Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Ben Davidson: The Two Main Differences Between His Pole Shift Scenario & The Ethical Skeptic's Excerpted from Observers Live #16 - Mountain Before You (streamed January 6, 2026) Upcoming conference featuring Ben Davidson SpaceWeatherNews and The Ethical Skeptic Ethical Skeptic ☀ Related Information: GROK, please compare The Ethical Skeptic’s...

sunfellow's profile picture

David Sunfellow

4,232 subscribers

1,479,989 views • 9 months ago •via X (Twitter)

EducationNews & PoliticsScience & Technology
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Ben Davidson: When Civilization Is Likely To End "Approximately in the 2040s, we should expect the final acceleration to 100x of the original pole motion speed and it's only a matter of months until the end of our civilization." -- Ben Davidson, SpaceWeatherNews Excerpted from: Crust is Tearing, Solar Alert This Week | S0 News June.20.2026 Learn more: The Earth Disaster Cycle (Scientific Discussion) The Disaster Cycle Movie Website The Sun, The Earth and The Disaster Cycle (book) By Ben Davidson Suspicious Observers See also: Grok, When, Exactly, Will The Predicted Crustal Displacement Take Place? So When, Exactly, Is The Pole Shift Going To Happen? ECDO - Ethical Skeptic ☀ - 6 Earth System Shifts Happening Now Outstanding Summary: Roger Cunningham & Ben Davidson 2026 Pole Shift Conference Presentations The Coming Pole Shift Pole Shift Articles On X Ancient Civilizations & Earth Disaster Cycles
0:46

Ben Davidson: When Civilization Is Likely To End "Approximately in the 2040s, we should expect the final acceleration to 100x of the original pole motion speed and it's only a matter of months until the end of our civilization." -- Ben Davidson, SpaceWeatherNews Excerpted from: Crust is Tearing, Solar Alert This Week | S0 News June.20.2026 Learn more: The Earth Disaster Cycle (Scientific Discussion) The Disaster Cycle Movie Website The Sun, The Earth and The Disaster Cycle (book) By Ben Davidson Suspicious Observers See also: Grok, When, Exactly, Will The Predicted Crustal Displacement Take Place? So When, Exactly, Is The Pole Shift Going To Happen? ECDO - Ethical Skeptic ☀ - 6 Earth System Shifts Happening Now Outstanding Summary: Roger Cunningham & Ben Davidson 2026 Pole Shift Conference Presentations The Coming Pole Shift Pole Shift Articles On X Ancient Civilizations & Earth Disaster Cycles

David Sunfellow

18,109 views • 3 months ago

Methuselah @EcdoPrep has created an interactive globe that illustrates ECDO evidence from around the world. That interactive globe is located here: His original YouTube introductory video is located here: His tweet introducing the new interactive globe is located here: To learn more about ECDO, go here: Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling - Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory (Ethical Skeptic ☀) Inversion — ECDO Theory (book) Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling - Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory Explained By AI Sam Dodson Explains The Master Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling – Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory (Green Eggs-n-Sam) Ben Davidson SpaceWeatherNews Provides Compelling Evidence Of Pole Shift Disaster Cycles Craig Stone's Eureka! Discovery: Groundtruth (The Earth Speaks) There Is Clear, Repeating Evidence In Both Fossils And Salt Deposits That Supports ECDO Theory The 3,000–5,000 BCE Y-DNA Culling Event Could Only Have Been Produced By A Global Cataclysm Unshattered Sands: Evidence Of A ~12,900-Year Cataclysmic Flood And Electrical Activity Driven By Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling Simple Summary of “Unshattered Sands” by Craig Stone (Craig Stone) Junho’s (Junho) Evidence Research Papers On The Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory So When, Exactly, Is The Pole Shift Going To Happen? Metronomes & Excursions: Current Evidence Suggests A Full Excursion Is Unlikely Stormy Patches Coming In The 2030s And 2040s... ECDO Moves From A Compelling But Speculative Framework Toward One With Robust, Modern Geodetic Support GEOSYNChronous Earth Rotation Monitoring System DRIFT Dashboard (Polar Motion Geometry And Context) Daily Pole-Step Bars From The Raw Earth Orientation Series Global Disaster Stories, Maps & Resources Wrong Conclusion, But Very Informative Video: The Dzhanibekov Effect Or Tennis Racket Theorem ECDOview - Ancient Site Alignment Verification Tool The Coming Pole Shift Ancient Civilizations & Earth Disaster Cycles Pole Shift Related Articles On X Scientists Who Believe The Earth Has Experienced Repeated, Sudden, Catastrophic Changes How To Still Storms & Walk On Water (Practical Advice For Dealing With Cataclysmic Scenarios)
6:07

Methuselah @EcdoPrep has created an interactive globe that illustrates ECDO evidence from around the world. That interactive globe is located here: His original YouTube introductory video is located here: His tweet introducing the new interactive globe is located here: To learn more about ECDO, go here: Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling - Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory (Ethical Skeptic ☀) Inversion — ECDO Theory (book) Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling - Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory Explained By AI Sam Dodson Explains The Master Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling – Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory (Green Eggs-n-Sam) Ben Davidson SpaceWeatherNews Provides Compelling Evidence Of Pole Shift Disaster Cycles Craig Stone's Eureka! Discovery: Groundtruth (The Earth Speaks) There Is Clear, Repeating Evidence In Both Fossils And Salt Deposits That Supports ECDO Theory The 3,000–5,000 BCE Y-DNA Culling Event Could Only Have Been Produced By A Global Cataclysm Unshattered Sands: Evidence Of A ~12,900-Year Cataclysmic Flood And Electrical Activity Driven By Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling Simple Summary of “Unshattered Sands” by Craig Stone (Craig Stone) Junho’s (Junho) Evidence Research Papers On The Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling Dzhanibekov Oscillation (ECDO) Theory So When, Exactly, Is The Pole Shift Going To Happen? Metronomes & Excursions: Current Evidence Suggests A Full Excursion Is Unlikely Stormy Patches Coming In The 2030s And 2040s... ECDO Moves From A Compelling But Speculative Framework Toward One With Robust, Modern Geodetic Support GEOSYNChronous Earth Rotation Monitoring System DRIFT Dashboard (Polar Motion Geometry And Context) Daily Pole-Step Bars From The Raw Earth Orientation Series Global Disaster Stories, Maps & Resources Wrong Conclusion, But Very Informative Video: The Dzhanibekov Effect Or Tennis Racket Theorem ECDOview - Ancient Site Alignment Verification Tool The Coming Pole Shift Ancient Civilizations & Earth Disaster Cycles Pole Shift Related Articles On X Scientists Who Believe The Earth Has Experienced Repeated, Sudden, Catastrophic Changes How To Still Storms & Walk On Water (Practical Advice For Dealing With Cataclysmic Scenarios)

David Sunfellow

14,707 views • 5 months ago

ECDO vs. EDC: the geometry seems to like a coupled crust and mantle. The biggest difference between the two theories is what moves during the proposed reorientation. ECDO, as proposed by Ethical Skeptic ☀, has the moving shell extending from the surface down to the core–mantle boundary. EDC, as proposed by SpaceWeatherNews, uses a much shallower shell, roughly 100 km deep, above the low-velocity zone. So, I tested that difference directly. First up: LIPs and LLSVPs. Across every tomography model in the analysis, the alignment held up better when the crust and mantle stayed together. Applying the exact 85º crust-only correction made the fit worse. Then, I checked five major hotspot tracks. Same story. The hotspot trails were best preserved without a large independent crustal rotation, and even letting the Euler pole wander around the globe could not rescue an 85º crust-only shift. At this point, the geometry is being pretty stubborn: the crust wants to stay with the mantle. That is strong evidence against the exact shallow shell geometry tested here. It supports preservation of crust–mantle coupling during any large reorientation. One caveat: a brief out and back excursion could restore the original alignment. That version would need to be tested using records formed during the temporary displaced interval. Apparently, the theory found another level.
0:25

