an entire generation of engineers calls the one that rewired how they think. -> The line that lands: computer science is about computers the way astronomy is about telescopes. The tool was never the point. The real subject was always one thing -- controlling complexity. Everything else is detail. Forty years later it reads like a prophecy. AI writes the syntax now. What's left is exactly what they taught: taming complexity nobody can hold in their head. The language was never the skill -> the thinking was. This is where you learn it. Most people chase the newest framework. The ones who watched this think on a level frameworks can't touch. Bookmark & Watch today it, this one's a legend ↓

slash1s

361,389 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Marc Andreessen just said what no politician will ever admit. The ideology that claims to protect the working class is what ensures they never leave it. Rogan: “We just assume that everybody who makes an incredible amount of money stole it.” That assumption isn’t accidental. It’s load-bearing. Remove it and the entire redistribution framework collapses. Because if wealth is created and not taken, the builder isn’t your enemy. And if the builder isn’t your enemy, you don’t need the politician who promised to fight them on your behalf. Andreessen: “Jeff Bezos is the obvious counterexample. Every time you do the one-click and the thing gets delivered to you two hours later at the cheapest possible price, saving you and your family a lot of time and money.” Bezos didn’t take from the economy. He expanded it. Every transaction voluntary. Every customer better off. Every dollar of his net worth is proof someone chose his service because it made their life easier. The economy isn’t a vault with a fixed amount inside. It’s a system that grows every time someone builds something people want. The fixed pie is a lie. And it has to be. Because the moment you accept the pie grows, you have to ask why you aren’t growing it yourself. That’s the question the ideology exists to prevent. Andreessen: “You can compare and contrast to other countries that have more draconian policies. And the result is they’re much poorer.” Every country that punished creation got less of it. No exceptions. Rogan: “That’s the weird thing about the whole socialism thing, is that it’s never worked ever, and they just go, ‘Well, it hasn’t been done right.’” A century of data across dozens of countries. Same experiment. Same collapse. The ideology doesn’t update because updating would end it. The people pushing redistribution aren’t solving poverty. They’re managing it. Solved poverty doesn’t need a program. Doesn’t need a department. Doesn’t need a politician who campaigns on it every cycle. Poverty is the product that funds the bureaucracy built to eliminate it. When a founder reinvests instead of extracting, that’s not avoidance. That’s deployment. Every dollar reinvested becomes a job. A contract. A supplier. A chain of downstream opportunity that vanishes the moment someone confiscates it at the source to fund a program that will never solve what it was designed to manage. The freest economies produce the most prosperity. The most regulated produce the most dependency. That’s not a coincidence. Dependency is the business model. Free people who build don’t need the system. The system needs people who don’t build. The greatest theft in the history of economics was never committed by a billionaire. It was committed by every ideology that looked a capable person in the eye and convinced them they were helpless. The most dangerous thing you can do inside a redistribution framework isn’t to resist it. It’s to succeed without it. Because one person who builds their way out of nothing, without permission, without a program, without the system, is living proof that everything the ideology told you was a lie. And that proof is the one thing the framework cannot survive.
1:52

Marc Andreessen just said what no politician will ever admit. The ideology that claims to protect the working class is what ensures they never leave it. Rogan: “We just assume that everybody who makes an incredible amount of money stole it.” That assumption isn’t accidental. It’s load-bearing. Remove it and the entire redistribution framework collapses. Because if wealth is created and not taken, the builder isn’t your enemy. And if the builder isn’t your enemy, you don’t need the politician who promised to fight them on your behalf. Andreessen: “Jeff Bezos is the obvious counterexample. Every time you do the one-click and the thing gets delivered to you two hours later at the cheapest possible price, saving you and your family a lot of time and money.” Bezos didn’t take from the economy. He expanded it. Every transaction voluntary. Every customer better off. Every dollar of his net worth is proof someone chose his service because it made their life easier. The economy isn’t a vault with a fixed amount inside. It’s a system that grows every time someone builds something people want. The fixed pie is a lie. And it has to be. Because the moment you accept the pie grows, you have to ask why you aren’t growing it yourself. That’s the question the ideology exists to prevent. Andreessen: “You can compare and contrast to other countries that have more draconian policies. And the result is they’re much poorer.” Every country that punished creation got less of it. No exceptions. Rogan: “That’s the weird thing about the whole socialism thing, is that it’s never worked ever, and they just go, ‘Well, it hasn’t been done right.’” A century of data across dozens of countries. Same experiment. Same collapse. The ideology doesn’t update because updating would end it. The people pushing redistribution aren’t solving poverty. They’re managing it. Solved poverty doesn’t need a program. Doesn’t need a department. Doesn’t need a politician who campaigns on it every cycle. Poverty is the product that funds the bureaucracy built to eliminate it. When a founder reinvests instead of extracting, that’s not avoidance. That’s deployment. Every dollar reinvested becomes a job. A contract. A supplier. A chain of downstream opportunity that vanishes the moment someone confiscates it at the source to fund a program that will never solve what it was designed to manage. The freest economies produce the most prosperity. The most regulated produce the most dependency. That’s not a coincidence. Dependency is the business model. Free people who build don’t need the system. The system needs people who don’t build. The greatest theft in the history of economics was never committed by a billionaire. It was committed by every ideology that looked a capable person in the eye and convinced them they were helpless. The most dangerous thing you can do inside a redistribution framework isn’t to resist it. It’s to succeed without it. Because one person who builds their way out of nothing, without permission, without a program, without the system, is living proof that everything the ideology told you was a lie. And that proof is the one thing the framework cannot survive.

Dustin

24,546 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

Notch Clips. every other ad tool ignores the footage sitting in your dropbox and generates new clips from a prompt. notch opens your library instead. it watches every clip you have ever shot and understands what is inside each one. the mood. who is in frame. what they are doing. the quality. so when you ask it to build an ad, it does not start from scratch. it reaches into your past shoots, finds the clip that fits, and slots it into the exact moment that needs it. here is what that looks like. you had thirteen versions of one reaction shot. notch picked the one that worked and left the other twelve. not by filename. not by guessing from a reference image. it watched all thirteen and could tell the difference. that is the whole idea. the right clip was already in your library. every other tool was about to make a worse one. footage you already shot, turned into every ad you still need. drop your site and a few clips you have. notch builds the first ad from them.
0:40

Notch Clips. every other ad tool ignores the footage sitting in your dropbox and generates new clips from a prompt. notch opens your library instead. it watches every clip you have ever shot and understands what is inside each one. the mood. who is in frame. what they are doing. the quality. so when you ask it to build an ad, it does not start from scratch. it reaches into your past shoots, finds the clip that fits, and slots it into the exact moment that needs it. here is what that looks like. you had thirteen versions of one reaction shot. notch picked the one that worked and left the other twelve. not by filename. not by guessing from a reference image. it watched all thirteen and could tell the difference. that is the whole idea. the right clip was already in your library. every other tool was about to make a worse one. footage you already shot, turned into every ad you still need. drop your site and a few clips you have. notch builds the first ad from them.

Vinay Jain

406,286 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten