Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Actually, Chinese baijiu is also made using foot-treading, a process known as “踩曲” Since foot-treading is necessary, those selected must be widely acceptable — children? nah, elderly? nah, men? may affect the visual impression, so only young women are most appropriate. The

140,543 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts has reached a new low - even for him! He has described women attempting suicide or self-harm as 'attention seeking' while saying men who do the same are suffering a legitimate medical condition. He made the comments during Senate Estimates. Since ... well forever ... the discussions around suicide and self-harm has centred on men's experience. Women have only been an after thought but that is changing somewhat. Women attempt suicide or self-harm at much higher rates than men but men are more likely to die as a result of their attempts. We do know that 19% of women who suicide do so after experiencing domestic violence while suicide rates among women who are raped or sexually assaulted are also quite staggering. Research is slowly emerging showing how violence itself is a precursor to women ending their own lives or attempting to. And the Federal Government is holding an inquiry into domestic violence related suicide as I write. It's perfectly okay to discuss differing rates of suicides - and their causality - among women and men. But for someone in a position of influence and power to say women are attention seeking when they suicide or self-harm is grotesque. *** ❤️SUPPORT MY WORK❤️ Please support my work and the Memorial to Women and Children Lost to Violence and Australian Femicide Watch. You can donate or grab a RED HEART t-shirt! 100% of money raised funds the Memorial and Australian Femicide Watch. Links in bio or visit

Sherele Moody (Femicide Researcher) 🌈

17,275 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra has completely targeted its competitors at the iPhone, and no longer competes with Chinese brand phones. This is because young people in South Korea are almost completely occupied by Apple, and Samsung’s strategy is to pull these young people back, so it strives to make Galaxy look like the Apple iPhone. There are several reasons for not competing with Chinese brands: 1. On the surface, although the Chinese Ultra models have powerful cameras and are suitable for those who pursue the ultimate in images, they are only limited to these people. Overall, the sales of Ultra models are not high, and even the sum of all brands of Ultra models cannot be compared with the sales of S24Ultra. 2. Moreover, these models with powerful cameras are relatively thick and heavy, with serious camera bulges, and the design is not perfect. It cannot be perfect. This design may not be suitable for everyone. Samsung will not easily take the risk to adopt this design in the global market. 3. The infinitely enhanced camera configuration will greatly increase the cost, which is difficult for Samsung to accept, and the production of this frequently updated camera may not be able to support Samsung's sales demand of tens of millions. In short, the Chinese brand Ultra model is more like a special non-popular model suitable for geeks. The Galaxy S25 series is defined as a popular model, and it must consider everyone's feelings and sufficient supply. This is why Samsung will not design the S25 Ultra as a Chinese brand Ultra. It remains consistent with the iPhone 16 Pro Max, but subtly. It is always slightly better than it For example, it is a little thinner (8.2mm vs 8.25mm), a little lighter (219g vs 227g), a little narrower bezel, a little stronger performance, a little more camera (retain 3x), a little more ultra-wide-angle pixels (50MP vs 48MP), a little bigger battery, and a little faster charging. Even the most incredible improvement: One UI 7.1 is a little smoother than iOS18 software. This is happening.

Ice Universe

347,352 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Most recent diffusion language model research (that I’ve seen) seems to be using masking as the noising process. It looks like, however, most closed-source models (Google Gemini Diffusion and possibly Inception Labs’ Mercury) use a different noising process, where instead of masking tokens, they replace them with different tokens (either with a random token or a semantically similar token). I wondered how they were getting such high throughput with the latter noising process, since I believed that optimizing inference with KVCache approximation would be more difficult (for various reasons). I visualized this noising process with tiny-diffusion and compared it to normal unmasking, and was very surprised to see how fast the generation “settles” into a reasonable output, and then only slightly refines afterwards, requiring much fewer steps in total. Unmasking (where tokens are never remasked, the typical implementation) is inherently limited in generation speed by the fact that an increase in tokens decoded per step leads to more errors due to the mismatch between individual and marginal token probability distributions we sample from. The token replacement noising process seems to have a much different set of characteristics. Because we sample each token per step, every token makes “progress” towards the final output each iteration (in addition to *potentially* giving other tokens more information in future steps). Generally, masking has outperformed other noising processes, which is probably why most research focused on it (using smaller models). But the paper referred to in the retweet shows that random replacement as a noising process may scale better as model size increases. Big labs might have noticed these results much earlier (due to having drastically more training resources and being able to test larger models), which may explain the discrepancy in the choice of noising process. I’m gonna test this with larger models, since tiny-diffusion only has 10M parameters.