ECDO vs. EDC: the geometry seems to like a coupled crust and mantle. The biggest difference between the two theories is what moves during the proposed reorientation. ECDO, as proposed by Ethical Skeptic ☀, has the moving shell extending from the surface down to the core–mantle boundary. EDC, as proposed by SpaceWeatherNews, uses a much shallower shell, roughly 100 km deep, above the low-velocity zone. So, I tested that difference directly. First up: LIPs and LLSVPs. Across every tomography model in the analysis, the alignment held up better when the crust and mantle stayed together. Applying the exact 85º crust-only correction made the fit worse. Then, I checked five major hotspot tracks. Same story. The hotspot trails were best preserved without a large independent crustal rotation, and even letting the Euler pole wander around the globe could not rescue an 85º crust-only shift. At this point, the geometry is being pretty stubborn: the crust wants to stay with the mantle. That is strong evidence against the exact shallow shell geometry tested here. It supports preservation of crust–mantle coupling during any large reorientation. One caveat: a brief out and back excursion could restore the original alignment. That version would need to be tested using records formed during the temporary displaced interval. Apparently, the theory found another level.

Stephanie Buchanan

17,388 views • 2 months ago

The Earth axis of rotation changes 104 degrees every 6500 years (or so)... and fast. How do we know? - cycling of the geomagnetic field shifts the stable axis of rotation from Polaris over the Arctic to the gyroscopic stable axis over southeastern Africa - hundreds of massive human monuments (e.g., Nazca lines) dating prior to the last axis change are aligned with Polaris as if it were positioned over Africa - evidence of the massive flooding that would have resulted from the change is found in the great deserts of the world, and on the pyramids of Giza - those same pyramids are constructed with dual orientation, such that the could observe thru shafts both positions of Polaris, exactly 104 degrees apart All human beings today are descendants of the several thousand to have survived the last ECDO change, about 7,000 years ago, when most of the world was flooded with cold water. The earliest signs that another shift is imminent are acceleration of the movement of the magnetic North Pole and a rapid warming of the oceans -- both caused by changes in the structure of the iron core inside the Earth. Roger Cunningham Ethical Skeptic ☀ explains ECDO theory in this X-episode of Uncommon Living podcast.
1:19:17

The Earth axis of rotation changes 104 degrees every 6500 years (or so)... and fast. How do we know? - cycling of the geomagnetic field shifts the stable axis of rotation from Polaris over the Arctic to the gyroscopic stable axis over southeastern Africa - hundreds of massive human monuments (e.g., Nazca lines) dating prior to the last axis change are aligned with Polaris as if it were positioned over Africa - evidence of the massive flooding that would have resulted from the change is found in the great deserts of the world, and on the pyramids of Giza - those same pyramids are constructed with dual orientation, such that the could observe thru shafts both positions of Polaris, exactly 104 degrees apart All human beings today are descendants of the several thousand to have survived the last ECDO change, about 7,000 years ago, when most of the world was flooded with cold water. The earliest signs that another shift is imminent are acceleration of the movement of the magnetic North Pole and a rapid warming of the oceans -- both caused by changes in the structure of the iron core inside the Earth. Roger Cunningham Ethical Skeptic ☀ explains ECDO theory in this X-episode of Uncommon Living podcast.

Thomas P Seager, PhD

95,329 views • 1 month ago

MIND-BLOWING🤯 Systems engineer and author Roger Cunningham explains how a cataclysmic event caused global oceanic displacement ~7,000 years ago, inundating the Pyramids of Giza, which are actually "warning indicators" for future civilizations that the cataclysm will happen again In this clip from a UK Column (UK Column) interview with Jerm Warfare, Cunningham (Ethical Skeptic ☀) describes ECDO Theory (Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling – Dzhanibekov Oscillation), which is a hypothesis proposed by Cunningham that explains periodic catastrophic Earth changes through internal geophysical processes. The theory summarized, per Grok: "In simple terms: The Earth's solid iron-nickel core periodically undergoes exothermic (heat-releasing) phase changes in its crystal structure. This heat rises through the mantle into the oceans (contributing to climate shifts and deep-ocean warming), while also weakening the geomagnetic field that normally 'locks' the outer shell (crust + mantle) to the spinning core. "Once the magnetic grip weakens enough, the outer shell can decouple and rapidly reorient relative to the spin axis in a Dzhanibekov-like flip (the tennis-racket theorem effect seen in spinning objects). This causes a true polar wander of roughly 104° along a specific meridian, shifting the geographic poles, sloshing oceans to create global floods, realigning ancient monuments to a former pole position (e.g., in southern Africa), and triggering cataclysms recorded in myths and geology. The system then oscillates back to its current stable state once the core regenerates. "The theory unifies evidence from climate anomalies, ancient site alignments, paleomagnetic data, and flood legends into one cyclic mechanism, with implications for past civilization resets and potential future events." ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- Cunningham: "I wouldn't call Charles Hapgood's notion a theory because it didn't have the elements of hypothesis in it. But it's a cool idea. It's an excellent construct. And that's where you start when you develop hypotheses. You start with a construct. "He said that the outside body of the Earth, like the skin of an orange, rotates independently and presents a new surface to the North Star. His sighting was that caused the inundations. So that was the first thinking, really, that's centered around this type of idea. "What ECDO theory postulates is that this decoupling, instead of happening at the crust, where there really isn't a mechanism to decouple, and that really has been one of the things that's kept the theory squelched, is there's no viable mechanism there, the viable mechanism does exist at the core–mantle boundary. "In fact, it suggests that this is an absolutely stark potential, if you look at the core–mantle boundary, that's what ECDO proposes, that particular situation in the core–mantle boundary causes this outer rotational body to do an inertial interchange True Polar Wander. "A portion of that wander was smooth and gentle, within reason. I'm sure the oceans were a little more energetic, but a portion of it during the capture by an inverted geomagnetic pole, in other words, the magnetic pole's north pole was down in Antarctica when it was captured by that when our outer magnetite structure of the crust was captured by that pole, it was pulled into location very rapidly, and that's what precipitated these oceans to come up out of their banks. "It did exactly what the Gong Gong historians said. They said that the sky rolled from the southeast to the northwest. And that's exactly what the ECDO rotation presupposes. And we developed the rotation based on the geomechanics first. We didn't look at the myths. And then we went out and took that geo- rotation and said, okay, let's compare this rotation to the myths that are out there that are informative, like the Epic of Gilgamesh, like the Gong Gong theory, or the Gong Gong tradition. And in fact, they matched in the geostrata the location of the saline diatomaceous deserts that have aridified across the planet. They all match this ECDO rotation. "And that's what the six or eight modeling groups that are working on ECDO now, they're finding, unequivocally, a good match to the Earth's deserts, to this, this inundation and rotation." Jerm: "So that would have been quite a quick event?" Cunningham: "A portion of it, the capture. Right now, as we understand the differential inertial moments in the Earth, they're not large enough to cause a 12-hour or 18-hour rotation of the Earth in this— into this new position. However, if we introduce an inverted geomagnetic pole, the geomagnetic pole captures the Earth's shell and brings it into alignment with wherever it is. "Once the north magnetic pole makes its journey across Asia, the central body of Asia, and then through the Bay of Bengal and down into Antarctica below Africa, it reinvigorates, it re-strengthens its, its permeability or its polarity and captures the Earth's body. Except now the Earth instead of pointing toward our north that we recognize today, it has to point the other direction. "And if it's already undergone this decoupling, this Dzhanibekov rotation is now somewhere wandering slowly in the North Pole would be in Southern Africa. Once the geomagnetic pole captures that Earth body, it'll snap it into its final position. And ECDO postulates that that snap, that final phase, is what indeed precipitated this high-energy displacement of the oceans." Jerm: "And thus the pyramids ended up underwater." Cunningham: "Correct. When we're in state two, most of the modelers right now they're modeling the viscosity of the mantle, they're modeling the ablate redistribution of the oceans, they're modeling the progression function for each of those. "In other words, none of that happens— Most of that doesn't happen immediately, the oceans do. They model the speed and the arrival of that, that turn, that Dzhanibekov turn. Most of them are finding that the height of the ocean about— in state two, our alternative rotation, equates just about that 597-foot-above-sea-level elevation that put the tidal banding mark on the Chephren pyramid. "So it's a very pleasing set of outcomes in the models so far. We got a long way to go on them, but the modelers are just doing absolute gangbuster work." Jerm: "Yeah, I mean so basically just the tips of the pyramids were sticking out?" Cunningham: "Yeah, both of them had their tips sticking out. I don't think that their construction at that level was an accident. I think the ancients wanted to tell us we know exactly how high the water's going to go. "This has happened so often and has been so consistent, we know how high the water is going to be. So we're going to build a device or set of devices that both tell you what we were looking at, and the three chambers inside Khufu tell you exactly what they were looking at. And we're going to give you these warning indicators that show the height of the flood, so that ancients know, and this agency that keeps us ignorant, there's no way they can unstack these 5 million stones in their effort to get rid of this. "In fact, I don't think they really understood. Most of their minions did not understand what had occurred, what these marks on top of the Chephren pyramid indicate, and fortunately so, or they would have cleaned up all of that. They would have removed those stones in short order had they known that this was indicative of a state 2 under ECDO theory title band."
5:59

