Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Blackw Friday means something VERY different for cuckolds, doesn't it? 😍 #asianthreesome #asiangırl #ควยนิโกร #คนดำ #hotwifethai #cuckoldthai #interracialthai #BlackCockThai #interracialasian #thaiteen #slut #BNWOThai #Thaianal

BBCTHAITEEN's profile picture

BBCTHAITEEN♠️🇹🇭CLUB THAI BBC♠️🇹🇭 live Thai

4,944 subscribers

48,462 views • 3 years ago •via X (Twitter)

NSFW#asianthreesome#asiangırl#ควยนิโกร#คนดำ#hotwifethai#cuckoldthai#interracialthai#BlackCockThai#interracialasian#thaiteen#slut#BNWOThai#Thaianal
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🇺🇸 ELON: IF THE SHIP OF AMERICA SINKS, WE ALL SINK WITH IT “A country is no different from a person. If a country overspends and doesn't spend wisely, just like a person, the country will go bankrupt. The reason I'm here is that I'm very worried about America going bankrupt due to the corruption and waste. And if we don't do something about it, the ship of America is going to sink. And we're all on that ship. This may be a message to people out there who are wealthy, have a lot of means or control companies. Just remember, we're all in ship America here. Your company is not going to exist if the ship of America sinks. We should do everything we possibly can to ensure that America is strong for far into the future.” Source: Interview on Fox News, March 2025
0:44

🇺🇸 ELON: IF THE SHIP OF AMERICA SINKS, WE ALL SINK WITH IT “A country is no different from a person. If a country overspends and doesn't spend wisely, just like a person, the country will go bankrupt. The reason I'm here is that I'm very worried about America going bankrupt due to the corruption and waste. And if we don't do something about it, the ship of America is going to sink. And we're all on that ship. This may be a message to people out there who are wealthy, have a lot of means or control companies. Just remember, we're all in ship America here. Your company is not going to exist if the ship of America sinks. We should do everything we possibly can to ensure that America is strong for far into the future.” Source: Interview on Fox News, March 2025

Mario Nawfal

832,231 views • 1 year ago

Elon Musk: Your company is not going to exist if the ship of America sinks. “A country is no different from a person. If a country overspends and doesn't spend wisely, just like a person, the country will go bankrupt. The reason I'm here is because I'm very worried about America going bankrupt due to the corruption and waste. And if we don't do something about it, the ship of America is going to sink. And we're all on that ship. This may be a message to people out there who are wealthy, have a lot of means or control companies. Just remember, we're all in ship America here. Your company is not going to exist if the ship of America sinks. And we should do everything we possibly can to ensure that America is strong for far into the future.” Interview on Fox News, March 18, 2025
0:44

Elon Musk: Your company is not going to exist if the ship of America sinks. “A country is no different from a person. If a country overspends and doesn't spend wisely, just like a person, the country will go bankrupt. The reason I'm here is because I'm very worried about America going bankrupt due to the corruption and waste. And if we don't do something about it, the ship of America is going to sink. And we're all on that ship. This may be a message to people out there who are wealthy, have a lot of means or control companies. Just remember, we're all in ship America here. Your company is not going to exist if the ship of America sinks. And we should do everything we possibly can to ensure that America is strong for far into the future.” Interview on Fox News, March 18, 2025

ELON CLIPS

2,165,394 views • 1 year ago

There’s Something Seriously Wrong With American Regulation Agencies. We’re Being Scammed The Requirement For “Cage Free Eggs” Just Means They Have Access To Outdoors But There Is “No Guarantee That They Go Outside Or Can Even Get Outside” “I started to notice we're getting scammed on pricing here. Eggs in my local supermarket. These eggs right here that say cage free very recently, they changed the look of the packaging here to say cage free, and the price was from a $1.79 to now ... This generic brand on the cheapest, plainest white eggs that used to be a $1.79 is utilizing a BS term or label that they put on their package to more than double the price. As some of you guys know, cage free just Just means that they're not in a tiny little cage. Same thing with free range. It means they have access to outdoors, but there's no guarantee that they actually go out there or that they can't even get out there and all these different brands are utilizing these logos like here, free range free range for $7.49. So they're tricking people into paying $7, $8, $9, $10 for a dozen eggs. Basically the same as the cheap eggs. All the plain white eggs they sell at Costco in the 2 dozen and the 5 dozen pack, those are all cage free. And you know what? They're only $2 a dozen. My grocery store here now doesn't allow you to buy any eggs at all for less than $4 a dozen, and they're the cheapest ones. If you're gonna spend extra on cage free or free range. You may as well spend a dollar or 2 more and get something organic.”
1:03

There’s Something Seriously Wrong With American Regulation Agencies. We’re Being Scammed The Requirement For “Cage Free Eggs” Just Means They Have Access To Outdoors But There Is “No Guarantee That They Go Outside Or Can Even Get Outside” “I started to notice we're getting scammed on pricing here. Eggs in my local supermarket. These eggs right here that say cage free very recently, they changed the look of the packaging here to say cage free, and the price was from a $1.79 to now ... This generic brand on the cheapest, plainest white eggs that used to be a $1.79 is utilizing a BS term or label that they put on their package to more than double the price. As some of you guys know, cage free just Just means that they're not in a tiny little cage. Same thing with free range. It means they have access to outdoors, but there's no guarantee that they actually go out there or that they can't even get out there and all these different brands are utilizing these logos like here, free range free range for $7.49. So they're tricking people into paying $7, $8, $9, $10 for a dozen eggs. Basically the same as the cheap eggs. All the plain white eggs they sell at Costco in the 2 dozen and the 5 dozen pack, those are all cage free. And you know what? They're only $2 a dozen. My grocery store here now doesn't allow you to buy any eggs at all for less than $4 a dozen, and they're the cheapest ones. If you're gonna spend extra on cage free or free range. You may as well spend a dollar or 2 more and get something organic.”

Wall Street Apes

282,394 views • 2 years ago

Kyle Busch will go down as arguably the greatest driver to have never won the Daytona 500. I have a special connection to that 2023 race, which was the closest he ever came to winning it. 2023 marked my first time reporting on location from the Daytona 500 as a member of the media. It also came three weeks after the passing of my Grandpa Taranto, who I was very close to. It was an emotional time for me on that front, and I had his prayer card up in the press box with me during the race and as things played out over the closing laps. I remember being up in my seat those final laps during the race between the RCR and RFK cars, thinking vividly that I was about to be a direct witness to something very special and one of those great moments in Daytona 500 history. It wasn't to be. (and that spin by the 99 didn't need to be a caution either. Come on.) I guess in retrospect it's of some comfort that Kyle was leading the Daytona 500 at Lap 200, but the record doesn't give him credit for that, nor others who have endured leading Lap 200 of the Daytona 500 but not winning the race. One year later during Media Day, I asked him about how frustrating that was when I put it in those terms. "Where does that rank on the pain scale?" "High." "Gotcha." "High, yeah. 'Cause I don't have the trophy or the ring, so it just means I coulda, shoulda, woulda if it was prior to 2005. So that sucks, but it is what it is. "I guess 2005, I knew the rules coming in anyways. That's when I first started in the Daytona 500 was 2005. It happens." The next year I went with a slightly different angle, asking if Daytona's repave in 2011 and the muting of variables like character in the track, handling, etc. had made the Daytona 500 a more difficult race to win. Kyle proceeded to give a very detailed and thorough answer about what it was like to race the old Daytona and drive through the bumps/beyond the limits of the tire, while also pointing out certain areas of the current Daytona that were becoming trouble spots. I listened to this back today as well as the followup I asked and I just love the exchange. It feels like I did my job asking Kyle informed questions and he obliged in giving informed answers.
3:10

Kyle Busch will go down as arguably the greatest driver to have never won the Daytona 500. I have a special connection to that 2023 race, which was the closest he ever came to winning it. 2023 marked my first time reporting on location from the Daytona 500 as a member of the media. It also came three weeks after the passing of my Grandpa Taranto, who I was very close to. It was an emotional time for me on that front, and I had his prayer card up in the press box with me during the race and as things played out over the closing laps. I remember being up in my seat those final laps during the race between the RCR and RFK cars, thinking vividly that I was about to be a direct witness to something very special and one of those great moments in Daytona 500 history. It wasn't to be. (and that spin by the 99 didn't need to be a caution either. Come on.) I guess in retrospect it's of some comfort that Kyle was leading the Daytona 500 at Lap 200, but the record doesn't give him credit for that, nor others who have endured leading Lap 200 of the Daytona 500 but not winning the race. One year later during Media Day, I asked him about how frustrating that was when I put it in those terms. "Where does that rank on the pain scale?" "High." "Gotcha." "High, yeah. 'Cause I don't have the trophy or the ring, so it just means I coulda, shoulda, woulda if it was prior to 2005. So that sucks, but it is what it is. "I guess 2005, I knew the rules coming in anyways. That's when I first started in the Daytona 500 was 2005. It happens." The next year I went with a slightly different angle, asking if Daytona's repave in 2011 and the muting of variables like character in the track, handling, etc. had made the Daytona 500 a more difficult race to win. Kyle proceeded to give a very detailed and thorough answer about what it was like to race the old Daytona and drive through the bumps/beyond the limits of the tire, while also pointing out certain areas of the current Daytona that were becoming trouble spots. I listened to this back today as well as the followup I asked and I just love the exchange. It feels like I did my job asking Kyle informed questions and he obliged in giving informed answers.

Steven Taranto

48,033 views • 3 months ago

They Didn’t Have to Like Each Other to Create Something Beautiful Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Grey stand in a white room, rehearsing for Dirty Dancing in 1987. There is no stage, no audience, no cinematic lighting. Just two people and the movements they have to repeat until they get them right. They look beautiful together. The way he holds her. The way she smiles as she comes down. Within a few seconds, you can almost imagine the entire movie taking shape inside that small room. Then I watch it again, and the room starts to bother me. It is too empty. Their clothes are completely ordinary. Some of the steps are still slightly off. There are moments when they don't quite move like a couple yet. This isn't romance in its finished form. This is work. And once you know that Swayze and Grey were not exactly easy with each other, the clip begins to feel different. They had worked together before on Red Dawn, and things had not gone particularly well. On Dirty Dancing, those differences were still there. Swayze was a professionally trained dancer, known for his discipline and high standards for every movement. Grey was more sensitive, more easily nervous, sometimes laughing at the wrong moment and uncomfortable with some of the lifts. They frustrated each other at times, and the rehearsal process was nowhere near as effortless as what we eventually saw on screen. So the “chemistry” people talk about wasn't simply two souls understanding each other. It was more like two very different personalities being placed in the same room and having to find a way to get the work done. They didn't necessarily have to like each other. But they had to learn to trust each other enough to keep going. I keep thinking about that lift. On screen, it looks like a moment of absolute trust. But in the rehearsal room, it was probably something much more practical: stay still, I'm here, let's try it again. That difference doesn't make the scene less beautiful. It makes it heavier. Because we usually see only the final result. We see the smile, the confidence and movements that seem effortless. We rarely see the dozens of attempts that came before—the missed beats, the frustration, the moments when someone wanted to walk away, and the decision to start again. That is what this rehearsal makes me think about more than the movie itself. Beautiful things aren't always created through harmony. Sometimes they are built from differences, pride, patience and one very simple decision: not to walk away. Swayze has been gone for many years. Grey is still here, and with time, she has spoken about him with greater tenderness. Yet this rehearsal continues to be watched, perhaps because it shows us the part that polished performances usually hide: the awkward, uncertain, unfinished middle, before everything becomes a legend. Two people who weren't particularly fond of each other helped create one of the most memorable couples in cinema. It sounds like a contradiction, but perhaps that contradiction is exactly what makes their story worth remembering. I don't know what that means to everyone else, but for me, it makes me think about how often we wait for something to become easy before believing that it is worth doing. Maybe not everything worthwhile begins with comfort. Some moments outlive the people who created them precisely because they were born from days that were awkward, difficult and uncomfortable—and from nothing more than the decision to stay one more time. Perhaps that is the most beautiful thing about that white room. They didn't have to like each other first. They just had to stay long enough to create something that millions of people would never forget.
1:00

They Didn’t Have to Like Each Other to Create Something Beautiful Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Grey stand in a white room, rehearsing for Dirty Dancing in 1987. There is no stage, no audience, no cinematic lighting. Just two people and the movements they have to repeat until they get them right. They look beautiful together. The way he holds her. The way she smiles as she comes down. Within a few seconds, you can almost imagine the entire movie taking shape inside that small room. Then I watch it again, and the room starts to bother me. It is too empty. Their clothes are completely ordinary. Some of the steps are still slightly off. There are moments when they don't quite move like a couple yet. This isn't romance in its finished form. This is work. And once you know that Swayze and Grey were not exactly easy with each other, the clip begins to feel different. They had worked together before on Red Dawn, and things had not gone particularly well. On Dirty Dancing, those differences were still there. Swayze was a professionally trained dancer, known for his discipline and high standards for every movement. Grey was more sensitive, more easily nervous, sometimes laughing at the wrong moment and uncomfortable with some of the lifts. They frustrated each other at times, and the rehearsal process was nowhere near as effortless as what we eventually saw on screen. So the “chemistry” people talk about wasn't simply two souls understanding each other. It was more like two very different personalities being placed in the same room and having to find a way to get the work done. They didn't necessarily have to like each other. But they had to learn to trust each other enough to keep going. I keep thinking about that lift. On screen, it looks like a moment of absolute trust. But in the rehearsal room, it was probably something much more practical: stay still, I'm here, let's try it again. That difference doesn't make the scene less beautiful. It makes it heavier. Because we usually see only the final result. We see the smile, the confidence and movements that seem effortless. We rarely see the dozens of attempts that came before—the missed beats, the frustration, the moments when someone wanted to walk away, and the decision to start again. That is what this rehearsal makes me think about more than the movie itself. Beautiful things aren't always created through harmony. Sometimes they are built from differences, pride, patience and one very simple decision: not to walk away. Swayze has been gone for many years. Grey is still here, and with time, she has spoken about him with greater tenderness. Yet this rehearsal continues to be watched, perhaps because it shows us the part that polished performances usually hide: the awkward, uncertain, unfinished middle, before everything becomes a legend. Two people who weren't particularly fond of each other helped create one of the most memorable couples in cinema. It sounds like a contradiction, but perhaps that contradiction is exactly what makes their story worth remembering. I don't know what that means to everyone else, but for me, it makes me think about how often we wait for something to become easy before believing that it is worth doing. Maybe not everything worthwhile begins with comfort. Some moments outlive the people who created them precisely because they were born from days that were awkward, difficult and uncomfortable—and from nothing more than the decision to stay one more time. Perhaps that is the most beautiful thing about that white room. They didn't have to like each other first. They just had to stay long enough to create something that millions of people would never forget.

Music over time🎻

74,921 views • 4 days ago

"The top 5 turbo cancers that have come out in my research, the top one is lymphoma, then glioblastomas or brain cancers in general. There's some...rare spinal cord cancers, but mainly glioblastomas. And then for for whatever reason, there's breast cancers..." Radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher Dr. William Makis (MakisMD) describes for BSfreeMD (BSfreeMD) how he noticed a pattern of physicians dying unexpectedly following the rollout of the COVID injections; including doctors in their twenties, thirties, and forties. A subset of these deaths, Makis says, have been "turbo cancer" deaths. "They were cancer, but it wasn't just cancer. It was stage 4. And it was always stage 4 diagnosis, presentation after two shots or booster shot, three shots and what was fascinating was the types of cancer too," the cancer researcher adds. Makis notes that the top turbo cancers he's observed following the rollout of the COVID injections are lymphomas (cancer of the lymphatic system), brain cancers, rare spinal cord cancers, and breast cancers. The physician adds that there's also been an "explosion of leukemias" (blood cell cancer) and kidney cancers. Partial transcription of clip: "As I dug deeper, I saw all these sudden unexpected deaths of these young doctors, and it wasn't like doctors in their sixties, seventies. It was, like, in their forties, thirties—medical students in their twenties. No one was talking about it. So, I brought that to international attention, and, of course, then the mainstream media came after me very, very viciously with Toronto Star, Reuters, Associated Press, all of them saying, you know, I'm insane, and this phenomenon doesn't exist. Even the Canadian Medical Association has been burying this for 2 years now. "But there was a big subset of these deaths, these unexpected deaths, and they were cancer. They were cancer, but it wasn't just cancer. It was stage 4. And it was always stage 4 diagnosis, presentation after two shots or booster shot, three shots and what was fascinating was was the types of cancer too. It was, you know, gastric cancer in a 30-year-old, lung cancer in a 40-year-old. Then, you know, the breast cancer started showing up. "The brain cancers, bizarre brain cancers, lots of glioblastomas, of course, but also these weird spinal tumors as well and it seems that these cancers, not only were they presenting at stage 4, but they were killing these doctors in a matter of months. And if you know anything about oncology, you know that even if you present with stage 4 breast cancer or colon cancer, it's not a death sentence. You could still live for years with these stage 4 prostate cancer. You could live many, many years, if you're, you know, taking the various treatments. And these cancers were killing people in, you know, in a matter of two months, three months, four months, as if they were all pancreatic cancers or as if they were all glioblastoma. So something was very wrong. you know, the behavior was completely different, and very, very few people are talking about it. "But when it comes to the mainstream medical establishment, it doesn't exist. And this is one of the few vaccine injuries that they will never admit. They've admitted the myocarditis. They've admitted the blood clots. Now they will lie about it. They'll say, well, myocarditis is one in 20,000, and it's all mild, then it's all healthy for you. It shows the vaccine works. This is, I mean, this literally is coming out of the new president of the Canadian Medical Association, Joss Reimer. She says, all the myocarditis is mild, and it's wonderful, and it means that the vaccine works and it all disappears, and it's all good. And there's no serious side effects. "But cancer is so controversial. They will not admit it. They are attacking all of us who are talking about it. But I can tell you in very brief terms the the characteristics of these turbo cancers. I'm seeing it mainly in, the mRNA vaccines, Pfizer or Moderna. I've almost never seen it with J&J and AstraZeneca. It may be happening, but, you know, there's so few cases. I cannot reach any conclusion right now. But I'm seeing thousands of these cases with Pfizer vaccines, Moderna vaccines. The presentations are stage 4, almost always. You'll get the occasional stage 2, stage 3 that rapidly progresses to stage 4 in a matter of months. But almost always, it's stage 4 presentation. "The top 5 turbo cancers that have come out in my research, the top one is lymphoma, then glioblastomas or brain cancers in general. There's some astrocytomas, some, you know, very rare spinal cord cancers, but mainly glioblastomas. And then, for whatever reason, there's breast cancers, mostly triple negative breast cancers. That is the main one. That's also the one with the poorest prognosis. Colon cancers is another big one and lung cancers, for whatever reason. And so those are the top fives. Then there's, of course, an explosion of leukemias, pancreatic cancers, melanomas, sarcomas of all kinds. "I could write an article [and] share 30 or 40 angiosarcomas. Like, that is something you see once in your career. And I could give you 30 cases right now. I could spend, you know, maybe one hour on the Internet, and I could give you 30 cases like that. [There's also] testicular and ovarian cancer, so the reproductive cancers, and kidney as well—these very extremely aggressive kidney cancers."
5:09

"The top 5 turbo cancers that have come out in my research, the top one is lymphoma, then glioblastomas or brain cancers in general. There's some...rare spinal cord cancers, but mainly glioblastomas. And then for for whatever reason, there's breast cancers..." Radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher Dr. William Makis (MakisMD) describes for BSfreeMD (BSfreeMD) how he noticed a pattern of physicians dying unexpectedly following the rollout of the COVID injections; including doctors in their twenties, thirties, and forties. A subset of these deaths, Makis says, have been "turbo cancer" deaths. "They were cancer, but it wasn't just cancer. It was stage 4. And it was always stage 4 diagnosis, presentation after two shots or booster shot, three shots and what was fascinating was the types of cancer too," the cancer researcher adds. Makis notes that the top turbo cancers he's observed following the rollout of the COVID injections are lymphomas (cancer of the lymphatic system), brain cancers, rare spinal cord cancers, and breast cancers. The physician adds that there's also been an "explosion of leukemias" (blood cell cancer) and kidney cancers. Partial transcription of clip: "As I dug deeper, I saw all these sudden unexpected deaths of these young doctors, and it wasn't like doctors in their sixties, seventies. It was, like, in their forties, thirties—medical students in their twenties. No one was talking about it. So, I brought that to international attention, and, of course, then the mainstream media came after me very, very viciously with Toronto Star, Reuters, Associated Press, all of them saying, you know, I'm insane, and this phenomenon doesn't exist. Even the Canadian Medical Association has been burying this for 2 years now. "But there was a big subset of these deaths, these unexpected deaths, and they were cancer. They were cancer, but it wasn't just cancer. It was stage 4. And it was always stage 4 diagnosis, presentation after two shots or booster shot, three shots and what was fascinating was was the types of cancer too. It was, you know, gastric cancer in a 30-year-old, lung cancer in a 40-year-old. Then, you know, the breast cancer started showing up. "The brain cancers, bizarre brain cancers, lots of glioblastomas, of course, but also these weird spinal tumors as well and it seems that these cancers, not only were they presenting at stage 4, but they were killing these doctors in a matter of months. And if you know anything about oncology, you know that even if you present with stage 4 breast cancer or colon cancer, it's not a death sentence. You could still live for years with these stage 4 prostate cancer. You could live many, many years, if you're, you know, taking the various treatments. And these cancers were killing people in, you know, in a matter of two months, three months, four months, as if they were all pancreatic cancers or as if they were all glioblastoma. So something was very wrong. you know, the behavior was completely different, and very, very few people are talking about it. "But when it comes to the mainstream medical establishment, it doesn't exist. And this is one of the few vaccine injuries that they will never admit. They've admitted the myocarditis. They've admitted the blood clots. Now they will lie about it. They'll say, well, myocarditis is one in 20,000, and it's all mild, then it's all healthy for you. It shows the vaccine works. This is, I mean, this literally is coming out of the new president of the Canadian Medical Association, Joss Reimer. She says, all the myocarditis is mild, and it's wonderful, and it means that the vaccine works and it all disappears, and it's all good. And there's no serious side effects. "But cancer is so controversial. They will not admit it. They are attacking all of us who are talking about it. But I can tell you in very brief terms the the characteristics of these turbo cancers. I'm seeing it mainly in, the mRNA vaccines, Pfizer or Moderna. I've almost never seen it with J&J and AstraZeneca. It may be happening, but, you know, there's so few cases. I cannot reach any conclusion right now. But I'm seeing thousands of these cases with Pfizer vaccines, Moderna vaccines. The presentations are stage 4, almost always. You'll get the occasional stage 2, stage 3 that rapidly progresses to stage 4 in a matter of months. But almost always, it's stage 4 presentation. "The top 5 turbo cancers that have come out in my research, the top one is lymphoma, then glioblastomas or brain cancers in general. There's some astrocytomas, some, you know, very rare spinal cord cancers, but mainly glioblastomas. And then, for whatever reason, there's breast cancers, mostly triple negative breast cancers. That is the main one. That's also the one with the poorest prognosis. Colon cancers is another big one and lung cancers, for whatever reason. And so those are the top fives. Then there's, of course, an explosion of leukemias, pancreatic cancers, melanomas, sarcomas of all kinds. "I could write an article [and] share 30 or 40 angiosarcomas. Like, that is something you see once in your career. And I could give you 30 cases right now. I could spend, you know, maybe one hour on the Internet, and I could give you 30 cases like that. [There's also] testicular and ovarian cancer, so the reproductive cancers, and kidney as well—these very extremely aggressive kidney cancers."

Sense Receptor

55,194 views • 2 years ago

🚨ALL OF THIS, EVERY WORD OF IT! “I was raised to stand when the anthem played, hand over heart, eyes on the flag, not out of habit, but out of honor, because I knew what it meant to live in a place where freedom wasn't just a word, but a sacrifice. America was never promised easy. She was promised free, and freedom has never been cheap. It's been bought in battlefield silence and folded flags, in tears on tarmacs and names etched in stone. This country is stitched together with stories of people who kept showing up even when it got hard: farmers, soldiers, mothers working two jobs, kids who believed they could be anything, because here, you still can. We are small towns and big cities, steel mills and skyscrapers, languages that sound different but still say, "This is home." And no, we're not perfect. We never have been. But perfection was never the goal. Progress was. Unity, even in the tension. Freedom, even in the mess. Somewhere along the way, we started forgetting, started tearing down what generations before us gave everything to build. We argue louder than we listen. We cancel quicker than we understand. We treat patriotism like it's a problem when it's the very reason we get to speak at all. This isn't about politics. This is about principle, about remembering that laws matter, that order matters, that borders mean something, that a country that stands for nothing will fall for anything. But yet we still rise every time, because when the world shakes, we don't run. We rebuild. That's the America I know, the one that opens its arms but doesn't forget what it holds up, the one that bends but does not break. So no, I won't apologize for being proud, for believing in the flag and what it stands for, for choosing country over chaos, honor over noise, hope over fear, because I've seen what this country can be when we stop fighting each other and start fighting for one another. "We the people" still means all of us, but only if we act like it. So I'll keep standing, even if I'm standing alone, because America wasn't just built on power. She was built on resolve, and this is the country that I still believe in”
1:56

🚨ALL OF THIS, EVERY WORD OF IT! “I was raised to stand when the anthem played, hand over heart, eyes on the flag, not out of habit, but out of honor, because I knew what it meant to live in a place where freedom wasn't just a word, but a sacrifice. America was never promised easy. She was promised free, and freedom has never been cheap. It's been bought in battlefield silence and folded flags, in tears on tarmacs and names etched in stone. This country is stitched together with stories of people who kept showing up even when it got hard: farmers, soldiers, mothers working two jobs, kids who believed they could be anything, because here, you still can. We are small towns and big cities, steel mills and skyscrapers, languages that sound different but still say, "This is home." And no, we're not perfect. We never have been. But perfection was never the goal. Progress was. Unity, even in the tension. Freedom, even in the mess. Somewhere along the way, we started forgetting, started tearing down what generations before us gave everything to build. We argue louder than we listen. We cancel quicker than we understand. We treat patriotism like it's a problem when it's the very reason we get to speak at all. This isn't about politics. This is about principle, about remembering that laws matter, that order matters, that borders mean something, that a country that stands for nothing will fall for anything. But yet we still rise every time, because when the world shakes, we don't run. We rebuild. That's the America I know, the one that opens its arms but doesn't forget what it holds up, the one that bends but does not break. So no, I won't apologize for being proud, for believing in the flag and what it stands for, for choosing country over chaos, honor over noise, hope over fear, because I've seen what this country can be when we stop fighting each other and start fighting for one another. "We the people" still means all of us, but only if we act like it. So I'll keep standing, even if I'm standing alone, because America wasn't just built on power. She was built on resolve, and this is the country that I still believe in”

Gunther Eagleman™

67,637 views • 7 months ago

.Jack Campbell’s Rachael Bade in the “new media seat”: “I mean, Democrats have accused ICE of murder. They've said they're targeting Americans. They've told ICE to get the F out of Minnesota. This is going to stoke the fire against ICE agents. And you're talking about ICE agents right now being concerned about. What, if anything, is the administration going to do to make sure these folks are protected during these protests? But also, should DHS sort of revisit their procedures here? I mean, nobody wants to see an American killed. Are there changes that need to be made to make sure something like this doesn't happen again?” Vice President JD Vance JD Vance: “Look, first of all, of course nobody wants an American citizen to be killed. This is absolutely a tragedy, but it's a tragedy of the making of the far left. They have radicalized a very small segment of the population, taught them that ICE agents are engaging in, in wide-scale violation of people's rights. What are ICE officers are doing is deporting the millions of criminal aliens that were let in during the Biden administration. So, number one, we have to say, as a matter of leadership, and I would appreciate if the Democrats would join me on this. Let's be honest about the fact that we have way too many illegal aliens in this country. Our ICE officers should be supported in doing their job. You're trying to actually marshal the far left lunatic fringe, to engage in doxxing, to try to make it impossible for them to enforce the law, and in some cases, actually to engage in acts of domestic terrorism against our law enforcement officers. When you talk about different plans, different protocols, different policies, I forget exactly how you asked the question. Here's the simple fact. What we're going to do is make it easier for the American people's administration to enforce the American people's law, and that means that Democrats have to stop rallying the mob against legitimate law enforcement operations. And that means that we are going to get tougher, and that's what this AG position is about. We're going to get tougher at the people who are defrauding the United States by inciting violence against our law enforcement officers. That's one of the things that we're going to do. We've already started that work at the Department of Justice. We're going to keep on doing it and this new AG position is going to kick that into high gear.”
2:10

.Jack Campbell’s Rachael Bade in the “new media seat”: “I mean, Democrats have accused ICE of murder. They've said they're targeting Americans. They've told ICE to get the F out of Minnesota. This is going to stoke the fire against ICE agents. And you're talking about ICE agents right now being concerned about. What, if anything, is the administration going to do to make sure these folks are protected during these protests? But also, should DHS sort of revisit their procedures here? I mean, nobody wants to see an American killed. Are there changes that need to be made to make sure something like this doesn't happen again?” Vice President JD Vance JD Vance: “Look, first of all, of course nobody wants an American citizen to be killed. This is absolutely a tragedy, but it's a tragedy of the making of the far left. They have radicalized a very small segment of the population, taught them that ICE agents are engaging in, in wide-scale violation of people's rights. What are ICE officers are doing is deporting the millions of criminal aliens that were let in during the Biden administration. So, number one, we have to say, as a matter of leadership, and I would appreciate if the Democrats would join me on this. Let's be honest about the fact that we have way too many illegal aliens in this country. Our ICE officers should be supported in doing their job. You're trying to actually marshal the far left lunatic fringe, to engage in doxxing, to try to make it impossible for them to enforce the law, and in some cases, actually to engage in acts of domestic terrorism against our law enforcement officers. When you talk about different plans, different protocols, different policies, I forget exactly how you asked the question. Here's the simple fact. What we're going to do is make it easier for the American people's administration to enforce the American people's law, and that means that Democrats have to stop rallying the mob against legitimate law enforcement operations. And that means that we are going to get tougher, and that's what this AG position is about. We're going to get tougher at the people who are defrauding the United States by inciting violence against our law enforcement officers. That's one of the things that we're going to do. We've already started that work at the Department of Justice. We're going to keep on doing it and this new AG position is going to kick that into high gear.”

Curtis Houck

13,627 views • 7 months ago

Carl Jung has been dead for over sixty years, and yet that single sentence gets screenshotted, tattooed, and quoted more today than during his entire lifetime: "Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate." There's a reason it refuses to die, because it describes a mechanism most people are running right now without knowing it. Start with what "the unconscious" actually meant to Jung, because the internet flattened it into a self-help slogan and lost the terror of the original idea. Jung wasn't talking about forgotten memories or bad habits. He was describing an entire hidden operating system running underneath your awareness — built from childhood wounds, inherited family patterns, cultural programming, and what he called the shadow, the parts of yourself you disowned so early you don't even remember rejecting them. This system has preferences. It has an agenda. It makes decisions. And it does all of this in a language you were never taught to read. You experience the output of that system as your own free choices. The person you're inexplicably drawn to. The opportunity you self-sabotaged right before it worked. The same fight in every relationship with a different face across the table. The career you fell into and can't explain why. You narrate all of it afterward as personality, as preference, as luck, as timing, as fate. You author a story where you're the conscious decision-maker at the center. Jung's claim is that you're often not the author. You're the narrator explaining decisions that were already made somewhere you can't see. This is where his idea collides directly with the Matrix, and the comparison is more precise than people realize. The Matrix isn't a metaphor for the world being fake. It's a metaphor for a control system so seamless that the controlled experience it as ordinary life. Nobody in the Matrix feels trapped. They feel normal. They feel free. The prison works because it's invisible. That is an almost perfect description of what Jung meant by the unconscious directing your life while you call it fate. The programming doesn't feel like programming from the inside. It feels like you. The reason so few people ever escape it comes down to a brutal design flaw in human awareness. To question your conditioning, you'd have to use the very mind that was shaped by that conditioning. The lens can't easily see its own distortion. Your defense mechanisms were specifically built to keep certain truths out of consciousness, which means the parts of you most in need of examination are the exact parts your psyche is engineered to hide. You're guarded against yourself by yourself. That's why insight alone rarely changes anyone. People read this quote, feel a jolt of recognition, screenshot it, and then continue living the identical pattern the following Tuesday. Awareness that stays intellectual changes nothing. Jung was pointing at something far more demanding than understanding. He was describing a confrontation. Making the unconscious conscious is not a mindset shift. It's an excavation. It means sitting with the emotions you spent decades avoiding. It means noticing the pattern while you're inside it instead of explaining it away afterward. It means owning the version of yourself you've been performing against your entire life. It's uncomfortable, slow, occasionally humiliating work, which is precisely why the culture prefers to frame it as a nice quote instead of a life sentence you're currently serving. And notice what he chose as the final word. Not "destiny." Not "path." Fate. Fate is the word humans reach for when something feels inevitable and external, when it feels handed down rather than chosen. Jung's genius was recognizing that the feeling of inevitability is itself a symptom. When your life feels like it's happening to you, when the same situations keep arriving like weather you didn't order, that sense of powerlessness is often the fingerprint of the unconscious running the show. The more automatic your life feels, the more of it is being directed from underneath. There's a strange freedom buried in this that most people miss because the idea sounds so heavy. If your patterns were unconsciously installed, then they were installed. Which means they can, with enormous effort, be examined and rewritten. The alternative belief, that this is simply who you are and always will be, is far more of a prison than anything Jung described. He wasn't condemning you to fate. He was showing you the one door out of it, and the door only opens inward. Sixty years dead, and the man is still describing the average scroll through your own life with more accuracy than the program that served you this post. The unconscious runs the program. Consciousness is the only thing that was ever able to read the code.
0:29

Carl Jung has been dead for over sixty years, and yet that single sentence gets screenshotted, tattooed, and quoted more today than during his entire lifetime: "Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate." There's a reason it refuses to die, because it describes a mechanism most people are running right now without knowing it. Start with what "the unconscious" actually meant to Jung, because the internet flattened it into a self-help slogan and lost the terror of the original idea. Jung wasn't talking about forgotten memories or bad habits. He was describing an entire hidden operating system running underneath your awareness — built from childhood wounds, inherited family patterns, cultural programming, and what he called the shadow, the parts of yourself you disowned so early you don't even remember rejecting them. This system has preferences. It has an agenda. It makes decisions. And it does all of this in a language you were never taught to read. You experience the output of that system as your own free choices. The person you're inexplicably drawn to. The opportunity you self-sabotaged right before it worked. The same fight in every relationship with a different face across the table. The career you fell into and can't explain why. You narrate all of it afterward as personality, as preference, as luck, as timing, as fate. You author a story where you're the conscious decision-maker at the center. Jung's claim is that you're often not the author. You're the narrator explaining decisions that were already made somewhere you can't see. This is where his idea collides directly with the Matrix, and the comparison is more precise than people realize. The Matrix isn't a metaphor for the world being fake. It's a metaphor for a control system so seamless that the controlled experience it as ordinary life. Nobody in the Matrix feels trapped. They feel normal. They feel free. The prison works because it's invisible. That is an almost perfect description of what Jung meant by the unconscious directing your life while you call it fate. The programming doesn't feel like programming from the inside. It feels like you. The reason so few people ever escape it comes down to a brutal design flaw in human awareness. To question your conditioning, you'd have to use the very mind that was shaped by that conditioning. The lens can't easily see its own distortion. Your defense mechanisms were specifically built to keep certain truths out of consciousness, which means the parts of you most in need of examination are the exact parts your psyche is engineered to hide. You're guarded against yourself by yourself. That's why insight alone rarely changes anyone. People read this quote, feel a jolt of recognition, screenshot it, and then continue living the identical pattern the following Tuesday. Awareness that stays intellectual changes nothing. Jung was pointing at something far more demanding than understanding. He was describing a confrontation. Making the unconscious conscious is not a mindset shift. It's an excavation. It means sitting with the emotions you spent decades avoiding. It means noticing the pattern while you're inside it instead of explaining it away afterward. It means owning the version of yourself you've been performing against your entire life. It's uncomfortable, slow, occasionally humiliating work, which is precisely why the culture prefers to frame it as a nice quote instead of a life sentence you're currently serving. And notice what he chose as the final word. Not "destiny." Not "path." Fate. Fate is the word humans reach for when something feels inevitable and external, when it feels handed down rather than chosen. Jung's genius was recognizing that the feeling of inevitability is itself a symptom. When your life feels like it's happening to you, when the same situations keep arriving like weather you didn't order, that sense of powerlessness is often the fingerprint of the unconscious running the show. The more automatic your life feels, the more of it is being directed from underneath. There's a strange freedom buried in this that most people miss because the idea sounds so heavy. If your patterns were unconsciously installed, then they were installed. Which means they can, with enormous effort, be examined and rewritten. The alternative belief, that this is simply who you are and always will be, is far more of a prison than anything Jung described. He wasn't condemning you to fate. He was showing you the one door out of it, and the door only opens inward. Sixty years dead, and the man is still describing the average scroll through your own life with more accuracy than the program that served you this post. The unconscious runs the program. Consciousness is the only thing that was ever able to read the code.

The Curious Tales

24,858 views • 2 months ago

MAGIC VIBES WITH EMIBONNIE #GMMTV2026 #EmiBonnie 🦊: The name of our series next year is "Moon Shadow". 🎤: How is it? Tell us abt it. 🐰: It's a relationship that's a bit of a love triangle. There's another character named "Jay" who is P'Film's character. The story is that P'Chan– 🦊: I play the role of Chan, who is a bar owner. 🐰: And I'm Key, a singer who applies to be a singer at the bar. 🦊: And my character asks, "Are you here just to sing?" 🎤: And what do you want her to do? Pls answer, pls answer. 🦊: We answered in the way you saw just now (in the pilot) that she's not just there to sing. 🐰: She's not just there to sing, 'kay? She's there for other things too. 🦊: Yeah, it's a relationship like a one night stand between P'Chan and N'Key. 🐰: But she doesn't want just one night. 🦊: She doesn't want it to be temporary, right? 🐰: She wants it to be forever. 🦊: She wants to stay overnight forever.* 🐰: But P'Chan has a lingering bond. 🦊: That is N'Film. N'Film stars as my ex girlfriend. 🐰: You can tell what her type is. 🦊: She has an ex who she hasn't been able to forget. There are still ties between them. 🎤: And what are you going to use to fight against that, Bonnie? 🐰: I'm good at giving affection and pleasing ppl. 🦊: She's very good at giving affection and being attentive. 🐰: So that's what I have to use to fight. 🦊: She doesn't stop fighting, she doesn't back down. 🐰: Well, is she as good at being attentive as me? 🦊: You'll have to see in the series whether she's good at being attentive and affectionate. 🎤: Is it hard to choose? 🐰: Yeah, is it? 🦊: There are options, aren't there? Each of them has different good qualities. 🐰: Hey, what does that mean? 🦊: They have their own good qualities. One of them is an ex, well, why are they an ex? 🐰: Favourite ex? 🦊: Nooo~ 🦊: There has to be a reason why they're an ex, right? 🐰: But they're a favourite? 🦊: 😂 🐰: A favourite ex. 🎤: Let's save the family problems for later 😆 🐰: Okay okay. 🦊: Well, honestly, I don't know yet how much of a favourite she is, but she might be, bc as soon as she appeared, even though she'd been gone for a long time, my heart still fluttered again. 🐰: 😐 🎤: And Film's eyes were something too. 🐰: They were something. I just touched her piano, and she was like, "Don't touch it!" 🦊: Yeah. 🐰: Can't touch her ex's gift at all. 🦊: The piano is something that I and N'Jay bought together, she bought it for me and we played it together all this time, and Key suddenly touched it. 🐰: See? That means she hasn't forgotten her ex. But I'm good at pleasing ppl, right? 🦊: Anything that's from the past, there are reasons why they're in the past. 🎤: And the ex is the past? 🦊: Yeah, the past is the past, the present is the present, and the future is– 🐰: Me, I'm your future. 🎤: 🤭 🦊: Well. Yes. 🎤: So you've matured in this series. 🦊: Yeah, we've matured in this series. 🐰: We've grown multiple steps. 🦊: Bonnie really matured a lot. 🐰: Yeah, it's the first series that's super spicy. 🦊: Pls stay tuned for whether the relationship between the three of us is going to be temporary, overnight, or forever. 🐰: The three of us? 🦊: Oh! Two of us, two of us. Sorry, I misspoke. 🐰: Three is fine. Sure. 🦊: Two ppl, but the relationship between the three of us. Three of us. 🐰: How it will turn out. 🦊: And pls check out the song that we sang in the trailer. It was us singing. 🐰: It's the song "ชั่วคราวหรือค้างคืนตลอดไป (Temporary or Overnight Forever)". 🦊: "ชั่วคราวหรือค้างคืนตลอดไป (Temporary or Overnight Forever)" by P'Mai Charoenpura (and Nueng Narongvit). 🐰: I'm not sure when they'll release it. 🎤: You're singers, can you sing it now. 🦊: Now? 🐰: (sings immediately, love her) 🦊: (sings too, touches Bonnie's chin for absolutely no reason) 🐰: She's playing an MV too. 🦊: (continues singing) [continued in replies]
5:18

MAGIC VIBES WITH EMIBONNIE #GMMTV2026 #EmiBonnie 🦊: The name of our series next year is "Moon Shadow". 🎤: How is it? Tell us abt it. 🐰: It's a relationship that's a bit of a love triangle. There's another character named "Jay" who is P'Film's character. The story is that P'Chan– 🦊: I play the role of Chan, who is a bar owner. 🐰: And I'm Key, a singer who applies to be a singer at the bar. 🦊: And my character asks, "Are you here just to sing?" 🎤: And what do you want her to do? Pls answer, pls answer. 🦊: We answered in the way you saw just now (in the pilot) that she's not just there to sing. 🐰: She's not just there to sing, 'kay? She's there for other things too. 🦊: Yeah, it's a relationship like a one night stand between P'Chan and N'Key. 🐰: But she doesn't want just one night. 🦊: She doesn't want it to be temporary, right? 🐰: She wants it to be forever. 🦊: She wants to stay overnight forever.* 🐰: But P'Chan has a lingering bond. 🦊: That is N'Film. N'Film stars as my ex girlfriend. 🐰: You can tell what her type is. 🦊: She has an ex who she hasn't been able to forget. There are still ties between them. 🎤: And what are you going to use to fight against that, Bonnie? 🐰: I'm good at giving affection and pleasing ppl. 🦊: She's very good at giving affection and being attentive. 🐰: So that's what I have to use to fight. 🦊: She doesn't stop fighting, she doesn't back down. 🐰: Well, is she as good at being attentive as me? 🦊: You'll have to see in the series whether she's good at being attentive and affectionate. 🎤: Is it hard to choose? 🐰: Yeah, is it? 🦊: There are options, aren't there? Each of them has different good qualities. 🐰: Hey, what does that mean? 🦊: They have their own good qualities. One of them is an ex, well, why are they an ex? 🐰: Favourite ex? 🦊: Nooo~ 🦊: There has to be a reason why they're an ex, right? 🐰: But they're a favourite? 🦊: 😂 🐰: A favourite ex. 🎤: Let's save the family problems for later 😆 🐰: Okay okay. 🦊: Well, honestly, I don't know yet how much of a favourite she is, but she might be, bc as soon as she appeared, even though she'd been gone for a long time, my heart still fluttered again. 🐰: 😐 🎤: And Film's eyes were something too. 🐰: They were something. I just touched her piano, and she was like, "Don't touch it!" 🦊: Yeah. 🐰: Can't touch her ex's gift at all. 🦊: The piano is something that I and N'Jay bought together, she bought it for me and we played it together all this time, and Key suddenly touched it. 🐰: See? That means she hasn't forgotten her ex. But I'm good at pleasing ppl, right? 🦊: Anything that's from the past, there are reasons why they're in the past. 🎤: And the ex is the past? 🦊: Yeah, the past is the past, the present is the present, and the future is– 🐰: Me, I'm your future. 🎤: 🤭 🦊: Well. Yes. 🎤: So you've matured in this series. 🦊: Yeah, we've matured in this series. 🐰: We've grown multiple steps. 🦊: Bonnie really matured a lot. 🐰: Yeah, it's the first series that's super spicy. 🦊: Pls stay tuned for whether the relationship between the three of us is going to be temporary, overnight, or forever. 🐰: The three of us? 🦊: Oh! Two of us, two of us. Sorry, I misspoke. 🐰: Three is fine. Sure. 🦊: Two ppl, but the relationship between the three of us. Three of us. 🐰: How it will turn out. 🦊: And pls check out the song that we sang in the trailer. It was us singing. 🐰: It's the song "ชั่วคราวหรือค้างคืนตลอดไป (Temporary or Overnight Forever)". 🦊: "ชั่วคราวหรือค้างคืนตลอดไป (Temporary or Overnight Forever)" by P'Mai Charoenpura (and Nueng Narongvit). 🐰: I'm not sure when they'll release it. 🎤: You're singers, can you sing it now. 🦊: Now? 🐰: (sings immediately, love her) 🦊: (sings too, touches Bonnie's chin for absolutely no reason) 🐰: She's playing an MV too. 🦊: (continues singing) [continued in replies]

K-bab

140,021 views • 9 months ago

yall think black hat sauce is methods wtf do you think is the base for those methods? It's making them believe and feel false realities > If you want real black hat alpha, this is it. YOU WANT your VSLs or marketing campaigns to have a high CVR, AOV & retention (mrr in the backend) black hat methods get to these means in many ways like (fake authority using ai for clebs, back end mrr, fake promises, etc) >> however you can overcome the need for all of this while getting the same end results by just curating the reality of the VSL and experience in general to fit what those methods would have done. like for example - how would we be able to invoke a first time experience ecstasy of emotion in a vsl? > not only will this make the experience of the ad unique but also give you a platform to create a real authority figure that matches the belief of a cleb. from my experience I've found the way to do this is visually, auditorily, and ofc with your creatives. As yall know for my VSLs I try to take very unique different angles, with very specific visuals that back it up. and if you have trouble with this, you're literally in the perfect time in the world. You can use sora 2, put in your theme & ideas and ask it to be creative, include 100 different shots/scenes (add a aesthetic source image to make the generations 100x better) and boom. You have so many different frames and angles to get inspired by. > Also with MRR, you know one neurochemical that boosts the fuck out of CVR & retention? makes you trust more in a offer, promise, and changes your consciousness in ways that subsequently makes you spend more? its oxytocin. best example that I always use. the Charity water VSL (search up on yt). $700m off of MRR how? because of how touching and deep it hit. those types of narratives and experiences is what secretes oxytocin. And that's one legit real way you can boost your mrr and keep it long term if your angle is tied in a way to keep eliciting that reaction. It can be for any offer or product, happy or sad (best to stick with happy unless for a charity vsl like this one, or if yk what you're doing). > However remember one chemical change doesn't mean everything. There are tons of different states of mind you can put someone in, but they won't led to the results you want unless you include Specifics (on the offer, promises, and social proofs/belief elements) A big idea & unique angle and a proposition that ties in the creative --> to a reason showing that they NEED to buy this offer for whatever reason. >>> these changes and efforts we go to make a VSL work, doesn't pull it's weight & potential if we don't see it through a lens of economic game theory. over the last 28 years or so "several lines of experimentation have discovered that our goal- directed behaviors can be under “unconscious control” (Custers & Aarts, 2010)" The unconscious mind is the foundation for all your customers actions, they act because the deeper sections of their brains pick up a cue run it through memory, and pre biologically embedded risk/reward and elimination scenarios to see if this new stimuli is similar/relevant to past stimuli that has aided in spreading it's genes in the past (i.e. been useful to the past generations which led to this trait being past on over and over again) For your purposes, the way to use this to your advantage and to activate it in a positive sense so it guides your customer to a conversion is to implement visual & auditory cues in your VSL that mirror the goal and desire/outcome they so deeply desire. this can be done by the language you use (copy), visuals/b roll etc. this will overlap with prefrontal–striatal loops as conscious intent ≈ 72 % making your customer already feel and get a grasp of their desires This is where belief and proofs come in, they all go hand in hand and strengthen the end goal (to buy). _____ also another note for the unique angle, drop off of CVRs happens also when a customer gets sight of a familiar stimulus in a VSL/offer (could be anything) even if they don't think of it consciously, the brain processes everything happening which is directed to be a data point for thought, through a memory check and relation test. If in the past, you had a bad experience with that stimulus, or something similar. The brain will count the offer as invalid with the outcome of lowering belief and seeing the future outcome as achievable. _______ more data on this inside also one of the biggest needle movers is tension in VSLs, include that in everything. 🥂
1:10

yall think black hat sauce is methods wtf do you think is the base for those methods? It's making them believe and feel false realities > If you want real black hat alpha, this is it. YOU WANT your VSLs or marketing campaigns to have a high CVR, AOV & retention (mrr in the backend) black hat methods get to these means in many ways like (fake authority using ai for clebs, back end mrr, fake promises, etc) >> however you can overcome the need for all of this while getting the same end results by just curating the reality of the VSL and experience in general to fit what those methods would have done. like for example - how would we be able to invoke a first time experience ecstasy of emotion in a vsl? > not only will this make the experience of the ad unique but also give you a platform to create a real authority figure that matches the belief of a cleb. from my experience I've found the way to do this is visually, auditorily, and ofc with your creatives. As yall know for my VSLs I try to take very unique different angles, with very specific visuals that back it up. and if you have trouble with this, you're literally in the perfect time in the world. You can use sora 2, put in your theme & ideas and ask it to be creative, include 100 different shots/scenes (add a aesthetic source image to make the generations 100x better) and boom. You have so many different frames and angles to get inspired by. > Also with MRR, you know one neurochemical that boosts the fuck out of CVR & retention? makes you trust more in a offer, promise, and changes your consciousness in ways that subsequently makes you spend more? its oxytocin. best example that I always use. the Charity water VSL (search up on yt). $700m off of MRR how? because of how touching and deep it hit. those types of narratives and experiences is what secretes oxytocin. And that's one legit real way you can boost your mrr and keep it long term if your angle is tied in a way to keep eliciting that reaction. It can be for any offer or product, happy or sad (best to stick with happy unless for a charity vsl like this one, or if yk what you're doing). > However remember one chemical change doesn't mean everything. There are tons of different states of mind you can put someone in, but they won't led to the results you want unless you include Specifics (on the offer, promises, and social proofs/belief elements) A big idea & unique angle and a proposition that ties in the creative --> to a reason showing that they NEED to buy this offer for whatever reason. >>> these changes and efforts we go to make a VSL work, doesn't pull it's weight & potential if we don't see it through a lens of economic game theory. over the last 28 years or so "several lines of experimentation have discovered that our goal- directed behaviors can be under “unconscious control” (Custers & Aarts, 2010)" The unconscious mind is the foundation for all your customers actions, they act because the deeper sections of their brains pick up a cue run it through memory, and pre biologically embedded risk/reward and elimination scenarios to see if this new stimuli is similar/relevant to past stimuli that has aided in spreading it's genes in the past (i.e. been useful to the past generations which led to this trait being past on over and over again) For your purposes, the way to use this to your advantage and to activate it in a positive sense so it guides your customer to a conversion is to implement visual & auditory cues in your VSL that mirror the goal and desire/outcome they so deeply desire. this can be done by the language you use (copy), visuals/b roll etc. this will overlap with prefrontal–striatal loops as conscious intent ≈ 72 % making your customer already feel and get a grasp of their desires This is where belief and proofs come in, they all go hand in hand and strengthen the end goal (to buy). _____ also another note for the unique angle, drop off of CVRs happens also when a customer gets sight of a familiar stimulus in a VSL/offer (could be anything) even if they don't think of it consciously, the brain processes everything happening which is directed to be a data point for thought, through a memory check and relation test. If in the past, you had a bad experience with that stimulus, or something similar. The brain will count the offer as invalid with the outcome of lowering belief and seeing the future outcome as achievable. _______ more data on this inside also one of the biggest needle movers is tension in VSLs, include that in everything. 🥂

Krma

37,202 views • 10 months ago

Vallée and the Closed System: Are We Prisoners? 🧠👽 Vallée: "Are We Being Taken Over by a Species from Somewhere in Space That's Vastly More Intelligent Than We Are?" 👽🧠 "..the simulation...was a new concept that I initially rejected." ~Vallée "Is it looking for us to try to interact with it as equals or with parity?" ~Scafish "Nobody says that to Congress, and I think Congress should hear it." ~Vallée If, "it's a closed system, we're like prisoners and something is going to happen to us, and there is very little we can do." ~Vallée Turn the thermostat dial. "If the temperature doesn't change, then I know I'm inside a control system. So, we can do the same thing with UFOs, but we have to react. We have to, number one, acknowledge that it exists, and number two, we have to react to it." ~Vallée ~~~ I've been wanting to share this one for a while... Vallée: "So, he said, the question you have to ask about UFOs is, number one, is it a natural system or an artificial system...control system. And if it is a control system, is it open or closed? In other words, are we being taken over by a species from somewhere in space that's vastly more intelligent than we are?" (I've never heard him even suggest that possibility.) Vallée: "You know, as Dr. Garry P. Nolan says, you know, people who have had ten, you know, scientific revolutions, or a hundred or a thousand, and come here with superior science to do something... And in which case, you know, it's a closed system, we're like prisoners and something is going to happen to us, and there is very little we can do. Or, is it an open system where we can, in fact, communicate with it. And if we can communicate with it, then the question for me as an information scientist is, what are the modalities of the interaction, you know? It's not just can we learn their language? And they say, you know, 'We come in peace to save mankind,' or something. Or 'We will give you the cure for cancer' or something. I don't think it's at that level." (Will we ever be able to get answers to these extremely important questions? If it's an open system, how do we communicate with it? How do we provoke it to react? We know it reacts to anything nuclear but we still don't know why. This is why we need the USG (and other governments) to present evidence that shows the masses this is real and extremely important for our species to investigate. If that evidence exists and is shown, we'll have an easier time getting the world's best minds to join the effort in figuring out the best way to answer these questions. We still may fail but we should at least try.) Vallée: "I think it's a meta-system. It's not a system. And that's my fear...if we can circle back to your earlier question about, you know, about NIDS and about BAASS, what we did for the government and what we did for the Defense Intelligence Agency. Half of the budget was spent developing, you know, a super database. And we don't know where it went. I mean, I'm not cleared to know where it went." (On the contractor (BAASS) side, Bigelow should have all copies of what AAWSAP produced. And on the DIA side, Lacatksi said he put all of the digital files in a specific place that he didn't name. As long as someone didn't delete it all, it should still be there. Vallée has said that the Capella database has about 250,000 cases from around the world.) Vallée: "But that would be a very interesting question, because the people who are getting [the database] are getting raw data, which we have very well organized, all in English. So they have the luxury of, you know, we had five translators from French, English, Portuguese, Russian, you know, everything was translated in a single structure across fourteen databases. "That's what we need to answer the question about the control system, and it's not being done. And we hired a whole team that we had trained to work on it. So to rebuild that will take the next ten or fifteen years. And nobody says that to Congress, and I think Congress should hear it, because it's our money." (As long as names and personal details are scrubbed from that database, there is no reason NOT to release it to the public. This way, we can take it and use AI to help decipher patterns and maybe answer some of these questions. Can Congress help us get access to that database?) Vallée: "When you ask, is it a control system? That's a big question." Peter Scafish Peter Skafish - "You asked, at one point, whether the system is open or closed, and you said, additionally, I believe, if it's open, that it would be possible to communicate back to it. And it sounds to me like that's the key question for you. Is, if you can understand what what the system of symbols is, or the modalities of communication, then you can understand enough to engage in some kind of communication, or at least give some kind of response to show that you understand." Vallée: "Yes." Scafish: "So then the question, and we have a member named Jacqueline, who has asked this. Could the system be stimulating us - provided there is such a system - to interact with it, more as subjects or agents than as something like animals or objects? Is it looking for us to try to interact with it as equals or with parity?" (When people report getting injured or sick from being in close proximity to UAP, it suggests to me that the phenomenon won't go out of its way to avoid affecting us in a negative manner if we get in their its/way (assuming it even knows that close encounters with UAP are not good for humans). Kind of like how we treat lower lifeforms. If we encounter a wild rabbit crossing the road, many of us will do our best to avoid it, but not if it means damaging our car or ourselves in an accident. It may ruin our day if we hit it, but it won't stop us from driving again in the future. Do NHI have bad days if their tech injures us or makes us sick? I have no clue.) Vallée: "Well, what I saw in the notes you gave me, is she was also asking: Is it a control system because we think it is? And that's a very interesting question. Because we react to the UFO phenomenon, or the UAP phenomenon. And, you know, at this point when I think about what I'm going to do next in this research, if I'm given the the opportunity to live a little longer, I'm not going to go back and write any more computer programs. There are better people to do that now, they have the data, and we're in a different phase now. We're in a whole different system. I have the luxury of doing some experiments I wanted to do for a long time." (Would have liked Scafish to ask him: What types of experiments?) Vallée: "So, if you think you are inside the control system, there are things that you can do. Or, if you think you're inside the simulation, you know, which was a new concept that I initially rejected, and then, you know, Ray's (Kurzweil?) work and others have brought it back to the forefront. And we have to ask that at the same time. Can we test it? How would you test it? Well, if, you know, I'm here in my apartment, and the temperature is constant in this apartment. But outside, I can see it's cold, or I can see the sun is out and it's warm, and how come it's constant here? So this would lead me to think that there is a control system, namely a thermostat, that is somewhere. "So I can start looking around the walls, and if I see dial, I can turn it, or I could start a fire and see what happens, see if the temperature changes. If the temperature doesn't change, then I know I'm inside a control system. So, we can do the same thing with UFOs, but we have to react. We have to, number one, acknowledge that it exists, and number two, we have to react to it."
7:26

Vallée and the Closed System: Are We Prisoners? 🧠👽 Vallée: "Are We Being Taken Over by a Species from Somewhere in Space That's Vastly More Intelligent Than We Are?" 👽🧠 "..the simulation...was a new concept that I initially rejected." ~Vallée "Is it looking for us to try to interact with it as equals or with parity?" ~Scafish "Nobody says that to Congress, and I think Congress should hear it." ~Vallée If, "it's a closed system, we're like prisoners and something is going to happen to us, and there is very little we can do." ~Vallée Turn the thermostat dial. "If the temperature doesn't change, then I know I'm inside a control system. So, we can do the same thing with UFOs, but we have to react. We have to, number one, acknowledge that it exists, and number two, we have to react to it." ~Vallée ~~~ I've been wanting to share this one for a while... Vallée: "So, he said, the question you have to ask about UFOs is, number one, is it a natural system or an artificial system...control system. And if it is a control system, is it open or closed? In other words, are we being taken over by a species from somewhere in space that's vastly more intelligent than we are?" (I've never heard him even suggest that possibility.) Vallée: "You know, as Dr. Garry P. Nolan says, you know, people who have had ten, you know, scientific revolutions, or a hundred or a thousand, and come here with superior science to do something... And in which case, you know, it's a closed system, we're like prisoners and something is going to happen to us, and there is very little we can do. Or, is it an open system where we can, in fact, communicate with it. And if we can communicate with it, then the question for me as an information scientist is, what are the modalities of the interaction, you know? It's not just can we learn their language? And they say, you know, 'We come in peace to save mankind,' or something. Or 'We will give you the cure for cancer' or something. I don't think it's at that level." (Will we ever be able to get answers to these extremely important questions? If it's an open system, how do we communicate with it? How do we provoke it to react? We know it reacts to anything nuclear but we still don't know why. This is why we need the USG (and other governments) to present evidence that shows the masses this is real and extremely important for our species to investigate. If that evidence exists and is shown, we'll have an easier time getting the world's best minds to join the effort in figuring out the best way to answer these questions. We still may fail but we should at least try.) Vallée: "I think it's a meta-system. It's not a system. And that's my fear...if we can circle back to your earlier question about, you know, about NIDS and about BAASS, what we did for the government and what we did for the Defense Intelligence Agency. Half of the budget was spent developing, you know, a super database. And we don't know where it went. I mean, I'm not cleared to know where it went." (On the contractor (BAASS) side, Bigelow should have all copies of what AAWSAP produced. And on the DIA side, Lacatksi said he put all of the digital files in a specific place that he didn't name. As long as someone didn't delete it all, it should still be there. Vallée has said that the Capella database has about 250,000 cases from around the world.) Vallée: "But that would be a very interesting question, because the people who are getting [the database] are getting raw data, which we have very well organized, all in English. So they have the luxury of, you know, we had five translators from French, English, Portuguese, Russian, you know, everything was translated in a single structure across fourteen databases. "That's what we need to answer the question about the control system, and it's not being done. And we hired a whole team that we had trained to work on it. So to rebuild that will take the next ten or fifteen years. And nobody says that to Congress, and I think Congress should hear it, because it's our money." (As long as names and personal details are scrubbed from that database, there is no reason NOT to release it to the public. This way, we can take it and use AI to help decipher patterns and maybe answer some of these questions. Can Congress help us get access to that database?) Vallée: "When you ask, is it a control system? That's a big question." Peter Scafish Peter Skafish - "You asked, at one point, whether the system is open or closed, and you said, additionally, I believe, if it's open, that it would be possible to communicate back to it. And it sounds to me like that's the key question for you. Is, if you can understand what what the system of symbols is, or the modalities of communication, then you can understand enough to engage in some kind of communication, or at least give some kind of response to show that you understand." Vallée: "Yes." Scafish: "So then the question, and we have a member named Jacqueline, who has asked this. Could the system be stimulating us - provided there is such a system - to interact with it, more as subjects or agents than as something like animals or objects? Is it looking for us to try to interact with it as equals or with parity?" (When people report getting injured or sick from being in close proximity to UAP, it suggests to me that the phenomenon won't go out of its way to avoid affecting us in a negative manner if we get in their its/way (assuming it even knows that close encounters with UAP are not good for humans). Kind of like how we treat lower lifeforms. If we encounter a wild rabbit crossing the road, many of us will do our best to avoid it, but not if it means damaging our car or ourselves in an accident. It may ruin our day if we hit it, but it won't stop us from driving again in the future. Do NHI have bad days if their tech injures us or makes us sick? I have no clue.) Vallée: "Well, what I saw in the notes you gave me, is she was also asking: Is it a control system because we think it is? And that's a very interesting question. Because we react to the UFO phenomenon, or the UAP phenomenon. And, you know, at this point when I think about what I'm going to do next in this research, if I'm given the the opportunity to live a little longer, I'm not going to go back and write any more computer programs. There are better people to do that now, they have the data, and we're in a different phase now. We're in a whole different system. I have the luxury of doing some experiments I wanted to do for a long time." (Would have liked Scafish to ask him: What types of experiments?) Vallée: "So, if you think you are inside the control system, there are things that you can do. Or, if you think you're inside the simulation, you know, which was a new concept that I initially rejected, and then, you know, Ray's (Kurzweil?) work and others have brought it back to the forefront. And we have to ask that at the same time. Can we test it? How would you test it? Well, if, you know, I'm here in my apartment, and the temperature is constant in this apartment. But outside, I can see it's cold, or I can see the sun is out and it's warm, and how come it's constant here? So this would lead me to think that there is a control system, namely a thermostat, that is somewhere. "So I can start looking around the walls, and if I see dial, I can turn it, or I could start a fire and see what happens, see if the temperature changes. If the temperature doesn't change, then I know I'm inside a control system. So, we can do the same thing with UFOs, but we have to react. We have to, number one, acknowledge that it exists, and number two, we have to react to it."

Joe Murgia

27,613 views • 8 months ago

Doug Leone, Chairman of Sequoia Capital, on why childhood pain is the most reliable predictor of relentless drive: Asked what makes the culture work, he doesn't begin with strategy, markets, or how they pick founders. He begins with a screening criterion most firms would never say out loud: "So, I think it starts with the people that we hire. We hired people that had a shock in their system when they were growing up." Then he names the shocks: "Maybe they were shunned. Maybe they were too smart for their own good. Maybe they were left by a parent. Maybe they were in a vicious competition with a twin brother. We have all those." doug leone puts himself in the sample: "In my case, I came from Europe. I got abused in high school. I was pissed off." His thesis is that the wound never closes, and that this is exactly what makes it useful: "So, we find these folks are a little edgy and for the rest of their lives they have something to prove in some ways not very different than founders." Credentials only tell you what someone has already done. The shock tells you what they're still trying to settle, and Leone is betting that it keeps producing long after the credentials stop. But he's equally clear that the trait arrives damaged. The same experience that manufactures the drive also isolates the person carrying it: "We put those people in an environment of trust. We teach them because those people and starting with myself, we were not pros at using the we pronoun." He's diagnosing his own hire, and himself: "Those people tend to be I people because they were set aside and we put them in a circle of trust and we teach them that we is better than I." The mechanism that makes the lesson hold is payroll: "We get compensation right. We don't have a situation that Johnny makes 10% more than Susie. It's pretty flat, which means we share things among us." You can't ask people who were set aside as children to trust each other while paying them on a scale that ranks them against each other. Flatten the pay and you delete the internal scoreboard, so the need to prove something has nowhere to point except outward. Which is where the drive finally goes: "And so we have this need, this incessant need to do something, to win that never goes away. And so when you say we work hard, it's all we've ever known."
1:17

Doug Leone, Chairman of Sequoia Capital, on why childhood pain is the most reliable predictor of relentless drive: Asked what makes the culture work, he doesn't begin with strategy, markets, or how they pick founders. He begins with a screening criterion most firms would never say out loud: "So, I think it starts with the people that we hire. We hired people that had a shock in their system when they were growing up." Then he names the shocks: "Maybe they were shunned. Maybe they were too smart for their own good. Maybe they were left by a parent. Maybe they were in a vicious competition with a twin brother. We have all those." doug leone puts himself in the sample: "In my case, I came from Europe. I got abused in high school. I was pissed off." His thesis is that the wound never closes, and that this is exactly what makes it useful: "So, we find these folks are a little edgy and for the rest of their lives they have something to prove in some ways not very different than founders." Credentials only tell you what someone has already done. The shock tells you what they're still trying to settle, and Leone is betting that it keeps producing long after the credentials stop. But he's equally clear that the trait arrives damaged. The same experience that manufactures the drive also isolates the person carrying it: "We put those people in an environment of trust. We teach them because those people and starting with myself, we were not pros at using the we pronoun." He's diagnosing his own hire, and himself: "Those people tend to be I people because they were set aside and we put them in a circle of trust and we teach them that we is better than I." The mechanism that makes the lesson hold is payroll: "We get compensation right. We don't have a situation that Johnny makes 10% more than Susie. It's pretty flat, which means we share things among us." You can't ask people who were set aside as children to trust each other while paying them on a scale that ranks them against each other. Flatten the pay and you delete the internal scoreboard, so the need to prove something has nowhere to point except outward. Which is where the drive finally goes: "And so we have this need, this incessant need to do something, to win that never goes away. And so when you say we work hard, it's all we've ever known."

Big Brain Business

28,618 views • 15 days ago

Most people think they understand finance. They don't. They know how to send money. Maybe how to trade. But the actual machinery underneath who controls which assets, who gets access to which markets, who decides who can even participate most people never see that part. And that's exactly where the problem starts. Right now, trillions of dollars in real-world value real estate, bonds, private credit, alternative funds are locked inside systems that were never designed to include you. Not unless you have the right passport, the right broker, the right balance in the right bank account. Traditional finance has always had an invisible velvet rope. Most of us just never got close enough to see it. Blockchain was supposed to change that. And it tried. DeFi opened a door. But even DeFi, for all its freedom, couldn't actually touch the real world. Tokens, yes. Speculation, yes. But actual real-world assets handled with proper compliance, proper security, proper legal enforceability that gap never really closed. Until something like Real comes along and asks a very different question. What if you didn't bolt RWA tokenization on top of an existing chain? What if you built the entire Layer 1 around it from the ground up? That's what Real is. The first fully decentralized, fully permissionless L1 blockchain built specifically not partially, not as a feature, but architecturally for the native tokenization of Real-World Assets. What does that mean ? It means things like bonds, real estate, private credit, and commodities can live on-chain with full transparency, full compliance, and full security baked into the protocol itself. Not added later. Not patched in. Native. They call it solving the "RWA Trilemma." Most tokenization projects have to sacrifice one of three things security, decentralization, or regulatory compliance. You either get compliant and centralized, or decentralized and legally fragile. Real built a hybrid validator architecture that doesn't make you choose. Business validators tokenizers, risk scorers, insurers each play a specific role in the asset lifecycle, staking tokens and facing real onchain penalties if they act wrong. The result is a system where real-world assets carry their own risk data, their own compliance metadata, and their own insurance all embedded directly at the protocol level. $29 million raised. A partnership with Wiener Privatbank SE: an actual institution. A partnership with RWA Inc. The $16 trillion RWA opportunity. A target of $500 million in tokenized assets. The numbers matter. But what matters more is the architecture. This feels like someone actually sat down and thought: what would financial infrastructure look like if it was rebuilt for the next hundred years? Finance was always a wall. What Real is building slowly, quietly, but very deliberately might just be a door. And most people still don't see it yet. #UCCC
3:39

Most people think they understand finance. They don't. They know how to send money. Maybe how to trade. But the actual machinery underneath who controls which assets, who gets access to which markets, who decides who can even participate most people never see that part. And that's exactly where the problem starts. Right now, trillions of dollars in real-world value real estate, bonds, private credit, alternative funds are locked inside systems that were never designed to include you. Not unless you have the right passport, the right broker, the right balance in the right bank account. Traditional finance has always had an invisible velvet rope. Most of us just never got close enough to see it. Blockchain was supposed to change that. And it tried. DeFi opened a door. But even DeFi, for all its freedom, couldn't actually touch the real world. Tokens, yes. Speculation, yes. But actual real-world assets handled with proper compliance, proper security, proper legal enforceability that gap never really closed. Until something like Real comes along and asks a very different question. What if you didn't bolt RWA tokenization on top of an existing chain? What if you built the entire Layer 1 around it from the ground up? That's what Real is. The first fully decentralized, fully permissionless L1 blockchain built specifically not partially, not as a feature, but architecturally for the native tokenization of Real-World Assets. What does that mean ? It means things like bonds, real estate, private credit, and commodities can live on-chain with full transparency, full compliance, and full security baked into the protocol itself. Not added later. Not patched in. Native. They call it solving the "RWA Trilemma." Most tokenization projects have to sacrifice one of three things security, decentralization, or regulatory compliance. You either get compliant and centralized, or decentralized and legally fragile. Real built a hybrid validator architecture that doesn't make you choose. Business validators tokenizers, risk scorers, insurers each play a specific role in the asset lifecycle, staking tokens and facing real onchain penalties if they act wrong. The result is a system where real-world assets carry their own risk data, their own compliance metadata, and their own insurance all embedded directly at the protocol level. $29 million raised. A partnership with Wiener Privatbank SE: an actual institution. A partnership with RWA Inc. The $16 trillion RWA opportunity. A target of $500 million in tokenized assets. The numbers matter. But what matters more is the architecture. This feels like someone actually sat down and thought: what would financial infrastructure look like if it was rebuilt for the next hundred years? Finance was always a wall. What Real is building slowly, quietly, but very deliberately might just be a door. And most people still don't see it yet. #UCCC

Meow

11,164 views • 3 months ago

Seattle AI founder looks to leave as taxes rise, ‘Everybody that I know… is in the process of leaving’ | Rachel del Guidice, Fox News A Seattle AI startup founder says he’s preparing to leave the city as taxes rise, warning that many entrepreneurs are already heading for the exits. "We're out looking for an alternative," Jesse Proudman, president and CTO of a privacy-focused unrestricted generative AI platform, told Fox News Digital in an interview Friday. "So we were looking in Nevada, we're looking in Texas and Austin, we're looking at Nashville and Florida," Proudman said. "And these are climates where the business community is vibrant. They're climates where the government is encouraging entrepreneurship, where they're welcoming people, and they're not villainizing those who have built something." Proudman said he has been in Washington state for 28 years, and that is his third startup. He started his first company when he was 13. "Seattle used to be a place where you were excited to build something, where it was celebrated, where you could imagine creating something from nothing and that you could manifest that," Proudman said. "And for many years, for probably 20 years, that was the culture here," he added. "We had a vibrant startup community. We had a very supportive startup community. And the ecosystem worked. It helped build the companies. And then, for whatever reason, sort of over the last four or five years, we've seen this shift where entrepreneurship is now villainized. And it's an unfortunate and sad shift in what otherwise has been a phenomenal place to run businesses." In March, Washington state Democrats passed the "millionaires tax," which Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson signed on March 30. It's the state's first-ever income tax, pushed by progressives and socialists and opposed by conservatives. The Wall Street Journal editorial board called the new tax a "con" after its passage that will "inevitably capture the middle class." Proudman told Fox News Digital that he has similar concerns. "They're beginning with millionaires because that's an easier place to sell it. It's obvious that they intend to apply this to everybody," he said. Proudman said that his concern is that Washington state Sen. Jamie Pedersen, who sponsored the millionaires tax, intends to extend the tax beyond millionaires. "He said he intends to apply it to everybody and, quite frankly, its implication is that Washington will become the highest tax state in the country," Proudman said of Pedersen. "It doesn't make sense to continue to live here if you have mobility." During a recent event at Seattle University, Mayor Katie Wilson, a self-described democratic socialist, laughed and appeared to dismiss the possibility that millionaires would leave the state. "I think the claims that millionaires are going to leave our state are, like, super overblown. And if — the ones that leave, like, bye," Wilson said. Proudman sees a more stark situation. "The reality is everybody that I know that has means to leave has either left or is in the process of leaving," he said. "They've listed their homes, they're shopping elsewhere," Proudman continued. "And again, it's like, you don't want to be where you're not part of the community, where it doesn't feel like you're welcome. And so the mayor, whose job it is, is to build a vibrant city, is telling the people who have built companies here, who have created jobs in this city and this state that they're not wanted here." "It's the same thing that happened in California with Elon Musk," he added. "Again, he went to Texas. Like, you're not wanted, you'll move to a climate where you are." According to the Tax Foundation, the city of Seattle has the highest combined state and local sales tax rate, at 10.35%.
4:40

Seattle AI founder looks to leave as taxes rise, ‘Everybody that I know… is in the process of leaving’ | Rachel del Guidice, Fox News A Seattle AI startup founder says he’s preparing to leave the city as taxes rise, warning that many entrepreneurs are already heading for the exits. "We're out looking for an alternative," Jesse Proudman, president and CTO of a privacy-focused unrestricted generative AI platform, told Fox News Digital in an interview Friday. "So we were looking in Nevada, we're looking in Texas and Austin, we're looking at Nashville and Florida," Proudman said. "And these are climates where the business community is vibrant. They're climates where the government is encouraging entrepreneurship, where they're welcoming people, and they're not villainizing those who have built something." Proudman said he has been in Washington state for 28 years, and that is his third startup. He started his first company when he was 13. "Seattle used to be a place where you were excited to build something, where it was celebrated, where you could imagine creating something from nothing and that you could manifest that," Proudman said. "And for many years, for probably 20 years, that was the culture here," he added. "We had a vibrant startup community. We had a very supportive startup community. And the ecosystem worked. It helped build the companies. And then, for whatever reason, sort of over the last four or five years, we've seen this shift where entrepreneurship is now villainized. And it's an unfortunate and sad shift in what otherwise has been a phenomenal place to run businesses." In March, Washington state Democrats passed the "millionaires tax," which Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson signed on March 30. It's the state's first-ever income tax, pushed by progressives and socialists and opposed by conservatives. The Wall Street Journal editorial board called the new tax a "con" after its passage that will "inevitably capture the middle class." Proudman told Fox News Digital that he has similar concerns. "They're beginning with millionaires because that's an easier place to sell it. It's obvious that they intend to apply this to everybody," he said. Proudman said that his concern is that Washington state Sen. Jamie Pedersen, who sponsored the millionaires tax, intends to extend the tax beyond millionaires. "He said he intends to apply it to everybody and, quite frankly, its implication is that Washington will become the highest tax state in the country," Proudman said of Pedersen. "It doesn't make sense to continue to live here if you have mobility." During a recent event at Seattle University, Mayor Katie Wilson, a self-described democratic socialist, laughed and appeared to dismiss the possibility that millionaires would leave the state. "I think the claims that millionaires are going to leave our state are, like, super overblown. And if — the ones that leave, like, bye," Wilson said. Proudman sees a more stark situation. "The reality is everybody that I know that has means to leave has either left or is in the process of leaving," he said. "They've listed their homes, they're shopping elsewhere," Proudman continued. "And again, it's like, you don't want to be where you're not part of the community, where it doesn't feel like you're welcome. And so the mayor, whose job it is, is to build a vibrant city, is telling the people who have built companies here, who have created jobs in this city and this state that they're not wanted here." "It's the same thing that happened in California with Elon Musk," he added. "Again, he went to Texas. Like, you're not wanted, you'll move to a climate where you are." According to the Tax Foundation, the city of Seattle has the highest combined state and local sales tax rate, at 10.35%.

Owen Gregorian

74,734 views • 4 months ago

Pyotr Kurzin Pyotr Kurzin , host of The Global Gambit podcast, published an interesting interview with Peter Zeihan Peter Zeihan about Russia's war against Ukraine. I found it quite compelling, so I decided to share its main points: ▪️ "[Putin] has another seven million people he can mobilize if he wants to. Granted, that is the last generation of Russian men under 30. That obviously comes at a huge cost. But the Russians really have not put their shoulder into this war yet. They have tried to treat it as what they've said - a special military operation. We have not seen the full economy mobilized. We have not seen the industrial plants receive the investment necessary for a mass expansion. And we certainly haven't seen the population mobilized in a way past wars involving either the Soviets or the Russians have. We are starting to see that now. It is not risk-free. There's no guarantee they win this anymore. But to think there's going to be a political break in Russia without a significantly greater economic dislocation than we have seen so far is being over-optimistic." ▪️ "For the first time, we're actually seeing the Russians on a military economic footing. While that is, from the capitalistic point of view, wildly inefficient, that doesn't mean it can't work. It means that for the first time in 5 years, the Russians are actually fighting like this is a real war as opposed to something that's a sideshow. That does have consequences. It means we have to have, among other things, a full mobilization. But to say that that's going to break the system, I don't know if I buy that. It just puts stresses in different places." ▪️ "We have to have a much sharper break. And that means the apathy has to end. The best example I can give you is when Prigozhin led his rebellion. He marched his people 1,500 kilometers to Moscow. No regular military commanders joined him, and no regular military commanders tried to stop him. That really underlined just the huge degree of apathy in Russia, even among the security services, about what was going on. While that means it's really difficult for Putin to motivate people, it also means it's very difficult for Putin to be motivated against. Until we have a situation where we don't just have defectors on the front, but actually people shooting their commanders, I don't see Putin in significant domestic danger." ▪️ "Five years on, and Ukrainians are not simply still fighting, but they found new ways to give the Russians a bloody nose and actually change the mechanics on the ground. With the new military technology we've seen this year, that eight-to-one ratio is being achieved regularly. For the first time in this conflict, we are finally at an even fight. That doesn't mean the Ukrainians are going to win, but for the first time, they're not losing ground. And that matters immensely." ▪️ "The Ukrainians are trying to change the math of the war in a very intelligent way. The [drone] technology is innovative. Since the Ukrainians are launching hundreds of these a day, we're in a situation where the entire Russian system is running out of anti-aircraft capability. It changes the math because now the Russians have to defend every square inch and absolutely cannot. Putin has redirected air defenses to concentrate around a few specific areas, most notably Crimea and Moscow, and everything else is kind of open. What we've seen in just the last couple of weeks is that the mid-range strikes that the Ukrainians have been doing since March, basically destroying the logistical tail of the military forces within about 300 or 400 kilometers of the front, have had such an impact that the Ukrainians are actually able to go on the offensive in zones that are mined and win. For the first time, the Russians just can't get more drones, more men, more fuel, more food within the battle zone at all. And that's now affected their ability to hold the line." ▪️ "The amount of economic damage that the Ukrainians cause is really deeply immense. We've had over 140 attacks now on 'shadow fleet' tankers in the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea in just the last six weeks. We are looking at the end of Russia's ability to export through the Baltic or the Black Sea. Conservatively, that's three to four million barrels a day of oil and product. They'll still be able to use, for now, their Siberian export route, but collectively, rail and pipe there is less than a third of what goes west. Long-term impact. This is the end of Russia as a significant energy exporter. Once this physical infrastructure is destroyed, the wells will be shut in, and most of them are mature wells that require foreign technology for their development. The Russians will have to re-drill them, and they can't re-drill them until such time as the sanctions are gone. The Chinese don't have the technology." ▪️ "Strategically, there is no version of an independent Ukraine that can function unless Crimea is part of Ukraine, or at least neutral, because it commands the access to the rivers that are the lifeblood of the Ukrainian economy for their exports of steel and especially grains. And if the Russians control Crimea, they basically control the north half of the Black Sea and can project power west and south very easily. But that assumes that they can resupply Crimea successfully, which is no longer for sure. With the mid-range drone strikes, it basically turned Crimea into an island that the Russians can't support, which means it turns from a springboard into a sandbag. The Ukrainians don't need to make a push in order to drain the Russians. They're just forcing the Russians to use all of their logistical capacity to try to reach someplace that they really can't defend anymore. It's a good strategy." ▪️ "For the Ukrainians to win, they don't just need to get Crimea back. They need to make sure that the Russians lose the military capacity to threaten them. And that means neutralizing or occupying the two Russian cities that are the logistic hubs that enable the war - Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don. We're nowhere close to that right now. But if those two cities are removed from the equation, it's not just that Russia loses the ability to project power west; it loses the ability to project power into the Caucasus. And then you're talking about the entire southern rim of the Russian state falling. And all of those barriers are then completely up in the air, and the Russians are too far from all of them and can't defend any of their territory. And whatever vector a future threat comes in from, the Russians just can't deal with it at all." ▪️ "At this moment, it's a question of whether or not and how soon the Russians can copy what the Ukrainians are doing with drones against two other developments. Number one, the Russians are finally putting huge investments into their ballistic missile capabilities because that's a technology that the Ukrainians have no defense for. The first large numbers of those missiles will probably come online in about six months. That's about the same time that these joint facilities that the Ukrainians are building with the European NATO allies and a number of countries in the Persian Gulf will also come online. So, we're going to have many more Ukrainian memory drones at the same time we have many more Russian ballistic missiles. This war is changing month by month."
0:51

Pyotr Kurzin Pyotr Kurzin , host of The Global Gambit podcast, published an interesting interview with Peter Zeihan Peter Zeihan about Russia's war against Ukraine. I found it quite compelling, so I decided to share its main points: ▪️ "[Putin] has another seven million people he can mobilize if he wants to. Granted, that is the last generation of Russian men under 30. That obviously comes at a huge cost. But the Russians really have not put their shoulder into this war yet. They have tried to treat it as what they've said - a special military operation. We have not seen the full economy mobilized. We have not seen the industrial plants receive the investment necessary for a mass expansion. And we certainly haven't seen the population mobilized in a way past wars involving either the Soviets or the Russians have. We are starting to see that now. It is not risk-free. There's no guarantee they win this anymore. But to think there's going to be a political break in Russia without a significantly greater economic dislocation than we have seen so far is being over-optimistic." ▪️ "For the first time, we're actually seeing the Russians on a military economic footing. While that is, from the capitalistic point of view, wildly inefficient, that doesn't mean it can't work. It means that for the first time in 5 years, the Russians are actually fighting like this is a real war as opposed to something that's a sideshow. That does have consequences. It means we have to have, among other things, a full mobilization. But to say that that's going to break the system, I don't know if I buy that. It just puts stresses in different places." ▪️ "We have to have a much sharper break. And that means the apathy has to end. The best example I can give you is when Prigozhin led his rebellion. He marched his people 1,500 kilometers to Moscow. No regular military commanders joined him, and no regular military commanders tried to stop him. That really underlined just the huge degree of apathy in Russia, even among the security services, about what was going on. While that means it's really difficult for Putin to motivate people, it also means it's very difficult for Putin to be motivated against. Until we have a situation where we don't just have defectors on the front, but actually people shooting their commanders, I don't see Putin in significant domestic danger." ▪️ "Five years on, and Ukrainians are not simply still fighting, but they found new ways to give the Russians a bloody nose and actually change the mechanics on the ground. With the new military technology we've seen this year, that eight-to-one ratio is being achieved regularly. For the first time in this conflict, we are finally at an even fight. That doesn't mean the Ukrainians are going to win, but for the first time, they're not losing ground. And that matters immensely." ▪️ "The Ukrainians are trying to change the math of the war in a very intelligent way. The [drone] technology is innovative. Since the Ukrainians are launching hundreds of these a day, we're in a situation where the entire Russian system is running out of anti-aircraft capability. It changes the math because now the Russians have to defend every square inch and absolutely cannot. Putin has redirected air defenses to concentrate around a few specific areas, most notably Crimea and Moscow, and everything else is kind of open. What we've seen in just the last couple of weeks is that the mid-range strikes that the Ukrainians have been doing since March, basically destroying the logistical tail of the military forces within about 300 or 400 kilometers of the front, have had such an impact that the Ukrainians are actually able to go on the offensive in zones that are mined and win. For the first time, the Russians just can't get more drones, more men, more fuel, more food within the battle zone at all. And that's now affected their ability to hold the line." ▪️ "The amount of economic damage that the Ukrainians cause is really deeply immense. We've had over 140 attacks now on 'shadow fleet' tankers in the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea in just the last six weeks. We are looking at the end of Russia's ability to export through the Baltic or the Black Sea. Conservatively, that's three to four million barrels a day of oil and product. They'll still be able to use, for now, their Siberian export route, but collectively, rail and pipe there is less than a third of what goes west. Long-term impact. This is the end of Russia as a significant energy exporter. Once this physical infrastructure is destroyed, the wells will be shut in, and most of them are mature wells that require foreign technology for their development. The Russians will have to re-drill them, and they can't re-drill them until such time as the sanctions are gone. The Chinese don't have the technology." ▪️ "Strategically, there is no version of an independent Ukraine that can function unless Crimea is part of Ukraine, or at least neutral, because it commands the access to the rivers that are the lifeblood of the Ukrainian economy for their exports of steel and especially grains. And if the Russians control Crimea, they basically control the north half of the Black Sea and can project power west and south very easily. But that assumes that they can resupply Crimea successfully, which is no longer for sure. With the mid-range drone strikes, it basically turned Crimea into an island that the Russians can't support, which means it turns from a springboard into a sandbag. The Ukrainians don't need to make a push in order to drain the Russians. They're just forcing the Russians to use all of their logistical capacity to try to reach someplace that they really can't defend anymore. It's a good strategy." ▪️ "For the Ukrainians to win, they don't just need to get Crimea back. They need to make sure that the Russians lose the military capacity to threaten them. And that means neutralizing or occupying the two Russian cities that are the logistic hubs that enable the war - Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don. We're nowhere close to that right now. But if those two cities are removed from the equation, it's not just that Russia loses the ability to project power west; it loses the ability to project power into the Caucasus. And then you're talking about the entire southern rim of the Russian state falling. And all of those barriers are then completely up in the air, and the Russians are too far from all of them and can't defend any of their territory. And whatever vector a future threat comes in from, the Russians just can't deal with it at all." ▪️ "At this moment, it's a question of whether or not and how soon the Russians can copy what the Ukrainians are doing with drones against two other developments. Number one, the Russians are finally putting huge investments into their ballistic missile capabilities because that's a technology that the Ukrainians have no defense for. The first large numbers of those missiles will probably come online in about six months. That's about the same time that these joint facilities that the Ukrainians are building with the European NATO allies and a number of countries in the Persian Gulf will also come online. So, we're going to have many more Ukrainian memory drones at the same time we have many more Russian ballistic missiles. This war is changing month by month."

Anton Gerashchenko

27,981 views • 11 days ago

John Mayer is a master of his craft. He’s also one of the best I’ve come across at using analogy and demonstration to articulate and demystify the creative process. Here’s a 14-clip (~7-minute) masterclass on mastery and creativity: TL;DW 1/ “Whenever I want to write a big song, I can't...That's when I get writer's block: when I try to write a song to fill the entire galaxy. I've never gotten a song that way. But if I write about something the size of a glass of water—a week later, I notice it's got the universe in it. So I'd rather have the universe in a glass of water than try to make a glass of water fit in the universe.” 2/ "What connects with people is you connecting with yourself." 3/ “Writer’s block is when the two people inside of you—the writer and the reader—when the reader doesn’t love the writer. It is not a failure to write. It is a failure to catch the feedback loop of enjoying what you’re seeing and wanting to contribute more to it.” 4/ “Don't shoot ideas down before you have them. 'That won't work' is the worst thing you can ever say. 'That didn't work' is cool, but 'that won't work' is not a way to go through life.” 5/ “I’ve seen the Cool metric change so many times. I'm not telling you don't chase Cool. I'm saying…by the time you reach what you think is cool, Cool is like, 'over here now.’ ‘The princess is in another castle.' You know what I mean? That's a Mario reference.” 6/ "I'm one-half consumer, one-half artist. So I try to put music out that I myself would want to hear as somebody on the other end." 7/ "I'm seeing a lot of motivation about you following your passion, but I'm not seeing any critical thought to what that is or how to be better at that. So, really the product is passion and that's strange to me. Because my product growing up was sitting in a room yelling, 'Mom, I'm practicing,' for hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours. 8/ "But then also read up...You know, this stuff doesn't just appear. It comes from somewhere. And as soon as you realize you love something—it's almost like catching up with some great TV show on season 9, and you can go, 'oh my God, that means there's 8 seasons before this." 9/ "Whatever you learn is the tip of the iceberg. Dive underwater and find the rest of the iceberg." 10/ "So listening to Stevie Ray Vaughan brought me back to people like Kenny Burrell and Albert King and Jimi Hendrix and Elmore James. So it became this family tree growing out of my CD player." 11/ "I came up with these guys as like references…It’s like if you're into the NBA and you wear different jerseys and you pretend you're a different player in the driveway—that's what I was doing..." 12/ "Which is a wonderful technique for being yourself. Failing to sound exactly like the person you want to sound like is a wonderful way to sound like yourself." 13/ After watching Cory Wong play guitar, Mayer told him, "You have an anatomy thing working on your right hand. Your hand is shaped in a way—you have long fingers, very sinewy hands—that you're able to play like that. That is an example of someone making the most of their anatomical gifts... And I wish more people could embrace finding what their strengths are anatomically—the way your hand is shaped, the way your mind works, whatever—and play to those strengths." 14/ Mayer picks up an acoustic guitar and demonstrates his songwriting process. “Well, I don’t always do it,” he admitted, “because it requires a stupid bravery all the time.” “You just stare at the corner of the wall," Mayer explains then improvises some vocals, “stare at the corner of the wall / try to get it going on / but I can’t sometimes / you just keep going ’til you get something,” he stops singing. “You gotta keep forcing it, forcing it, forcing it…it doesn’t matter [what comes out of your mouth].” Follow Billy Oppenheimer for more content like this!
6:57

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

Billy Oppenheimer

1,382,401 views • 3 years ago

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, and Learn Claude Code Today. $5,000/month. $10,000/month. $20,000/month. People are building entire apps and charging clients thousands using Claude Code. You're still Googling 'how to center a div.' While you're binge-watching a show you won't remember next week, a 19 year old with zero coding experience just built a $5,000 SaaS product in one afternoon using the tool I'm about to break down. Same laptop. Same internet. Same 24 hours. He has Claude Code. You have Netflix. That's the only difference. This YouTube video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Save this post. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude.MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.
35:48

CANCEL Your Weekend Plans, and Learn Claude Code Today. $5,000/month. $10,000/month. $20,000/month. People are building entire apps and charging clients thousands using Claude Code. You're still Googling 'how to center a div.' While you're binge-watching a show you won't remember next week, a 19 year old with zero coding experience just built a $5,000 SaaS product in one afternoon using the tool I'm about to break down. Same laptop. Same internet. Same 24 hours. He has Claude Code. You have Netflix. That's the only difference. This YouTube video is a goldmine. Full Claude Code tutorial. Beginner to pro. Every feature. Every setup step. Every best practice. Zero prior knowledge needed. Save it. Watch it tonight. Not tomorrow. Tonight. Save this post. This is your complete Claude Code roadmap. Lose it and you lose the next 12 months of income. Follow Himanshu Kumar so you don't miss the breakdowns for each feature. ↓ 1. Understand What Claude Code Actually Is. You think Claude Code is just another chatbot. It's not. And that misunderstanding is why you're broke. ChatGPT gives you text. Claude Code gives you software. It runs in your terminal. It reads your entire codebase. It writes files directly to your project. It runs commands on your machine. It debugs errors autonomously. It builds features end to end. You're not chatting. You're deploying a developer. One that works 24/7. Never asks for a raise. Never calls in sick. Never pushes broken code at 5 PM on a Friday. People are charging clients $5,000-$10,000 for apps they built with Claude Code in 3 hours. And you didn't even know this tool existed because you're still asking ChatGPT to write you a to-do list. The gap between you and people making money with AI isn't intelligence. It's awareness. Now you're aware. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the complete breakdown of every Claude Code feature. ↓ 2. Set Up Claude Code Properly. Most people quit here. "It's too complicated." "I don't know terminal." "I'll set it up later." Later never comes. And "complicated" means "I watched for 30 seconds and gave up." The setup takes 10 minutes. Install Node.js. Install Claude Code via npm. Authenticate your account. Open your terminal. Done. 10 minutes. You spent longer this morning deciding what to have for breakfast. The video walks through every single click. Every command. Every screen. Assuming you know absolutely nothing. If you can download an app on your phone, you can set up Claude Code. It's the same level of difficulty. But you'll still tell yourself it's "too technical" because that excuse is more comfortable than admitting you're just scared to try something new. This is the setup that everything else builds on. Skip it and nothing works. ↓ 3. Use the Desktop App. You don't even need to live in the terminal if you don't want to. Claude Code has a desktop app. Clean interface. Visual feedback. Everything you need without touching command line. But here's the thing most people don't know: The desktop app isn't just a pretty wrapper. It lets you manage projects visually. See file changes in real time. Switch between projects instantly. The people making money with Claude Code use the desktop app for client projects because it's faster to manage multiple builds simultaneously. You're still opening 14 browser tabs to organize one project. They open one app and everything's there. Efficiency isn't a personality trait. It's a tool choice. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the desktop app workflow that handles 5 client projects at once. ↓ 4. Install the Right Dependencies. This is where beginners silently fail and blame the tool. Claude Code needs certain dependencies installed to work properly. Miss one and everything breaks. Then you go on Twitter and say "Claude Code doesn't work." It works fine. You just didn't read the setup guide. The video covers every dependency you need. What to install. How to install it. How to verify it's working. No guessing. No Stack Overflow rabbit holes at midnight. No "why isn't this working" for 3 hours. Watch the dependency section once. Follow every step. Never deal with setup issues again. You spent more time last week troubleshooting a printer than this takes. ↓ 5. Work Inside Your Code Editor. Claude Code integrates directly with your code editor. VS Code. Cursor. Whatever you use. It's not a separate window you alt-tab between. It's right there. In your workflow. You type a request. Claude writes the code. The code appears in your editor. You review it. Accept it. Done. No copy pasting between windows. No reformatting code that got mangled in transit. No "which version was the right one." It's like pair programming with someone who never gets distracted, never argues about naming conventions, and actually writes code that works on the first try. Your current coding process is: Google the problem, read 5 answers on Stack Overflow, copy the wrong one, debug for an hour, find the right one, paste it in, break something else, repeat. Claude Code's process is: describe what you want, get working code, move on with your life. Same hour. One method produces working software. The other produces frustration and a browser history full of Stack Overflow tabs. Stop coding the hard way. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for code editor setup guides and integration tips. ↓ 6. Master Basic Usage. Most people learn 5% of a tool and say they "know" it. You "know" Photoshop because you can crop an image. You "know" Excel because you can sum a column. You "know" Claude Code because you asked it one question. Basic usage means: How to give Claude Code context about your project. How to ask for changes to existing code. How to generate new files and features. How to review what Claude produces. How to iterate when the output isn't perfect. These basics are the foundation of everything. Skip them and every advanced feature feels confusing. Master them and every advanced feature feels obvious. The video breaks down each one with real examples. Not theory. Actual usage on actual projects. You've been using AI tools at 5% capacity and wondering why your results are 5% of what others get. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code usage tips. ↓ 7. Learn Every Command. Claude Code has commands that most users never discover. Because most users type one message and expect magic. That's not how professionals use it. Professionals use specific commands that tell Claude Code exactly what to do, how to do it, and what constraints to follow. The difference between a beginner and someone making $10K/month with Claude Code is knowing which command to use and when. The video walks through every single one. Not just what they do. But when to use each one. And why one command is better than another for specific situations. You've been using Claude Code like a hammer. These commands turn it into a full toolbox. Stop treating a power tool like a blunt instrument. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the command cheat sheet I use daily. ↓ 8. Understand Modes and Shortcuts. Speed matters. The person who builds an app in 2 hours charges $5,000. The person who builds the same app in 2 days charges $2,000. Same app. Same quality. Different speed. Different income. Claude Code has modes that change how it operates. And shortcuts that cut your workflow time in half. Most people don't know either exists. They use Claude Code in default mode for everything. Like driving a car in first gear on the highway. Technically it works. But everyone is passing you. The video shows you every mode. Every shortcut. Every time-saving trick that separates the people charging $2,000 per project from the people charging $10,000. Speed is money. Literally. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the shortcuts that cut my build time by 60%. ↓ 9. Write a Proper Planning Prompt. This is the section that separates amateurs from professionals. And it's the section most people skip. A planning prompt tells Claude Code what you're building before you start building it. Architecture. File structure. Technologies. Features. Constraints. Edge cases. Without a planning prompt, Claude Code guesses. And guessing produces garbage. With a planning prompt, Claude Code executes a clear plan. And clear plans produce working software. The video shows you exactly how to write a planning prompt that makes Claude Code produce professional-grade output on the first try. "But I just want to start coding." That's why your code breaks every time. That's why you restart projects 4 times. That's why nothing you build ever gets finished. Because you refuse to plan. A 5-minute planning prompt saves you 5 hours of debugging. But you'd rather skip the 5 minutes and suffer through the 5 hours because patience isn't your thing. And that's exactly why you're not making money. Planning is the most underpaid skill in coding. And the most overpaid when you master it. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the planning prompt templates I use for every client project. ↓ 10. Choose the Right Model. Claude Code lets you select different AI models. Not all models are the same. Not all tasks need the same model. Using the most powerful model for a simple task wastes credits. Using a basic model for a complex task wastes time. The video explains: Which model to use for quick fixes. Which model to use for complex architecture. Which model to use for debugging. Which model to use for code generation. Most people pick one model and use it for everything. That's like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. Model selection is strategy. And strategy is money. The people making $10K/month with Claude Code are strategic about every credit they spend. You're burning through credits because you use the most expensive model to write a hello world. ↓ 11. Use Git and Version Control. If you're not using version control, you're one mistake away from losing everything. Claude Code integrates with Git. Every change tracked. Every version saved. Every mistake reversible. Without Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You can't undo it. You start over. 3 hours wasted. With Git: Claude makes a change. It breaks something. You roll back in 5 seconds. Keep working. Version control isn't optional. It's insurance. And the people not using it are the same people who say "I lost my entire project" like it's something that just happens. It doesn't just happen. It happens because you didn't set up Git. The video walks through the entire Git integration. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the Git workflow that's saved every project I've ever built. ↓ 12. Set Up Claude.MD and Memory. This is the feature that makes Claude Code feel like a real team member instead of a stranger you explain everything to every time. ClaudeMD is a memory file. You tell Claude Code about your project once. It remembers forever. Coding style preferences. Project architecture decisions. Technology stack. File naming conventions. Business logic rules. Without ClaudeMD: Every new conversation starts from zero. You explain the same things repeatedly. Output is inconsistent. With ClaudeMD: Claude knows your project. Claude follows your rules. Claude produces consistent, professional code. The difference between a sloppy freelancer and a reliable agency is consistency. Claude. MD gives you consistency without the agency overhead. Most people don't set this up and wonder why Claude Code gives different answers every time. ↓ 13. Automate with Tasks. This is where Claude Code stops being a tool and starts being an employee. Tasks let you define repeating workflows. "Every time I push code, run tests." "Every time I create a new file, add boilerplate." "Every time I start a session, check for errors." Automated. Hands-free. Consistent. You're doing these things manually every single day. The same checks. The same steps. The same routine. Tasks do them automatically. So you can focus on the work that actually makes money. Every manual task you automate is time you get back. And time is the only thing you can never make more of. Save this post. Follow Himanshu Kumar for the task automation templates that run my entire workflow. ↓ 14. Explore Features Most People Never Touch. The video covers features that 95% of Claude Code users don't know exist. Because they watched a 3-minute TikTok about Claude Code and think they're experts now. They're not. They're using 5% of a tool that can do everything. The full tutorial goes deep into features that most tutorials skip because they're "too advanced." They're not too advanced. They're too valuable for lazy creators to bother explaining. This video explains all of them. Clearly. For beginners. The 5% of features you don't know about are the 5% that make people rich. ↓ Let's zoom out. I just broke down 14 sections of Claude Code. Setup and installation. Desktop app. Dependencies. Code editor integration. Basic usage. Commands. Modes and shortcuts. Planning prompts. Model selection. Git and version control. Memory and Claude. MD. Tasks and automation. Advanced features. All in one video. All free. All beginner friendly. The person who masters even half of these in the next 2 weeks will be in the top 1% of Claude Code users. The top 1% of Claude Code users are the ones charging $5,000-$10,000 per project and building them in a single afternoon. Everyone else is asking ChatGPT to fix their resume. Same tools. Same access. Completely different outcomes. Because one person treats AI like a toy. And the other treats it like a business. ↓ Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear. You don't have a talent problem. You don't have an intelligence problem. You don't have a resources problem. You have an action problem. Everything I just listed has a free tutorial right here in the attached video. 33 minutes. That's it. 33 minutes to learn the tool that people are using to build $5,000-$20,000/month businesses. You spent more time today scrolling Twitter than it takes to watch this video. You spent more time this week watching Netflix than it takes to master Claude Code basics. You spent more time this month doing nothing than it would take to completely change your income. The information is free. The tool is accessible. The opportunity is here. The only thing missing is you caring enough to start. ↓ CANCEL your plans this week. This isn't optional anymore. The people learning Claude Code right now will be building apps for the people who didn't learn it. That's not a prediction. That's already happening. Companies are replacing $150/hour developers with one person and Claude Code. If you code: learn Claude Code or become half as valuable by next year. If you don't code: learn Claude Code or miss the biggest opportunity to start earning from tech without a CS degree. There's no path forward that doesn't include AI coding tools. None. You have one window. Right now. This week. ↓ Here's your action plan for the next 7 days: Day 1: Watch the full video. Install Claude Code. Set up dependencies. Day 2: Learn basic usage. Try 5 different commands. Day 3: Write your first planning prompt. Build a small project. Day 4: Set up Claude. MD. Configure your memory file. Day 5: Master modes and shortcuts. Build a second project faster. Day 6: Set up Git integration. Automate with tasks. Day 7: Build something real. A tool, an app, a website. Ship it. 7 days. One tool. One completely different skill set. One completely different income potential. Or 7 more days of scrolling Twitter watching other people build things while you "plan to start." Your call. ↓ This is the most important video you'll watch this year. 33 minutes. Complete Claude Code mastery. From zero to building real projects. Save this post. Come back to it every single day this week. Check off each section as you complete it. Follow Himanshu Kumar for daily Claude Code breakdowns, advanced tutorials, and the exact workflows that are turning beginners into $10K/month builders. The only thing between you and $10K/month with Claude Code is this video and 7 days. Don't waste them. You Must Follow me Himanshu Kumar, so i can send you DM.

Himanshu Kumar

101,793 views • 5 months ago