nathan (in sf)

40,440 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

What struck me about this video of “fake virginity blood” being sold in Northern Nigeria is not the product itself, but the moral education that makes such a product necessary. Deception does not appear out of nowhere. It is learned. And as bell hooks reminds us, patriarchy is one of the most effective schools of deception we have. When a society places impossible and one-sided moral demands on women, while demanding almost nothing from men, it does not produce virtue. It produces performance. Virginity here is not really about sex. It is about proof. About a woman’s body being turned into evidence. The hymen becomes a certificate of value. Blood becomes currency. Honour becomes something that must be staged convincingly enough to satisfy male judgment. Growing up in Northern Nigeria, many of us heard the stories in whispers. Rumours about the lengths people went to preserve the myth of virginity. Women avoiding vaginal penetration entirely. Anal sex used as a workaround, so that on the wedding night the illusion could be completed. Blood shown. Husband reassured. Honour “intact.” Everyone colluding in a lie that everyone knows is a lie. This is not moral decay. It is moral absolutism doing what it always does. It teaches people how to deceive in order to survive. bell hooks writes that patriarchy teaches men and women to lie in different ways. Men learn to lie about vulnerability. They are trained to suppress fear, tenderness, emotional need, because honesty would cost them power or status. Women, on the other hand, learn to lie to stay safe. They learn that telling the truth about their bodies, desires, or histories can bring punishment, abandonment, or violence. So women learn concealment. Performance. Strategic silence. Seen this way, fake virginity blood is not shocking. It is logical. It is a market solution to a moral contradiction. If a woman’s worth is reduced to an anatomical fiction, she will find a way to manufacture that fiction. And we must ask the obvious question: where is the demand for virginity from men? Where is the obsession with their bodies as proof of moral worth? Where are the rituals, the products, the inspections? Men are assumed whole by default. Women must prove themselves worthy. The tragedy is not that women deceive. The tragedy is that honesty is made dangerous for them. A society that truly cared about morality would start with symmetry. It would care less about blood on bedsheets and more about kindness, responsibility, and mutual respect. Until then, deception will continue to flourish. Not because women are immoral, but because patriarchy demands purity while rewarding power. And whenever purity is demanded without justice, lies will follow.
0:13

Sensitive content

What struck me about this video of “fake virginity blood” being sold in Northern Nigeria is not the product itself, but the moral education that makes such a product necessary. Deception does not appear out of nowhere. It is learned. And as bell hooks reminds us, patriarchy is one of the most effective schools of deception we have. When a society places impossible and one-sided moral demands on women, while demanding almost nothing from men, it does not produce virtue. It produces performance. Virginity here is not really about sex. It is about proof. About a woman’s body being turned into evidence. The hymen becomes a certificate of value. Blood becomes currency. Honour becomes something that must be staged convincingly enough to satisfy male judgment. Growing up in Northern Nigeria, many of us heard the stories in whispers. Rumours about the lengths people went to preserve the myth of virginity. Women avoiding vaginal penetration entirely. Anal sex used as a workaround, so that on the wedding night the illusion could be completed. Blood shown. Husband reassured. Honour “intact.” Everyone colluding in a lie that everyone knows is a lie. This is not moral decay. It is moral absolutism doing what it always does. It teaches people how to deceive in order to survive. bell hooks writes that patriarchy teaches men and women to lie in different ways. Men learn to lie about vulnerability. They are trained to suppress fear, tenderness, emotional need, because honesty would cost them power or status. Women, on the other hand, learn to lie to stay safe. They learn that telling the truth about their bodies, desires, or histories can bring punishment, abandonment, or violence. So women learn concealment. Performance. Strategic silence. Seen this way, fake virginity blood is not shocking. It is logical. It is a market solution to a moral contradiction. If a woman’s worth is reduced to an anatomical fiction, she will find a way to manufacture that fiction. And we must ask the obvious question: where is the demand for virginity from men? Where is the obsession with their bodies as proof of moral worth? Where are the rituals, the products, the inspections? Men are assumed whole by default. Women must prove themselves worthy. The tragedy is not that women deceive. The tragedy is that honesty is made dangerous for them. A society that truly cared about morality would start with symmetry. It would care less about blood on bedsheets and more about kindness, responsibility, and mutual respect. Until then, deception will continue to flourish. Not because women are immoral, but because patriarchy demands purity while rewarding power. And whenever purity is demanded without justice, lies will follow.