MIND-BLOWING🤯 Systems engineer and author Roger Cunningham explains how a cataclysmic event caused global oceanic displacement ~7,000 years ago, inundating the Pyramids of Giza, which are actually "warning indicators" for future civilizations that the cataclysm will happen again In this clip from a UK Column (UK Column) interview with Jerm Warfare, Cunningham (Ethical Skeptic ☀) describes ECDO Theory (Exothermic Core-Mantle Decoupling – Dzhanibekov Oscillation), which is a hypothesis proposed by Cunningham that explains periodic catastrophic Earth changes through internal geophysical processes. The theory summarized, per Grok: "In simple terms: The Earth's solid iron-nickel core periodically undergoes exothermic (heat-releasing) phase changes in its crystal structure. This heat rises through the mantle into the oceans (contributing to climate shifts and deep-ocean warming), while also weakening the geomagnetic field that normally 'locks' the outer shell (crust + mantle) to the spinning core. "Once the magnetic grip weakens enough, the outer shell can decouple and rapidly reorient relative to the spin axis in a Dzhanibekov-like flip (the tennis-racket theorem effect seen in spinning objects). This causes a true polar wander of roughly 104° along a specific meridian, shifting the geographic poles, sloshing oceans to create global floods, realigning ancient monuments to a former pole position (e.g., in southern Africa), and triggering cataclysms recorded in myths and geology. The system then oscillates back to its current stable state once the core regenerates. "The theory unifies evidence from climate anomalies, ancient site alignments, paleomagnetic data, and flood legends into one cyclic mechanism, with implications for past civilization resets and potential future events." ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- Cunningham: "I wouldn't call Charles Hapgood's notion a theory because it didn't have the elements of hypothesis in it. But it's a cool idea. It's an excellent construct. And that's where you start when you develop hypotheses. You start with a construct. "He said that the outside body of the Earth, like the skin of an orange, rotates independently and presents a new surface to the North Star. His sighting was that caused the inundations. So that was the first thinking, really, that's centered around this type of idea. "What ECDO theory postulates is that this decoupling, instead of happening at the crust, where there really isn't a mechanism to decouple, and that really has been one of the things that's kept the theory squelched, is there's no viable mechanism there, the viable mechanism does exist at the core–mantle boundary. "In fact, it suggests that this is an absolutely stark potential, if you look at the core–mantle boundary, that's what ECDO proposes, that particular situation in the core–mantle boundary causes this outer rotational body to do an inertial interchange True Polar Wander. "A portion of that wander was smooth and gentle, within reason. I'm sure the oceans were a little more energetic, but a portion of it during the capture by an inverted geomagnetic pole, in other words, the magnetic pole's north pole was down in Antarctica when it was captured by that when our outer magnetite structure of the crust was captured by that pole, it was pulled into location very rapidly, and that's what precipitated these oceans to come up out of their banks. "It did exactly what the Gong Gong historians said. They said that the sky rolled from the southeast to the northwest. And that's exactly what the ECDO rotation presupposes. And we developed the rotation based on the geomechanics first. We didn't look at the myths. And then we went out and took that geo- rotation and said, okay, let's compare this rotation to the myths that are out there that are informative, like the Epic of Gilgamesh, like the Gong Gong theory, or the Gong Gong tradition. And in fact, they matched in the geostrata the location of the saline diatomaceous deserts that have aridified across the planet. They all match this ECDO rotation. "And that's what the six or eight modeling groups that are working on ECDO now, they're finding, unequivocally, a good match to the Earth's deserts, to this, this inundation and rotation." Jerm: "So that would have been quite a quick event?" Cunningham: "A portion of it, the capture. Right now, as we understand the differential inertial moments in the Earth, they're not large enough to cause a 12-hour or 18-hour rotation of the Earth in this— into this new position. However, if we introduce an inverted geomagnetic pole, the geomagnetic pole captures the Earth's shell and brings it into alignment with wherever it is. "Once the north magnetic pole makes its journey across Asia, the central body of Asia, and then through the Bay of Bengal and down into Antarctica below Africa, it reinvigorates, it re-strengthens its, its permeability or its polarity and captures the Earth's body. Except now the Earth instead of pointing toward our north that we recognize today, it has to point the other direction. "And if it's already undergone this decoupling, this Dzhanibekov rotation is now somewhere wandering slowly in the North Pole would be in Southern Africa. Once the geomagnetic pole captures that Earth body, it'll snap it into its final position. And ECDO postulates that that snap, that final phase, is what indeed precipitated this high-energy displacement of the oceans." Jerm: "And thus the pyramids ended up underwater." Cunningham: "Correct. When we're in state two, most of the modelers right now they're modeling the viscosity of the mantle, they're modeling the ablate redistribution of the oceans, they're modeling the progression function for each of those. "In other words, none of that happens— Most of that doesn't happen immediately, the oceans do. They model the speed and the arrival of that, that turn, that Dzhanibekov turn. Most of them are finding that the height of the ocean about— in state two, our alternative rotation, equates just about that 597-foot-above-sea-level elevation that put the tidal banding mark on the Chephren pyramid. "So it's a very pleasing set of outcomes in the models so far. We got a long way to go on them, but the modelers are just doing absolute gangbuster work." Jerm: "Yeah, I mean so basically just the tips of the pyramids were sticking out?" Cunningham: "Yeah, both of them had their tips sticking out. I don't think that their construction at that level was an accident. I think the ancients wanted to tell us we know exactly how high the water's going to go. "This has happened so often and has been so consistent, we know how high the water is going to be. So we're going to build a device or set of devices that both tell you what we were looking at, and the three chambers inside Khufu tell you exactly what they were looking at. And we're going to give you these warning indicators that show the height of the flood, so that ancients know, and this agency that keeps us ignorant, there's no way they can unstack these 5 million stones in their effort to get rid of this. "In fact, I don't think they really understood. Most of their minions did not understand what had occurred, what these marks on top of the Chephren pyramid indicate, and fortunately so, or they would have cleaned up all of that. They would have removed those stones in short order had they known that this was indicative of a state 2 under ECDO theory title band."

Sense Receptor

29,564 views • 3 months ago

Ben Affleck reveals seeing OpenAI made him call Matt Damon and warn “we’re finished,” before realizing its researchers knew little about how movies are made “And then there’s this company OpenAI, and they have this text-to-image thing. And as I was telling you before, I’ve learned to take advantage of the opportunities my life has afforded, which is essentially, probably inappropriately, I find often I’m able to just pick up the phone and say, ‘Hi, I’m Ben Affleck. Can I just come in and see what you’re doing?’" "People are like, ‘Sure.’ It still baffles me, but nonetheless, I went in and looked at what they were doing." "At first I kind of had a heart attack, I called Matt Damon. I was like, ‘Dude, we have to do as many movies in the next few years because we’re finished.’" "I went back, looked at it, and then started saying, ‘Well, hold on a second. Why isn’t this working in the way that I think it should work?’" "And it was a very strange thing to realize that I was dealing with researchers and scientists who were so incredibly smart in this one way and had so little information about video and how it’s created, or how it’s defined, and how it’s captioned, and how it needs to be organized." "And so, having learned the lessons of the previous failed entrepreneurship and having raised money for Artists Equity already, I gambled on this notion that in order to do this in an ethical way, and in a way that could take this technology and actually make it work hand in glove with artists in this community where there are very fixed, long-standing relationships around likeness and so forth, we had to create our own data set.”
1:26

Ben Affleck reveals seeing OpenAI made him call Matt Damon and warn “we’re finished,” before realizing its researchers knew little about how movies are made “And then there’s this company OpenAI, and they have this text-to-image thing. And as I was telling you before, I’ve learned to take advantage of the opportunities my life has afforded, which is essentially, probably inappropriately, I find often I’m able to just pick up the phone and say, ‘Hi, I’m Ben Affleck. Can I just come in and see what you’re doing?’" "People are like, ‘Sure.’ It still baffles me, but nonetheless, I went in and looked at what they were doing." "At first I kind of had a heart attack, I called Matt Damon. I was like, ‘Dude, we have to do as many movies in the next few years because we’re finished.’" "I went back, looked at it, and then started saying, ‘Well, hold on a second. Why isn’t this working in the way that I think it should work?’" "And it was a very strange thing to realize that I was dealing with researchers and scientists who were so incredibly smart in this one way and had so little information about video and how it’s created, or how it’s defined, and how it’s captioned, and how it needs to be organized." "And so, having learned the lessons of the previous failed entrepreneurship and having raised money for Artists Equity already, I gambled on this notion that in order to do this in an ethical way, and in a way that could take this technology and actually make it work hand in glove with artists in this community where there are very fixed, long-standing relationships around likeness and so forth, we had to create our own data set.”

Fireside Alpha

91,994 views • 3 days ago

.Breitbart News’s Nick Nick Gilbertson: “Do you think Democrats are genuine in their focus on affordability, especially after they delivered 40 year high inflation last time they were in power? And then — or do you think they’re using it or focusing on it as a means to try and win midterms and begin the impeachment process?” President Trump: “Yeah. The second. Look, the Democrats had the highest inflation in the history of our country 48 years, they say — but the history of our country. They had the highest inflation that we’ve ever had. When I inherited it, I inherited very high prices. And from day one, they said affordability. Affordability is a word because they’re good at that. They’re good at words. But I’m good at words too. But they hit me with affordability. I’d just gotten there. They hit me with eggs. We had a news conference on my third day and they said, egg prices are through the roof. I said, I just got here, tell me about eggs. And we got the prices down, way down, actually lower than it was four years before. But we’ve gotten everything. The thing that we have now — the only thing that’s really of great concern, two things. Beef is coming down. And the reason is they put restrictions on beef under the Biden administration, and it takes a while to settle that. But prices are down. But the big thing is, of course, energy. We had the energy way down, but I had to do a journey to Iran. I had to say, you know, we just hit the best markets. By the way, the stock market today is at the highest it’s ever been. And we’ve had 59 of them. 59 days out of a very short period of time where the stock market hit all time highs. So, we have an all time high stock market. We have all time high job numbers. We have 401(k)s just hit the highest number they’ve ever been. So many of you have 401(k)s. That means you’re richer than you’ve ever been. And we’re doing really well. But they — they came up with this word affordability. But it’s them that caused the problem. And they use that word — Senator, Senator, they use that word right from the beginning. I was in one day and I heard somebody on television say affordability, and I inherited this mess from them. But we’ve got it in great shape. The country is doing well. We’re respected all over the world. This country is respected. The hottest country. We’re a dead country two years ago and now we’re the hottest country anywhere in the world. So, I think most of you appreciate that. Some of you don’t.”
2:32

.Breitbart News’s Nick Nick Gilbertson: “Do you think Democrats are genuine in their focus on affordability, especially after they delivered 40 year high inflation last time they were in power? And then — or do you think they’re using it or focusing on it as a means to try and win midterms and begin the impeachment process?” President Trump: “Yeah. The second. Look, the Democrats had the highest inflation in the history of our country 48 years, they say — but the history of our country. They had the highest inflation that we’ve ever had. When I inherited it, I inherited very high prices. And from day one, they said affordability. Affordability is a word because they’re good at that. They’re good at words. But I’m good at words too. But they hit me with affordability. I’d just gotten there. They hit me with eggs. We had a news conference on my third day and they said, egg prices are through the roof. I said, I just got here, tell me about eggs. And we got the prices down, way down, actually lower than it was four years before. But we’ve gotten everything. The thing that we have now — the only thing that’s really of great concern, two things. Beef is coming down. And the reason is they put restrictions on beef under the Biden administration, and it takes a while to settle that. But prices are down. But the big thing is, of course, energy. We had the energy way down, but I had to do a journey to Iran. I had to say, you know, we just hit the best markets. By the way, the stock market today is at the highest it’s ever been. And we’ve had 59 of them. 59 days out of a very short period of time where the stock market hit all time highs. So, we have an all time high stock market. We have all time high job numbers. We have 401(k)s just hit the highest number they’ve ever been. So many of you have 401(k)s. That means you’re richer than you’ve ever been. And we’re doing really well. But they — they came up with this word affordability. But it’s them that caused the problem. And they use that word — Senator, Senator, they use that word right from the beginning. I was in one day and I heard somebody on television say affordability, and I inherited this mess from them. But we’ve got it in great shape. The country is doing well. We’re respected all over the world. This country is respected. The hottest country. We’re a dead country two years ago and now we’re the hottest country anywhere in the world. So, I think most of you appreciate that. Some of you don’t.”

Curtis Houck

36,122 views • 4 months ago

HALF A MILLION PEOPLE WERE DEFRAUDED Imagine you are behind on your store card payments. You are already struggling. Then the bank quietly adds an extra charge on top of what you owe. Not because it costs them that much. Just because .. they can. And because they think nobody is watching. Someone was watching. Nicholas Wilson was a debt recovery lawyer. He goes by Mr Ethical Mr Ethical 🚩 on X. His old boss meant it as an insult. In 2003 he noticed that HSBC subsidiary HFC Bank was adding an illegal 16.4% charge onto the debts of people who were already in financial trouble. Store cards from John Lewis, Currys, B&Q, Dixons, PC World. Ordinary people. Struggling people. Being quietly robbed. He told his boss it was illegal. His boss started calling him "Mr Ethical" as a joke. Then they sacked him. He reported it to the regulators. Financial Conduct Authority ignored him for years. When a researcher separately wrote to both HSBC and the FCA asking about the fraud... ... both wrote back with responses in the exact same wording, same punctuation, same paragraphs. The bank and the regulator were sharing the same script. FCA's own independent Complaints Commissioner eventually investigated. He called it the worst case of regulatory failure he had ever dealt with. FCA's response was to appoint Ruth Kelly, an HSBC director, and Baroness Hogg from John Lewis, onto its own board. The two people they were supposed to be investigating were now sitting inside the regulator. You actually cannot make this up. After 13 years of Wilson refusing to go away, HSBC quietly agreed to pay some money back. FCA announced 6,700 victims. Wilson says the real number is closer to 500,000. HSBC has now set aside £223 million for repayments. No fine. No criminal charges. No one went to prison. No one was even publicly named. Wilson has spent the last 20 years unemployable. Blacklisted. Living on state benefits. Fighting to keep his home. Someone even anonymously reported him to the DWP for benefit fraud while the actual billion pound fraud went unpunished. The bank that robbed half a million people kept its licence. The man who caught them lost everything. Source: The Guardian | BBC | Private Eye Magazine | Sunday Mirror | @realmediauk | nicholaswilson com | Mr Ethical 🚩 and others.
2:13

HALF A MILLION PEOPLE WERE DEFRAUDED Imagine you are behind on your store card payments. You are already struggling. Then the bank quietly adds an extra charge on top of what you owe. Not because it costs them that much. Just because .. they can. And because they think nobody is watching. Someone was watching. Nicholas Wilson was a debt recovery lawyer. He goes by Mr Ethical Mr Ethical 🚩 on X. His old boss meant it as an insult. In 2003 he noticed that HSBC subsidiary HFC Bank was adding an illegal 16.4% charge onto the debts of people who were already in financial trouble. Store cards from John Lewis, Currys, B&Q, Dixons, PC World. Ordinary people. Struggling people. Being quietly robbed. He told his boss it was illegal. His boss started calling him "Mr Ethical" as a joke. Then they sacked him. He reported it to the regulators. Financial Conduct Authority ignored him for years. When a researcher separately wrote to both HSBC and the FCA asking about the fraud... ... both wrote back with responses in the exact same wording, same punctuation, same paragraphs. The bank and the regulator were sharing the same script. FCA's own independent Complaints Commissioner eventually investigated. He called it the worst case of regulatory failure he had ever dealt with. FCA's response was to appoint Ruth Kelly, an HSBC director, and Baroness Hogg from John Lewis, onto its own board. The two people they were supposed to be investigating were now sitting inside the regulator. You actually cannot make this up. After 13 years of Wilson refusing to go away, HSBC quietly agreed to pay some money back. FCA announced 6,700 victims. Wilson says the real number is closer to 500,000. HSBC has now set aside £223 million for repayments. No fine. No criminal charges. No one went to prison. No one was even publicly named. Wilson has spent the last 20 years unemployable. Blacklisted. Living on state benefits. Fighting to keep his home. Someone even anonymously reported him to the DWP for benefit fraud while the actual billion pound fraud went unpunished. The bank that robbed half a million people kept its licence. The man who caught them lost everything. Source: The Guardian | BBC | Private Eye Magazine | Sunday Mirror | @realmediauk | nicholaswilson com | Mr Ethical 🚩 and others.

Artur Nadolny

168,886 views • 4 months ago

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”
2:36

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

Curtis Houck

108,556 views • 6 months ago

Ben Horowitz tells the story of Slack’s pivot from a failed gaming app into a $28 billion company Ben recalls investing in Stewart Butterfield’s new company Tiny Speck. In 2001, Stewart began building an online game, pivoted into Flickr, and the company was acquired by Yahoo in 2005 for $25 million. In early 2009, Stewart decided he wanted to try building the online game again. This time, it would be called Glitch. Ben tells the story: “And so he builds Glitch. I love Glitch - it was a marvelous game. But it had two major problems. One, he started it in 2006 and built on Flash before Steve Jobs declared war on Flash. So it wasn’t going to work on the iPhone. And then the other problem was people would finish the game in two days, and so that’s not very good for retention.” After raising more than $15 million to build Glitch, Stewart called Ben to tell his investor that they only had $6 million left: “Ben, I’ve got $6 million left. I have no way to raise money because I’ve made really no progress because of these issues. It’s going to cost me more than $6 million to finish the game. So I’ve got three choices. I can pray for rain and try and finish it. I can shut down the company and give you your $6 million back. Or we build this tool that we use in our engineering team to communicate with each other and make engineering work a little better, and I could just put that out as a product.” Ben replies: “What? You just like built some tool to talk to each other and you want to put that out as a product? And you’re a consumer guy and you want to become an enterprise software guy?” Stewart says, “Yeah, I think it’d be a pretty good idea.” And so Ben said, “$6 million isn’t going to make a big difference in my life. If you really think it’s a good idea and you want to do that, go ahead.” Stewart decided to call the new product Slack, and it soon became the fastest growing enterprise software company of all time before SalesForce acquired it for $27.7 billion in July 2021. Ben points out an important lesson here: “A lot of the process is do you have a secret? Do you know something that nobody else knows? And because [Stewart] was pulling his hair out, literally smoking 8 packs of cigarettes a day, trying to get Glitch out the door, he was doing everything to optimize that development, and so he learned where software development was suboptimal… And that’s a really big key. You have to do something really hard if you want to learn something about the world that nobody else knows or is acting on. That’s when you have a breakthrough. But it starts with hard work.” Video source: UC Berkeley SCET (2020)
3:16

Ben Horowitz tells the story of Slack’s pivot from a failed gaming app into a $28 billion company Ben recalls investing in Stewart Butterfield’s new company Tiny Speck. In 2001, Stewart began building an online game, pivoted into Flickr, and the company was acquired by Yahoo in 2005 for $25 million. In early 2009, Stewart decided he wanted to try building the online game again. This time, it would be called Glitch. Ben tells the story: “And so he builds Glitch. I love Glitch - it was a marvelous game. But it had two major problems. One, he started it in 2006 and built on Flash before Steve Jobs declared war on Flash. So it wasn’t going to work on the iPhone. And then the other problem was people would finish the game in two days, and so that’s not very good for retention.” After raising more than $15 million to build Glitch, Stewart called Ben to tell his investor that they only had $6 million left: “Ben, I’ve got $6 million left. I have no way to raise money because I’ve made really no progress because of these issues. It’s going to cost me more than $6 million to finish the game. So I’ve got three choices. I can pray for rain and try and finish it. I can shut down the company and give you your $6 million back. Or we build this tool that we use in our engineering team to communicate with each other and make engineering work a little better, and I could just put that out as a product.” Ben replies: “What? You just like built some tool to talk to each other and you want to put that out as a product? And you’re a consumer guy and you want to become an enterprise software guy?” Stewart says, “Yeah, I think it’d be a pretty good idea.” And so Ben said, “$6 million isn’t going to make a big difference in my life. If you really think it’s a good idea and you want to do that, go ahead.” Stewart decided to call the new product Slack, and it soon became the fastest growing enterprise software company of all time before SalesForce acquired it for $27.7 billion in July 2021. Ben points out an important lesson here: “A lot of the process is do you have a secret? Do you know something that nobody else knows? And because [Stewart] was pulling his hair out, literally smoking 8 packs of cigarettes a day, trying to get Glitch out the door, he was doing everything to optimize that development, and so he learned where software development was suboptimal… And that’s a really big key. You have to do something really hard if you want to learn something about the world that nobody else knows or is acting on. That’s when you have a breakthrough. But it starts with hard work.” Video source: UC Berkeley SCET (2020)

Startup Archive

51,352 views • 9 months ago

Bricks and Minifigs: This story is extremely disturbing showcasing not only the corruption within the Utah police department but as well as the unlawful activity going on within Multi million dollar corporations. Bricks and Minifigs allegedly stole $200,000 worth of Star Wars LEGO sets from an innocent family. The family then called upon their last hope, “RecklessBen” on YouTube. Ben promised to do everything he could to help, including serving the owners, taking them to court, getting them to admit their wrongdoings, and much more. He actually won a case in small claims court, but Bricks and Minifigs still refused to return the LEGO sets or pay RecklessBen the money awarded through the lawsuit. Instead, they decided to shut down the entire LEGO store to avoid Ben at all costs, claiming he was harassing them and spreading false information. However, Ben had evidence prepared and available, which ultimately contributed to his victory in court and in the media. Ben then decided to publicly host a closing ceremony for Bricks and Minifigs which gained significant attention. The media caught on, and Bricks and Minifigs responded by disabling comments across their platforms. They also reportedly sent an email to employees throughout the country explaining how to respond to questions regarding the controversy and alleged corruption. That email was later leaked by an insider employee. Furthermore, Ben decided to file another lawsuit. Before doing so, however, he was required to attempt to settle the matter outside of court. Ben traveled to Utah to visit one of the owners of Bricks and Minifigs, “Joshua Johnson.” While attempting to settle the dispute, Ben noticed Johnson speaking on the phone. Suddenly, three separate police vehicles arrived at the property. The officers followed Ben and his driver, pulled them over, and accused them of running a stop sign. However, video footage later obtained by Ben from the police department allegedly showed otherwise, suggesting the traffic stop was unjustified. The police appeared to know exactly who RecklessBen was. Eventually, they let him go, but later showed up at either his home or Airbnb. Ben never received a clear explanation as to why they were there, leading the media to believe it was an act of intimidation. With no other options, RecklessBen visited another owner, “Brandon Best,” who was reportedly involved in the removal of the original store owner and the alleged theft of the $200,000 worth of Star Wars LEGO sets. Ben asked whether Brandon intended to pay the court ordered judgment. Predictably, Brandon did not wish to speak. Instead, he contacted the police. Once again, officers appeared dismissive of Ben’s claims and unwilling to consider the information he presented. In the end, Ben was able to document that he had made a genuine effort to settle the dispute in person, which satisfied the court’s requirements and allowed the lawsuit to proceed. Later, Ben discovered that both Brandon and Joshua were members of the Mormon faith. Within Mormon teachings, theft is considered morally wrong. This detail becomes relevant later in the story. Eventually, Ben and his driver began heading home from where ever off, when they were once again pulled over by Utah police. Officers spent hours searching their vehicle for alleged illegal substances such as heroin. They also attempted to pressure the driver into admitting he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The driver repeatedly denied these accusations and remained cooperative throughout the encounter. Eventually, they were released. Ben later obtained dashcam footage, but noticed that portions of the officers’ audio had been redacted. This raised concerns for him regarding transparency within the department. Ben questioned why those conversations needed to be removed and whether officers were searching for any possible reason to arrest him or his crew. Part two coming soon.. #erudition
1:17

Bricks and Minifigs: This story is extremely disturbing showcasing not only the corruption within the Utah police department but as well as the unlawful activity going on within Multi million dollar corporations. Bricks and Minifigs allegedly stole $200,000 worth of Star Wars LEGO sets from an innocent family. The family then called upon their last hope, “RecklessBen” on YouTube. Ben promised to do everything he could to help, including serving the owners, taking them to court, getting them to admit their wrongdoings, and much more. He actually won a case in small claims court, but Bricks and Minifigs still refused to return the LEGO sets or pay RecklessBen the money awarded through the lawsuit. Instead, they decided to shut down the entire LEGO store to avoid Ben at all costs, claiming he was harassing them and spreading false information. However, Ben had evidence prepared and available, which ultimately contributed to his victory in court and in the media. Ben then decided to publicly host a closing ceremony for Bricks and Minifigs which gained significant attention. The media caught on, and Bricks and Minifigs responded by disabling comments across their platforms. They also reportedly sent an email to employees throughout the country explaining how to respond to questions regarding the controversy and alleged corruption. That email was later leaked by an insider employee. Furthermore, Ben decided to file another lawsuit. Before doing so, however, he was required to attempt to settle the matter outside of court. Ben traveled to Utah to visit one of the owners of Bricks and Minifigs, “Joshua Johnson.” While attempting to settle the dispute, Ben noticed Johnson speaking on the phone. Suddenly, three separate police vehicles arrived at the property. The officers followed Ben and his driver, pulled them over, and accused them of running a stop sign. However, video footage later obtained by Ben from the police department allegedly showed otherwise, suggesting the traffic stop was unjustified. The police appeared to know exactly who RecklessBen was. Eventually, they let him go, but later showed up at either his home or Airbnb. Ben never received a clear explanation as to why they were there, leading the media to believe it was an act of intimidation. With no other options, RecklessBen visited another owner, “Brandon Best,” who was reportedly involved in the removal of the original store owner and the alleged theft of the $200,000 worth of Star Wars LEGO sets. Ben asked whether Brandon intended to pay the court ordered judgment. Predictably, Brandon did not wish to speak. Instead, he contacted the police. Once again, officers appeared dismissive of Ben’s claims and unwilling to consider the information he presented. In the end, Ben was able to document that he had made a genuine effort to settle the dispute in person, which satisfied the court’s requirements and allowed the lawsuit to proceed. Later, Ben discovered that both Brandon and Joshua were members of the Mormon faith. Within Mormon teachings, theft is considered morally wrong. This detail becomes relevant later in the story. Eventually, Ben and his driver began heading home from where ever off, when they were once again pulled over by Utah police. Officers spent hours searching their vehicle for alleged illegal substances such as heroin. They also attempted to pressure the driver into admitting he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The driver repeatedly denied these accusations and remained cooperative throughout the encounter. Eventually, they were released. Ben later obtained dashcam footage, but noticed that portions of the officers’ audio had been redacted. This raised concerns for him regarding transparency within the department. Ben questioned why those conversations needed to be removed and whether officers were searching for any possible reason to arrest him or his crew. Part two coming soon.. #erudition

Gristmill

15,937 views • 4 months ago

Agents vs. Graphs, clearly explained! spawning more agents is great, but it has a ceiling nobody says out loud: five agents is a count. a graph is a shape. only one of them changes the answer. point five agents at the same pile with the same window and they converge. the first one writes a finding, the rest read it, and all five reports centre on the same thing. you paid five times for one opinion with four echoes. Graph engineering fixes this by moving the decision up a layer: not how many agents, but who is allowed to look at what. you need both. here's how it works: ↳ the count buys you throughput. five things happening instead of one ↳ the shape buys you coverage. five different things happening instead of the same one five times Prompts → Context → Harness → Agents → Graphs the node that does this is the splitter, and it decides more than any other node in the system. cut a repository by folder and four workers audit the same three files. cut it by blast radius and each one sees something the others cannot. the trick is being selective about what each lane is allowed to see. separate contexts are not a nice-to-have, they are the mechanism. if two agents are meant to produce different things, they must not share a window. if they are meant to produce the same thing, you did not need two agents. one thing to know before you scale it. a branch that throws does not reject the batch. it resolves to null, and that is the containment. which means your merge quietly receives a short list. ↳ filter the nulls before the merge, or one dead lane poisons the whole result ↳ never index a merge by position. eight good branches and one failure will shift everything by one, silently skip that and the run looks like it worked. the output is just missing a lane, and nothing errored. and the one that eats whole nights: multi-agent setups can use up to fifteen times the total tokens of a single chat, because every lane reloads its own core. you are trading total tokens for a clean main window. usually the right trade, always a choice. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓
0:49

Agents vs. Graphs, clearly explained! spawning more agents is great, but it has a ceiling nobody says out loud: five agents is a count. a graph is a shape. only one of them changes the answer. point five agents at the same pile with the same window and they converge. the first one writes a finding, the rest read it, and all five reports centre on the same thing. you paid five times for one opinion with four echoes. Graph engineering fixes this by moving the decision up a layer: not how many agents, but who is allowed to look at what. you need both. here's how it works: ↳ the count buys you throughput. five things happening instead of one ↳ the shape buys you coverage. five different things happening instead of the same one five times Prompts → Context → Harness → Agents → Graphs the node that does this is the splitter, and it decides more than any other node in the system. cut a repository by folder and four workers audit the same three files. cut it by blast radius and each one sees something the others cannot. the trick is being selective about what each lane is allowed to see. separate contexts are not a nice-to-have, they are the mechanism. if two agents are meant to produce different things, they must not share a window. if they are meant to produce the same thing, you did not need two agents. one thing to know before you scale it. a branch that throws does not reject the batch. it resolves to null, and that is the containment. which means your merge quietly receives a short list. ↳ filter the nulls before the merge, or one dead lane poisons the whole result ↳ never index a merge by position. eight good branches and one failure will shift everything by one, silently skip that and the run looks like it worked. the output is just missing a lane, and nothing errored. and the one that eats whole nights: multi-agent setups can use up to fifteen times the total tokens of a single chat, because every lane reloads its own core. you are trading total tokens for a clean main window. usually the right trade, always a choice. below i have quoted my full guide on graph engineering. it covers the three topologies, the verifier patterns, and where the gate should actually open. save this and read it below ↓

Hanako

97,154 views • 1 month ago

The North Star (Polaris) is always at the top of the Earth's axis of rotation, but that doesn't mean it's always been above the Arctic. When the Earth's geomagnetic field weakens, that indicates that the axis of rotation will flip so that Polaris switches from over the Arctic to over the Rift Valley in Africa. The consequences for human habitat are catastrophic, because the change in axis of rotation happens so fast (days) that the Earth's crust moves out from under the Earth's oceans. Low lying areas can become inundated with water for centuries, as the oceans adjust to the new rotation. This switch happens every 6400-6500 years (or so). How do we know? The great monuments of mankind that date to a period more than 6400 years ago are all aligned to a Polaris above the Rift Valley. They point to the North Star as their builders observed it during their lifetimes -- over Africa, not the Arctic. The next axis flip will be presaged by a rapid movement and weakening of the Earth's geomagnetic field, which is exactly what is observed right now. Now you're probably saying "That's some tin foil hat BS that Seager probably picked up from the Danny Jones Podcast podcast!" But you didn't spend all day with Ethical Skeptic ☀ quizzing him on his data, did you?
3:03

The North Star (Polaris) is always at the top of the Earth's axis of rotation, but that doesn't mean it's always been above the Arctic. When the Earth's geomagnetic field weakens, that indicates that the axis of rotation will flip so that Polaris switches from over the Arctic to over the Rift Valley in Africa. The consequences for human habitat are catastrophic, because the change in axis of rotation happens so fast (days) that the Earth's crust moves out from under the Earth's oceans. Low lying areas can become inundated with water for centuries, as the oceans adjust to the new rotation. This switch happens every 6400-6500 years (or so). How do we know? The great monuments of mankind that date to a period more than 6400 years ago are all aligned to a Polaris above the Rift Valley. They point to the North Star as their builders observed it during their lifetimes -- over Africa, not the Arctic. The next axis flip will be presaged by a rapid movement and weakening of the Earth's geomagnetic field, which is exactly what is observed right now. Now you're probably saying "That's some tin foil hat BS that Seager probably picked up from the Danny Jones Podcast podcast!" But you didn't spend all day with Ethical Skeptic ☀ quizzing him on his data, did you?

Thomas P Seager, PhD

148,219 views • 2 months ago

"There was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing." ~TB 💥 If Trump Waives Eric Davis' NDAs, Is This Some of What We Can Expect to Hear? 💥 (I may not be first with these clips but I try to include info. that you won't get anywhere else.) If that information about lifeforms, and what they were doing, was accurate, it's the type of information the world deserves to know. Was it Dr. Eric Davis who briefed him/them on that? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was, and I have NOT asked Davis about this.) "All these rumors that you hear...just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me...actually has occurred." ~TB ~ Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "If I knew what you knew, I would not be able to sleep at night." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (TB): "Yeah, I was briefed in a situation, and they got into some pretty intense stuff." Hannity: "Can I ask who briefed you?" Burchett: "You can ask but I can't tell." (Again: My Guess: Dr. Eric Davis. I could be wrong, but it makes a lot of sense to me. Here's why... This is a message from Davis to me, from January... Why Won't Davis Share What He Know with Congress? Davis: "I already shared my information in a Pentagon SCIF with the SASC staff in Oct. 2019 and in a controlled access conference room in a Senate office building with the SSCI staff in Oct. 2019 and at a defense company’s controlled access room in June 2021. "Then I shared it with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's committee in a House of Representatives office building SCIF last May. (Burchett is part of that committee, and that's one reason why I feel like Davis is the one Burchett is referring to when he says someone briefed him on some intense stuff.) Davis: "So the 'Why won’t he?' has already been answered." Murgia: "So what changes if a President waives your NDAs?" Davis: "If the POTUS were to waive my NDAs, I could share everything I know with the public." (PUBLIC!) ~~~ Hannity: "Have you ever told Donald Trump about all the obstacles they're throwing in your face?" Burchett: "No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I had a discussion with somebody last week. They said, you need to have lunch with [Trump]. It's very difficult to get, you know, he's, right now, of course, things going on all over the world." Hannity: "But you're also saying, on the other hand, on a need-to-know basis. And that means the President's not on a need-to-know basis? Our duly-elected president, information is being withheld from him?" Burchett: "I believe so. I was told that, even. Yeah, in the SCIF, this one time, where they asked me, where you're quoting, I mean, there was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing. And different..." Hannity: "Lifeforms alive here? Lifeforms dead here?" Burchett: "Possibly. Both. Both." Hennity: "And vehicles that have been recovered here?" Burchett: "Yeah, and some that have possibly come here, and not in a crash-type setting (laughs). We had an individual that gave..." (Again, this feels like Davis was the guy briefing them. He has spoken about crashed AND landed craft, including the alleged Holloman AFB landing-and-meeting event.) Burchett: "And this was interesting about the whole thing was because, there's all the folks in there, and there's different groups of people, and Rep. Eric Burlison's a dear friend of mine. Because in the beginning, he was a big skeptic (According to Burlison, he still IS a skeptic. ~Joe), you know? And I asked him to join us in some of this stuff because I needed somebody that just wasn't like me, that just had been..." Hannity: "Skepticism's healthy." Burlison: "It's very healthy. I mean, you know...but a lot of people that were skeptics. But we were in this one meeting in a secure environment, and a member came in who is not really friendly to the cause. And really was a disrupter and started asking questions. And the person who was briefing us named names, dates, times, places, events, people." (That sounds exactly like the meticulous, and detail-orientated, Dr. Eric Davis. 😎 ) Burchett: "Because I'd asked a question about Jimmy Carter. There was talk, I just threw it out there, that Carter... I didn't like his politics, but I don't question his faith." (Sad that Burchett even feels the need to mention Carter's politics.) Burchett: "And they said that [Carter] was briefed at one time and became physically upset with the information that he was given." Hannity: "Of course he did." (This seemed like snide remark from Hannity, as in, Carter wasn't a real man and he couldn't handle information like that without getting upset. Cheap shot, but that's Hannity.) Burchett: "Yeah, but he had actually seen a UFO, it's a documented thing. And this person that was briefing us gave the date of that meeting and he gave the receipts. He said, 'You can go to the Carter library,' and he gave the date. and said... And there was, I think four people in the meeting (with Carter), and they listed three of them, and one of them, they weren't sure who it was. So it was probably, you know, CIA or something. And it ended up upsetting [Carter] so much that they pretty much had to clear his calendar for a while. But what is that?" (Again, that sounds like a Davis briefing.) Burchett: "And the thing is, everything that I've...all these rumors that you hear in the movies, in the books and the magazines that I read growing up, just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me that this is actually has occurred. And that, to me, is, I wonder, is this stuff being planted? Is it being pushed out, so that we gradually get a hold of it?" (Hopefully, we get to hear what Burchett and the others heard so we can judge the veracity of it and see if we can somehow confirm any of it.)
4:06

"There was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing." ~TB 💥 If Trump Waives Eric Davis' NDAs, Is This Some of What We Can Expect to Hear? 💥 (I may not be first with these clips but I try to include info. that you won't get anywhere else.) If that information about lifeforms, and what they were doing, was accurate, it's the type of information the world deserves to know. Was it Dr. Eric Davis who briefed him/them on that? I have a sneaking suspicion that it was, and I have NOT asked Davis about this.) "All these rumors that you hear...just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me...actually has occurred." ~TB ~ Sean Hannity 🇺🇸: "If I knew what you knew, I would not be able to sleep at night." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office (TB): "Yeah, I was briefed in a situation, and they got into some pretty intense stuff." Hannity: "Can I ask who briefed you?" Burchett: "You can ask but I can't tell." (Again: My Guess: Dr. Eric Davis. I could be wrong, but it makes a lot of sense to me. Here's why... This is a message from Davis to me, from January... Why Won't Davis Share What He Know with Congress? Davis: "I already shared my information in a Pentagon SCIF with the SASC staff in Oct. 2019 and in a controlled access conference room in a Senate office building with the SSCI staff in Oct. 2019 and at a defense company’s controlled access room in June 2021. "Then I shared it with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's committee in a House of Representatives office building SCIF last May. (Burchett is part of that committee, and that's one reason why I feel like Davis is the one Burchett is referring to when he says someone briefed him on some intense stuff.) Davis: "So the 'Why won’t he?' has already been answered." Murgia: "So what changes if a President waives your NDAs?" Davis: "If the POTUS were to waive my NDAs, I could share everything I know with the public." (PUBLIC!) ~~~ Hannity: "Have you ever told Donald Trump about all the obstacles they're throwing in your face?" Burchett: "No, I haven't. As a matter of fact, I had a discussion with somebody last week. They said, you need to have lunch with [Trump]. It's very difficult to get, you know, he's, right now, of course, things going on all over the world." Hannity: "But you're also saying, on the other hand, on a need-to-know basis. And that means the President's not on a need-to-know basis? Our duly-elected president, information is being withheld from him?" Burchett: "I believe so. I was told that, even. Yeah, in the SCIF, this one time, where they asked me, where you're quoting, I mean, there was some pretty intense stuff about lifeforms, what they were doing. And different..." Hannity: "Lifeforms alive here? Lifeforms dead here?" Burchett: "Possibly. Both. Both." Hennity: "And vehicles that have been recovered here?" Burchett: "Yeah, and some that have possibly come here, and not in a crash-type setting (laughs). We had an individual that gave..." (Again, this feels like Davis was the guy briefing them. He has spoken about crashed AND landed craft, including the alleged Holloman AFB landing-and-meeting event.) Burchett: "And this was interesting about the whole thing was because, there's all the folks in there, and there's different groups of people, and Rep. Eric Burlison's a dear friend of mine. Because in the beginning, he was a big skeptic (According to Burlison, he still IS a skeptic. ~Joe), you know? And I asked him to join us in some of this stuff because I needed somebody that just wasn't like me, that just had been..." Hannity: "Skepticism's healthy." Burlison: "It's very healthy. I mean, you know...but a lot of people that were skeptics. But we were in this one meeting in a secure environment, and a member came in who is not really friendly to the cause. And really was a disrupter and started asking questions. And the person who was briefing us named names, dates, times, places, events, people." (That sounds exactly like the meticulous, and detail-orientated, Dr. Eric Davis. 😎 ) Burchett: "Because I'd asked a question about Jimmy Carter. There was talk, I just threw it out there, that Carter... I didn't like his politics, but I don't question his faith." (Sad that Burchett even feels the need to mention Carter's politics.) Burchett: "And they said that [Carter] was briefed at one time and became physically upset with the information that he was given." Hannity: "Of course he did." (This seemed like snide remark from Hannity, as in, Carter wasn't a real man and he couldn't handle information like that without getting upset. Cheap shot, but that's Hannity.) Burchett: "Yeah, but he had actually seen a UFO, it's a documented thing. And this person that was briefing us gave the date of that meeting and he gave the receipts. He said, 'You can go to the Carter library,' and he gave the date. and said... And there was, I think four people in the meeting (with Carter), and they listed three of them, and one of them, they weren't sure who it was. So it was probably, you know, CIA or something. And it ended up upsetting [Carter] so much that they pretty much had to clear his calendar for a while. But what is that?" (Again, that sounds like a Davis briefing.) Burchett: "And the thing is, everything that I've...all these rumors that you hear in the movies, in the books and the magazines that I read growing up, just the wild, crazy stuff, some of that stuff now I'm being briefed on and people are telling me that this is actually has occurred. And that, to me, is, I wonder, is this stuff being planted? Is it being pushed out, so that we gradually get a hold of it?" (Hopefully, we get to hear what Burchett and the others heard so we can judge the veracity of it and see if we can somehow confirm any of it.)

Joe Murgia

30,335 views • 3 months ago