Elnathan John

318,506 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Women are revising their social media boyfriend requirements for 2026. OUT: 🆇 “Must be over 6 feet.” 🆇 “Must make over 6 figures.” 🆇 “Must own his own home.” IN: ✅ “Must like me.” ✅ “Must not be angry all the time.” ✅ “Must not cheat 24/7.” This is (in part) due to the male retreat from the dating space. There are more long-term single men than at any time in at least a century. Single men are more disinterested in dating and women than any time in at least a century. Women, as a result, are getting approached less, going on fewer dates, and running into far fewer men who actually want relationships (and a lot more guys ‘just playing the field’). You’d probably have to go back to the 1850s, with 300,000 men pushing west to seek their riches in California, living in frontier towns with 10-to-1 male-to-female ratios, to find a time with as many single men unfocused on women. (The shift in women’s ‘going rate’ is also due to the real economy declining… just like how in the roaring 1920s, when the economy was great and everything kept going up, women were flappers who delayed marriage and called wedding rings ‘handcuffs’ and ‘manacles’, but after the stock market crashed in 1929, and the Great Depression got underway, the flappers disappeared and the women of the 1930s suddenly became much more interested in getting hitched.) Anyway: If you are one of the dudes who has foresworn women and dating: thanks for your service, brother 🫡 If you are one of the dudes who is out there getting after it, though: you can look forward to a continuation in 2026 of women softening their stances, making themselves MORE available, asking you to jump through fewer hoops than ever, and acting clingier and needier if they think they have a chance with you. Just make sure you are out IN FIELD chatting up women, flirting with women, getting them onto dates, and inviting them home. You just need to be IN the game. A lot of guys aren’t in the game anymore (or they are locked up on screens, trying to do stuff online, trying to get girls by liking their pics, ‘sliding into their DMs’, where the odds are seriously stacked against ordinary men… ESPECIALLY compared to IRL). 2026 is bringing an increasingly WIDE open field with girls. FOR the guys who’ll be out there playing in it, that is!

Girls Chase 🏃‍♀️💨

189,518 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

A Bitter Reality We Must Confront This is a painful reality that many of us—especially Hausa Muslims—must be willing to discuss honestly. As Sheikh Lawan Abubakar Triumph (may Allah preserve and protect him) rightly pointed out, the culture of begging that has become associated with the Almajiri system is not an Islamic teaching. It is a social problem that has, unfortunately, become deeply entrenched in parts of Northern Nigeria. The Sheikh observed that even in countries poorer than Nigeria, such as Sudan, Benin Republic, and Ghana, it is not uncommon to find some of our own people begging on the streets. Able-bodied men, women, and even children have come to treat begging as a means of livelihood. This is contrary to the teachings of Islam, which honour work, dignity, and self-reliance. It is also important to reject the false claim that today’s begging culture is synonymous with the noble Islamic concept of Al-Muhajir (the emigrant for the sake of Allah). They are not the same. Using religion to justify or institutionalize street begging is both historically and religiously inaccurate. A painful sight in many of our cities is seeing elderly women, before sunrise, taking young children to street corners—not to earn an honest living, but to beg. In contrast, many other elderly women, majority of other ethnicities, leave their homes at the same hour to sell bread, fry akara, hawk vegetables, or engage in other lawful work. They are teaching their grandchildren that dignity comes through effort, not dependence on handouts. This is not about ethnicity. Every community has its strengths and its weaknesses. But where begging becomes normalized & even defended in the name of culture or religion, society must pause and ask hard questions. Islam encourages productive work, condemns habitual begging without genuine necessity, and commands Muslims to preserve their honour. We should therefore invest in genuine Qur’anic education, vocational skills, entrepreneurship, and social support for the truly needy—not perpetuate a system that traps generations in dependency. If we truly love our people, we must have the courage to acknowledge this problem and work together to solve it. Reforming the Almajiri system, abolishing street begging, protecting children, empowering families, and restoring the dignity of labour are responsibilities we all share. May Allah guide us to what is right, grant dignity to our people through lawful means, and protect our children from every path that leads to dependence and humiliation. Āmīn.

𝐇𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐦𝐚, 𝐏𝐡.𝐃.

12,569 Aufrufe • vor 12 Tagen

The discourse around the Eze penalty last night is fascinating. If nothing else it provides Arteta with an excuse as to how his team has been hard done by and robbed. He loves excuses. It’s a fascinating situation because I actually think the right outcome was reached albeit through the wrong process. Once given on the field under the current rules it shouldn't have been overturned. For that Arsenal can feel aggrieved. Don't forget Arsenal were the beneficiaries of an incredibly soft penalty in Leverkusen. It wasn’t overturned. I find the attached video interesting because it clearly shows how minimal the contact is. The defender doesn’t pin Ezes foot to the ground. Doesn’t smash into it. It brushes down the side of it. It’s where the still pictures of it were wildly misleading. Are we really saying that contact such as that is worthy of a penalty? What’s clear in the video is that Eze has absolutely made the most of the slight contact. I love the straight left leg. A very natural position. It’s a brilliant dive and normally it would have been rewarded. By saying that is a stone wall penalty all we are doing is encouraging such theatrics and cheating. Whenever you hear the words “that was clever” by a commentator they are intimating the player has cheated/made the most of it. We complain about refs all the time but what chance do they have when players are doing stuff like this. Until players are punished properly there is no disincentive for players to keep doing this stuff. I also find it fascinating when you have a foot brushed like this. When you compare it to all the holding/pushing/grappling at other times. Sometimes a contact sport and others not. Is this really what football has become?

Luke Paton

104,531 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

China Successfully Tests New Hypersonic Missile with 8,000 km Range The Chinese have successfully tested a variant of a hypersonic missile, which is actually a glide vehicle: the DF-27A. The average speed was Mach 8.6, and it covered 2,100 km in 12 minutes. This is just one more in a series of several Chinese anti-ship missiles. While much of the West treats military service as an economic activity, the Chinese are preparing for a real war. There is no room there for playing around with a new class of battleships or listening to the lobby for expensive energy. China has a national industrial and military project that Western nations currently can only dream of achieving. Of course, it's part of the Western style to live life differently. But there is a serious missile gap, with China far ahead of the West. An 8,000 km range means hitting a ship in Hawaii without leaving mainland China. And there are other missile models with ranges of 3,000–4,000 km. Intercepting these hypersonic missiles once launched is extremely difficult, but what can be done is to prevent them from having precise guidance capability. Just as land doctrines are being redesigned, so is naval warfare, by hypersonic missiles and aerial and underwater drones. Projects are now underway for drones capable of bypassing protective nets. Today, the Chinese have more missiles in stock than the Soviets had at their peak. And I won't even mention drones, as the numbers are almost unimaginable. Only a major reform could improve the West’s position. The West is currently developing some missile systems that should be available around 2030, but a doctrinal reform is also necessary. Countries cannot fight in 2025 the same way wars were fought decades ago; a complete reform is required. This reminds me of Ukrainian soldiers who, after being trained in the West and then facing the reality of the battlefield, said that the training was completely inadequate for the kind of war they were actually fighting. It is precisely to avoid this kind of mismatch that reforms need to be carried out. *Illustrative video- may contain inaccuracies.*

Patricia Marins

23,068 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten