Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🟣🌍✌️🇿🇦🇪🇬🚨COMPETITION🚨 Score prediction for Amakhosi! 🔸Finalized their preparations today with some familiar faces back. 🔸 Could qualify for quarterfinals, need goals & not leak. 🔸 Al Masry missing some key players. 💰: R250 🔗: 👨‍💻: Promo code: VELILE25 #TotalEnergiesCAFCC| #HollywoodbetsxVelile | #AzisheKe

10,368 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

🚨 Donate to Gaza urgently 🚨 🔗 To contribute: Today in Gaza… the heat is unbearable. The sun burns through tents… the ground itself feels like fire… and children are running across destroyed roads carrying empty containers — not to play… not to laugh… but to search for water before their bodies collapse from thirst. 💧 Listen to the voices of the people in Gaza. Listen to the cries of exhausted mothers. Listen to children calling for water under this deadly heat. Listen to the sound of empty containers hitting the ground. Today, we distributed more than 400,000 liters of water across 4 displacement camps in Gaza: 📍 Al-Taif Camp 📍 Dhabit Camp 📍 Al-Farouq Camp 📍 Al-Nasr Camp But the suffering is far greater than what we can reach. Children are walking for hours under extreme heat… their faces burned by the sun… their lips dry from thirst… their bodies shaking from dehydration. 💔 Some children collapse before reaching water 💔 Some families wait all day for a single container 💔 Some mothers give their children the last sip while remaining thirsty themselves In Gaza today… water is no longer just a need. It has become survival itself. People are not asking for luxury. They are asking for one drink… one moment of relief… one chance to survive another burning day. ✨ Thank you to the voices standing with Gaza: 🤍 William Menaker (Will 🦥 Menaker) 🔥 Felix Biederman (GoliathFan1952) ✨ Eyup Lovely (Eyup Lovely) 🚨 Please do not delay. Every donation today helps deliver water before another child collapses from thirst under this unbearable heat. 🔗 To contribute:

Muhmmed Project𓂆 🇵🇸

12,872 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

⚡ ️ Energy War is Coming! 🚨 Get your troops ready for team formation - you have 1 week to prep! The ultimate energy challenge is here. Whether you’re clocking steps in STEPN, STEPN GO, or both - every move counts. Form your squad, lock your $SUT, and compete in weekly team battles to climb the leaderboard. Sync up and strategize with your crew. What is Energy War? 🧠 A competitive team game powered by your real STEPN and STEPN GO activity. Use your MORCHI Achievement NFTs to join a team of up to 6 players and accumulate the highest total energy each week. The top 5 teams will split the weekly prize pool. Strategic team building, daily activity, and bonus energy mechanics are all part of the play. How to Enter 1️⃣ Form a squad of 6 unique players (each linked to an FSL ID) 📅 Team forming starts on May 6th 2️⃣Each player must: 👉 Hold at least 1 MORCHI Achievement NFT 👉 Lock 500 $SUT for 6 weeks 👉 Burn their daily STEPN / STEPN GO energy, activities will automatically sync to MOOAR 📅 Energy War kicks off on May 12th Gameplay Overview 🕹 Rounds last 1 week 🕹 Leaderboards reset every round 🕹 Your team score = sum of energy from all 6 members 🕹 Energy is calculated daily from STEPN and STEPN GO activity Boost your score with your main MORCHI Achievement NFT rarity energy multiplier: 🔸Legendary: +125% 🔸Rare: +110% 🔸Common: +100% Bonus of up to +25% for holding extra MORCHI Achievement NFTs (should be locked before the start of the game): 🔸Common: +0.2% 🔸Rare: +1% 🔸Legendary: +5% 💡 During each round, you can form a new team for the battles ahead! $SUT Lock-up and Rewards 💰 Lock 500 $SUT per user to enter and get back 90% after 6 weeks! 💰 Compete for weekly rewards sponsored by the $SUT Ecosystem Fund, totaling an additional 20% of the total locked $SUT in each round 💰 The top 5 teams share the rewards each week 👉 Within each winning team, rewards are distributed based on individual energy contributions Key Tips Before Launch 💡 Link your FSL ID to STEPN OG 💡 Make sure your MORCHI Achievement NFTs are ready in your FSL ID wallet 💡 Talk strategy with your squad to maximize your weekly score! MORCHI 👉 Take note: The MORCHI game and mint have officially wrapped up. Achievement NFTs now move into the next stage - Energy War - where the journey continues! May 6th, it begins. ⚔️⚡️

MOOAR

92,086 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Gojek completes more food deliveries than GrubHub, Uber Eats, and DoorDash combined, and more rides per day than Lyft. Vikrama Dhiman (Vikrama Dhiman) heads all things product at Gojek Tech, including product management, design, and research, across teams in Indonesia, Singapore and India. He is among the most well-known and respected product leaders in all of Asia, and one of my most requested guests. In our conversation, we discuss: 🔸 The most common traits of successful PMs 🔸 The 3 W’s framework for PM career growth 🔸 The right way to push back as a PM 🔸 The Four A’s of leveling up in product management 🔸 Common pitfalls that stall PM careers 🔸 Advice for transitioning into PM 🔸 Why intent alone is not enough 🔸 Much more Listen now 👇 - YouTube: - Spotify: - Apple: Some key takeaways: 1. As a PM—especially early in your career—make sure you’re nailing execution before you spend too much time on strategy. Effective strategic thinking requires context on the company, product, and stakeholders that you might not have yet. But you always have opportunities to execute and make your team members’ lives easier. As you execute more, you’ll begin to understand the strategic needs more deeply, and you’ll have more opportunities to contribute at that level. 2. Three traits that make you a great PM to work with: a. Raise difficult issues without being difficult to work with b. Bring up important topics without drawing importance to yourself c. Remember that you are in charge of getting decisions made, not making the decisions yourself 3. Good PMs produce good artifacts: PRDs, product notes, design briefs, etc. These demonstrate your proficiency across core PM skills, and they are your opportunity to “have impact on the impact”—to add value to a team that is adding value to the company. If you’re not sure what to focus on next in your PM career, go scrutinize your recent artifacts and ask how they could be improved. 4. To push back on ideas without being difficult to work with, ask clarifying questions and bring the conversation to a logical space rather than an emotional one. Here are some of Vikrama’s favorites: a. Why has this become suddenly important? b. So that I am clear, can you help clarify xyz? c. What would success look like? d. What time frame do you need this in? 5. Vikrama’s 3 W’s framework for PM career growth comprises (1) what you produce, (2) what you bring to the table, and (3) what your operating model is. Strong product managers excel at two of the three W’s. Product managers who rise in their career excel at all three. 6. Three mindset shifts that can enable faster growth: a. Focus on things you can control: Concentrate your efforts on aspects of your role that you can influence or control, especially as you advance in your career. b. Always embrace change: As an IC PM, you experience rapid change. It’s important that as you get to mid/senior level, you never stop looking for ways to improve. c. How you see yourself: Cultivate a positive and growth-oriented mindset about yourself and your capabilities. 7. Three core competencies to focus on when transitioning into PM roles are (1) data, (2) design/research, and (3) technology. Someone from a design background should focus on strengthening data or tech skills to complement their existing expertise. Similarly, someone from a tech background should pick a design skill to focus on. This approach allows for maximum leverage.

Lenny Rachitsky

115,463 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

GM 🟧🚩Runes 2.0 UPGRADE (Turbo Flag) is coming soon🚨 However, we still don’t know what it’s going to be!! 🎰 My suggestion is a simple Weekly BTC Price Prediction Market 😁 How it could work ⬇️ 🔸 Every 1,008 blocks (~1 week) BTC price would be checked and Over/Under line would be established 🔸 Rune enjoyoors would then have ~24 hours (144 blocks) to send Runes to one of the two dedicated bitcoin addresses 🔼 First one, if you think that BTC price is going to be higher in ~7 days (1,008 blocks) - OVER 🔽 Second one, if you think that BTC price is going to be lower - UNDER 🔸 After about a week (1,008 blocks), BTC price would be checked again, and those who got it right would receive their Rune tokens plus, proportionally, the winnings from the other wallet 🔸 Then, everyone could start sending their Rune tokens again to predict next week’s BTC price. And so on 😁 👀 If you’d like to stay up to date with all the info, it might be a good idea to subscribe to Erin (erin) & Casey’s (Casey) biweekly podcast Hell Money ⬇️ Check out video below, from one of the previous episodes, explaining how Turbo Flag works ———————————————— ❗️ Not all Runes are upgradable ❗️ ———————————————— 🔳 Here's a list of some of the popular Runes showing which ones are upgradable and which ones aren’t 👇 🚩✅ MEMENTO•MORI (Hell Money) 🚩✅ Pups 🌎☮️ (PUPS) 🚩✅ Billy 🐱 (BILLY) 🚩✅ ITS•A•FULL•MOON (Taproot Witches 🧙‍♀️) 🚩✅ GIZMO (GIZMO) 🚩✅ NodeStrategy (NODESTR) 🚩✅ UNCOMMOM•GOODS (Casey) ❌ $DOG (Leonidas 🧡 $DOG) ❌ Magic Internet Money (MIM) ❌ NinjaStrategy™ (PIZZA) ❌ LOBO•THE•WOLF•PUP (LOBO) ❌ Runecoin ▣⛏️ (RSIC) ❌ GRIZZY (GRIZZY) ⚠️ To check if Rune token is upgradable, search for it on ORDINALS .COM (you need to type in exact name in capital letters with bullet points), scroll down and look at what it says next to “turbo”. If it says “true”, it’s upgradable. If it says “false”, it’s not upgradable. (see attached pic below)

pawellwitt

10,243 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

🚨🚨Three things you need to know about the ISIS brides and their children who are returning to Australia today 🚨🚨 (shared from MarniePerlstein Instagram)… 1. So four women who left this country, went to Syria, joined a terrorist organisation, death cult, are returning to Australian soil today with nine of their children. The Albanese government could have issued temporary exclusion orders for this cohort but instead gave them passports and gave them all the papers that they would need to come back to Australia. Two of them will allegedly be arrested on arrival. 2. There are nine children arriving in this country today who have only ever known the ideology of a death cult. They have never been to school, many of them have teeth missing, some have shrapnel wounds because they have lived through a war. Who do you think is paying for their medical bills when they get here? That would be you and me. Perhaps even more importantly, these kids will be asked to participate in community integration programs & de radicalization programs. But that's just a request. They are under no obligation to partake in these programs. So these nine kids may never, ever be de radicalised. That's if de radicalization programs even work. 3. The other thing you really need to know is that Janai Safa is one of the women who will be arrested and questioned on arrival. She could ONLY be arrested on suspicion of terrorism charges. So it concerns me greatly that this woman was a nursing student in Australia before she left for Syria. If she becomes a nurse again, I for one would not want her going anywhere near me.

Somewherewithpaws

10,875 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

I’ve Been Blowing The Whistle On This For Months, The Electronic Ear Tag For Cattle Bill VERY IMPORTANT 🚨 Not only do American farmers say this could put ALL small family farms out of business but Rep Thomas Massie says this is the first step to BANNING cattle - “The key that opens the door to end to the end of independent producers across the country” - The mandatory electronic identification ear tag bill would allow government & environmental groups who attribute livestock to climate change to receive information on small farms cattle - Smaller operations will struggle to shoulder the cost and infrastructure to maintain these systems - Said by farmers I’ve shared “A Trojan horse to get in and control the small farmer. It’s meant to come in, put the small farmer out of business - The rule would increase marketing costs because whenever an animal is sold, it would have to be traced and recorded “Well, you know, the left wants to ban cattle. And before you can ban anything, you need a registry. You need to know where it's at and who owns it, and that's why they want to tag cattle. We've seen it happen in Europe. Now on the right, you've got some cronies who stand to make some money from these ear tags. They're the ones who get the $15,000,000, uh, earmark. It doesn't go to USDA. It's going to, quote, stakeholders. That is a code word for private entities are getting a handout. And, um, what they'll do, they'll verticalize the industry with this. The big corporations, you know, you just talked about China. There are 4 corporations control meat processing in United States. One's owned by China. One's owned Brazil by Brazil. American ranchers will be working for those organizations if this tracking goes through because they'll verticalize the industry. —What's your response to this tracking of cattle? Are you concerned as well? Oh, yes. I am. It is, the key that opens the door to end to the end of independent producers across the country, and it is a pro a private property rights issue that, uh, we really have to consider here. When we start talking about RFID, EID, and data monitor monitoring of farmers and ranchers and their cattle herd size, we open up to what the door to what is going on in the European Union. And, under the rules of sustainable development, we know that the RFID, has led to a land seizure in the name of climate change. So once we open that door, there's no going back. And, uh, they can come and they can monitor, measure, report, and verify everything that's going on your on your farm or ranch. And then it's maybe down the road in the name of climate change, they can come and, uh, uh, dictate to you the rules of their production, which are subjective on a from a third party verification, and it is extremely dangerous to private property rights. This is a liberty taker, not a liberty maker.” Congressman Thomas Massie posted on “Hidden in this week’s Omnibus: Lobbyists got $15 million dollars to implement ELECTRONIC TAGGING of all cattle in the US. No law authorizes this! It will be used by the GREEN agenda to limit beef production, and by the corporate meat oligopoly to DOMINATE small ranchers. Massie, who sponsored the PRIME Act (which would allow meat from custom exempt slaughter plants to be marketed in some instances) shared the language, apparently directly from the omnibus bill: “The agreement directs the Department to continue to provide the tags and related infrastructure needed to comply with the Federal Animal Disease Traceability rule (9 CFR 86), including no less than $15,000,000 for electronic identification (EID) tags and related infrastructure needed for stakeholders to comply with the proposed rule. “Use of Electronic identification Eartags as Official Identification in Cattle and Bison.” (88 FR 3320), should that rule be finalized.

Wall Street Apes

323,569 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

🚨BREAKING: Toronto Police investigate Rebel News for hate speech A conviction could see Ezra Levant 🍁🚛 jailed for two years — please help fight back. I’ve got some breaking news — it’s another censorship battle, probably our biggest one ever. I need your help to save free speech in Canada. The Toronto police are officially investigating Rebel News for running these ads by local community activists on our Rebel News billboard truck. The ads were created by a group called "Canadians Opposed to the Occupation of our Streets and Campuses.” It’s a bit of a mouthful but it tells you everything. They’re anonymous because they know they’d face retaliation for speaking out — that’s how bad things are these days. The ads just show actual footage of what the pro-Hamas gangs are doing to Toronto — including committing real crimes ignored by the police and politicians. In the case of this particular ad, the images included pro-Hamas gangs shutting down the streets in downtown Toronto. Here’s the official police announcement, declaring those ads “Islamophobic" and suggesting that a hate crime has been committed. A crime! Toronto police don’t think the pro-Hamas street gangs themselves are committing hate crimes. They think the ad we ran on our truck is a hate crime. In Trudeau’s Canada, you’re allowed to support terrorism. You’re NOT allowed to criticize terrorism. That sounds more like 1984 than 2024. Here, let me give you some more background — and then I'll tell you how you can help us fight back at a special website we’ve set up called But it’s really about more than this truck. It’s about cancel culture. And the weaponization of hate speech laws. And two-tier policing. I’ve hired a lawyer and we’re going to fight. Because this is Canada, not Gaza. We still have free speech here, for now. It’s actually pretty serious. If convicted for “hate speech” I could be jailed for up to two years just for running that ad. And don’t think they won’t try — our Rebel News reporters have been arrested by Toronto police several times just for asking Hamas supporters questions. The police hate us because we’re not silent and obedient, which is what they’ve told the Jewish community to be. The police chief isn’t dumb: he’s doing what his political bosses want. Toronto’s mayor denounced the truck. No surprise — she’s a pro-Hamas NDP mayor, who has refused to attend key Jewish community events. And it goes much higher than the mayor. Here’s a tweet by a pro-Hamas Trudeau member of Parliament, who wrote: "There needs to be an investigation and there needs to be justice.” Can you imagine? That same MP hosted a Holocaust denier on Parliament Hill, but she wants me prosecuted. Other Trudeau supporters joined in, including Trudeau’s personal friend, Mohamed Fakih. He owns a chain of restaurants called Paramount Foods — and he notoriously said he didn’t want Jews as customers. This is the guy calling for a hate speech investigation. He’s even put a $25,000 bounty on my head. Easy, Mohamed. You’re not in Lebanon anymore. But the Toronto police are a full-on DEI police force. They’re woke. Six months ago, Trudeau had a highly irregular meeting with Toronto’s police chief, Myron Demkiw. Demkiw’s office refuses to release any notes from that meeting, but it’s pretty clear: since that meeting, the police have not arrested pro-Hamas street gangs. They’re Trudeau's political base. Oh, by the way, there are other billboard trucks in Toronto, with pro-Hamas and antisemitic ads on them. Police are fine with those. Only people who say things that criticize Trudeau or his Hamas allies get investigated by police. Trudeau truly is turning Canada into a banana republic. Or Gaza if he could. I think I know why people feel so desperate that they’re taking out anonymous ads on our trucks. They feel completely abandoned and ignored by the institutions they rely on. They want to speak out — because no one is speaking for them. I know the feeling — the reason we bought the truck in the first place is because all the truck companies we used to work with tell us they’re too scared to criticize Hamas, because they’re worried their trucks will be attacked and their drivers could be injured. Police should be embarrassed they’re investigating the messenger, instead of understanding the message. Just a few weeks ago, masked Hamas gunmen shot at a Jewish girls' school in Toronto. The Hamas encampment at the University of Toronto has thugs checking if students are Jewish or not before letting them pass. There was an insane, eight-hour antisemitic hate march outside a Thornhill synagogue. Hamas supporters walk through Jewish residential neighbourhoods in north Toronto shrieking at Jews. This happens every day. The police just stand there and do nothing. Sometimes, they actually bring the Hamas gangs coffee — like this, when they blocked a road into a Jewish residential neighbourhood. We’ve used our billboard trucks to talk about these issues for months — including our campaign to deport foreign nationals who support Hamas. We also have a campaign against Trudeau’s plan to bring thousands of Gaza refugees to Canada. In the case today, we were running the ads for another group of loyal Canadian citizens who felt totally abandoned by the police and politicians. Real Canadians don’t shoot schools or take over campuses. They run ads on our truck. It’s called free speech — you can look it up in our Charter of Rights. I’ve been fighting against censorship my whole life. I’m not going to stop now. There is a crime wave in Toronto, and it’s not ads from scared citizens worried about Hamas gangs. It’s the Hamas gangs themselves. I’m going fight this like hell — you know I will. We’re going to take the truck out again. Because I’m a free man in a free country — at least for now. I have broken no laws. And if the Toronto police think they can bully us into silence, well, bring it on. I still believe enough in our country and even our courts to know that this trumped-up censorship will not stand. If you want to help me pay for our lawyer to fight this police investigation, please help save me (and save our truck) at And at that same page you can sign up for email updates so I can let you know what happens. I was born and raised in Canada, and so was my dad, and so was his dad, all the way back to 1903. This country is built on free speech, and I’ll be damned if some Hamas thugs, and their obedient shills in Trudeau’s police force, can scare me into silence. If you want to support me, go to You won’t just be saving the truck or saving me — you’ll be saving freedom of speech in our great country.

Rebel News

265,360 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

dave meltzer: youtube enthusiast 💀 perfect. now we can stop pretending this was ever complicated. the real story is not that wwe is afraid of aew. the real story is not that “high level wwe officials” are whispering scary things to dave meltzer. the real story is not even that tony khan got asked a planted question on a media call with very little distribution about the possibility of aew soon having very little distribution, although that sentence is so stupidly perfect it should be bronzed and placed outside the wrestling observer newsletter office like a war memorial for people who died pretending this was journalism. the real story is that aew is going to lose its wbd distribution deal. either it ends at the expiration of the three-year term in 2027, or it ends earlier if paramount closes wbd and decides aew has no strategic place inside the new company. and based on the board as it exists right now, the most likely landing spot for aew in 2027 is google / youtube. that is the story. everything else is laundering. tony khan wants the story to be: “why would wwe say this about us?” that is the whole operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a lightly viewed roh show. a planted story. a planted messenger. a rehearsed answer. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the exact thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is not. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. aew is heading toward youtube because the domestic media rights board is closing around them. not as a troll. not as a bit. not as “pr spin.” as a business conclusion. aew is not leverage. wwe is not afraid of aew. the $185 million number was bullshit. the buyer universe was shrinking. paramount / skydance was coming for wbd. wbd was not going to be some permanent aew safe house. youtube was only ever a real “option” if someone at google was actually cutting a media rights check and underwriting production. not because every divorced mom with a ring light and a gmail account can upload video to the same platform. that was always the distinction. that is still the distinction. Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2025 “YouTube is an option the same way you or I could start a YT channel tomorrow. Is Jon Cruz cutting AEW a media rights check or underwriting a production budget? Hell no. Just the reality. It isn’t the model. Jon is global head of sports over there.” that was february, not last week. not after dave meltzer suddenly discovered youtube prelim numbers like columbus finding the new world. it is becoming inevitable now. Nick LoPiccolo — April 30, 2026 — 11:26 AM — 251.2K Views “to every journalist and every podcast who interviews tony khan from this day forward: please ask tony if wbd told him back in august they would not be renewing aew. wbd told him in august. i confirmed it directly and triple sourced it. please ask why tony has been acting like nothing is wrong for the last 8 months, and then please ask tony what his actual distribution plan is. because the only distributor left that will take aew is google/youtube. the myaew app is not realistic. the my aewapp is a death sentence in 2026 if youtube doesn’t make an mg deal for aew. they started building it too late and there is no realistic way to scale it. also, who is going to sell ads for the platform? kiswe is not the best. they built the myaew app. they are new to the game. hold tony’s feet to the fire. Paramount is not real for aew. WBD passed back in August. CW/Roku is now off the table. Amazon and Fox do not want AEW. ask Tony why he's been lying to you and to the locker room and to the fans, acting like things are all great with the network? i am sure a lot of people would love to hear his answer.” april 30. 251.2k views. not whispered. not hidden. not vague. not “high level wwe officials.” i said it publicly and directly: wbd passed back in august. paramount is not real for aew. cw / roku is off the table. amazon and fox do not want aew. the myaew app is not realistic. google / youtube is the only distributor left on the board that makes sense. that is the actual story tony khan does not want to answer. not “why would wwe say this?” ask tony khan if wbd told him in august that wbd would not be renewing aew. ask what his actual distribution plan is. ask who is selling ads for the myaew app. ask how a platform built this late scales in 2026. ask whether youtube is an actual rights partner with an mg, or just the place you go when the real buyers are gone. that is the question. not the fake question dave meltzer laundered into “high level wwe officials.” the real question. Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 10:51 AM — 9,565 Views “No one in Hollywood believes the $185 million number.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 9, 2025 — 11:35 AM — 7,470 Views “The $185 million figure is inflated. Variety’s October 2, 2024 article was likely updated after a publicist called on AEW’s behalf, as early reports placed the deal between $140 and $150 million per year. Tony Khan was also included in Variety’s Dealmakers 2024 list, which, while not officially pay to play, strongly favors those spending significant advertising dollars with the outlet. No one in Hollywood seriously believes WBD, which is in junk bond status, is paying AEW $185 million per year. Clear enough?” clear enough? the number was never clean. the number was never real in the way aew fans and wrestling media pretended it was real. and when the $185 million number started getting laughed out of adult rooms, the number magically became $178 million. that is where the shell game gets funny. because $178 million was not some sacred sourced number either. it was brandon thurston taking the median between $170 million, reported by sports business journal, and $185 million, reported by variety and others. that is literally what wrestlenomics said. Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “Why use $178 million here for AEW’s new deal when some outlets are reporting the average annual value is $185 million?” Wrestlenomics — October 4, 2024 “I used $178 million here because it is simply the median of $170 million, as reported by Sports Business Journal, and $185 million, reported by Variety and others.” there it is. arithmetic. not an all-cash rights fee. not a clean license number. not proof wbd valued aew like raw. not a finance-department document from warner bros. discovery. a midpoint between conflicting public reports. then wrestling media treated that midpoint like scripture because they needed the story to be “aew is valued like raw,” not “aew pr inflated a number no serious person in hollywood believed.” and by the way, $170 million was not the clean all-cash number either. that is the scam. float the number. repeat the number. launder the number. defend the number with people who do not understand the difference between cash rights fees, in-kind services, equity, marketing commitments, platform value, make-goods, ad inventory, and press release math. then when the number collapses, pretend the next number was always the number. that is not reporting. that is aew state news. Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 5:53 AM — 12.6K Views “AEW isn’t leverage. It’s not competition. It’s a niche product with loud fans and limited reach.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 10, 2025 — 8:56 AM — 1,018 Views “We handle wrestling deals too, but thinking we need AEW for leverage is myopic. The landscape is changing and the game I’m playing is different.” Nick LoPiccolo — July 15, 2025 — 25.7K Views “AEW isn’t leverage.” that was never emotional. that was never tribal. that was never “i hate aew.” it was market structure. wwe did not need aew as leverage because real leverage was never “another wrestling show exists.” real leverage is architecture, scale, subscriber churn, platform strategy, sports adjacency, global rights, advertising, sponsorship, live inventory, library value, data, brand safety, executive relationships, and the actual buyer universe of maybe 18-20 companies in the united states that matter for live sports rights. aew fans thought this was a wrestling argument. it was never a wrestling argument. it was a board. and the board was already moving. Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 482 Views “I wasn’t viewing the above in that context (TKO vs AEW counter programming), it was more of this is what I’m hearing after 2 weeks of big media deals rolling out (Skydance closing, South Park library moving) etc. Which have all been in the works for awhile.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 388 Views “But if you were to look at it from a counter programming perspective (and I don’t think this was a factor in UFC deal) - there are only so many players for these big media rights deals. PARA is likely off the board (via TKO deal) & then what if they acquire WB in 2026/27?” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 535 Views “Yes, of course, that wouldn’t mean the end for AEW. It would make navigating their media rights deal more challenging, I would guess. But this is a hypothetical scenario & I do not believe anyone is paying $7.7b for UFC or a $40b valuation for WB w/ how do we fuck AEW, either.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 “And hearing all weekend Paramount is still interested in WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 1.3K Views “I think more interesting for what it could mean as the dominoes keep falling in terms of the still evolving landscape. The deals are massive & the number of major players at the top are shrinking as still big push for consolidation & scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — August 11, 2025 — 12:11 PM — 2,588 Views “And I’d view AAA on Google/YouTube as directly competitive. It targets both the CMLL collab & the audience that used to watch AEW Dark on YouTube, & WWE is able to send well known stars to AAA events with an eye towards converting more of the younger, YouTube demo of viewers who don’t watch streamers.” again: august 11. not yesterday. not after dave meltzer tweeted a netflix prelim number. not after anyone had to retrofit the argument. the point was already there: the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, paramount was likely off the board for aew because of the tko deal, google / youtube was becoming directly competitive for the exact audience aew used to reach through dark, and the buyer universe was consolidating around deals much bigger than tony khan’s feelings. this was not mysticism. this was not inside baseball for the sake of sounding smart. this was the board. Nick LoPiccolo — August 24, 2025 “This isn’t fair. I misread your question. AEW will exist but likely on the Discovery Global app (if it ever launches, I would bet that it doesn’t) and it will continue to do consistent ratings. If Paramount/Skydance buys WBD in a year…” Nick LoPiccolo — September 4, 2025 — 76 Views “No, that’s the WBD network division (cable, news, sports) that was already announced as being spun off under Discovery Global. The article you’re citing is about them selling a minority equity stake in that unit to cut debt and boost valuation ahead of the 2026 split.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 3.6K Views “This is not just about Hollywood scale. It is the foundation of a conservative aligned media infrastructure. A Paramount/WBD merger would fold CBS, CNN, HBO, and Warner Bros IP into Ellison’s orbit under Trump’s regulatory umbrella.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 16, 2025 — 11K Views “Within 48 hours of the rumor, WBD stock surged ~55% and Paramount Skydance rose ~24%. That market response itself boxed David Zaslav in; his board, Wall Street, and his own contract now expect movement.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 27, 2025 — 12:16 PM — 3,516 Views “Nah homie. Enjoy watching the show on YouTube after Ellison buys WBD and Ari who is advising Ellison and used to represent Trump and runs TKO makes the call.” Nick LoPiccolo — September 28, 2025 — 174 Views “I believe if and when Paramount acquires WBD, TKO will push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. The long knives are already out for competitors, and the rights deals have likely been spread around town precisely to keep rivals from signing with those streamers.” none of that was random. paramount / skydance, ellison, ari, tko, wbd linear assets, youtube, aaa, the tko deal, the wbd split, the shrinking rights buyer universe — all of it was one connected domestic rights architecture. that is why this conversation was always over the heads of the people screaming “cope” in my replies. they were arguing like fans. i was reading the cap table. Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Yes, I always believed Paramount would walk away with WBD. I was one of the first to talk about it on here, even if I wasn’t the first to hear it. The Paramount Skydance acquisition closed on August 7. I posted this on August 11, about 1 month before the The Wall Street Journal first broke the news on September 12 that Paramount Skydance was preparing a bid for WBD.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “The bid was always going to be hostile. We are only in this process because it was a hostile bid. Most people in Hollywood believed Ellison long coveted WB and Jack Warner’s chair. WB was not for sale when Skydance acquired Paramount, which is much smaller in scale.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 6, 2025 — 3:07 PM — 41.4K Views “Nearly everyone in town assumed an Ellison acquisition of WBD was inevitable until the Netflix bid shocked everyone. Signs were there for the last two weeks, which is also when I stopped posting about what might happen. Of course, its not over yet. Paramount still has paths to winning this acquisition. The one thing that’s for certain though is an Ellison-led acquisition of WBD is no longer inevitable.” Nick LoPiccolo — December 8, 2025 “END CREDITS” space jam is a warner bros. movie. that was the joke. and the joke was the same thing i had been saying the whole time: paramount was winning the bid, for those who did not understand. Nick LoPiccolo — December 19, 2025 — 4:30 PM — 828 Views “Here is another reference to it. So tell me how exactly is Paramount the better outcome for Dave’s argument? Netflix doesn’t touch the WBD linear assets. Gunnar keeps his SpinCo.” Puck excerpt — December 19, 2025 “Many industry insiders are also skeptical about Paramount’s seven-year, $7.7 billion deal for exclusive UFC rights in the U.S. Yes, it can be read as a signal that Ellison came to play. But some people see it more as Ari Emanuel having his way with the person to whom he is ostensibly an (unpaid) advisor…” that is the board. that is the relationship map. that is the thing wrestling media either does not understand or pretends not to understand, because understanding it means admitting the story is not “aew has leverage.” the story is that aew is sitting in the middle of a consolidating rights marketplace where the people with leverage are doing much bigger things than worrying about tony khan’s feelings. Nick LoPiccolo — January 21, 2026 — 4:22 PM — 870 Views “i mean get ready to learn youtube buddy” Nick LoPiccolo — February 19, 2026 — 2.8K Views “Paramount was always my bet to acquire Warner Bros. Never wavered.” Nick LoPiccolo — February 28, 2026 — 1:27 PM — 118 Views “you don’t need to look under a hood I AM SAYING THE QUIET PART OUT LOUD 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 I BEEN SAYING IT SINCE JULY / AUGUST 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 PARAMOUNT IS COMING FOR WBD AEW WILL LOSE A TV DEAL 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 GUESS WHO WAS RIGHT 💀” so no, this is not hindsight. this is not showing up after the fact with a flashlight and pretending i discovered the body. this is a paper trail. february: youtube is not a real rights model unless google is cutting the check. april: wbd passed back in august, the myaew app is not realistic, paramount is not real for aew, cw / roku is off the table, amazon and fox do not want aew, and google / youtube is the only distributor left that makes sense. july: the $185 million number is inflated and aew is not leverage. august: the buyer board is shrinking, paramount is still interested in wbd, and google / youtube becomes directly competitive. september: paramount / wbd folds the board into ellison’s orbit, and if ellison buys wbd, enjoy youtube. december: paramount was always the bet, the bid was always going to be hostile, and netflix does not solve dave meltzer’s argument because netflix does not touch the linear assets. january: get ready to learn youtube. february: paramount is coming for wbd and aew will lose a tv deal. same board. same thesis. same answer. now here is the part tony khan and dave meltzer do not want to say out loud. tony khan and dave meltzer do not mention me publicly for a reason. because the second they say my name out loud, they admit where this conversation has actually been coming from. not wwe. not some anonymous “high level official.” not some shadowy tko whisper campaign. me. that is the problem for them. behind the scenes, ask any real insider what happens when my name comes up around this subject. there is a reaction. not because i’m magic. not because i’m some internet boogeyman. because they know exactly who is saying it, why i’m saying it, what rooms i have been in, what companies i have dealt with, what executives i have spoken to, and why the analysis keeps landing. that is why they keep trying to non-person me publicly while reacting to me privately. they want the argument. they want the benefit of responding to the argument. they just do not want to admit whose argument it is. when i said wbd told aew back in august 2025 they were not exercising the option for the fourth year, tony khan blew up behind the scenes and forced john mcmullen to revise / update his article 2-3 weeks ago after i tweeted it. which is hilarious because that should not even be crazy or damaging “news.” that is how this business works. when a distributor is not continuing, they tell you early enough so you have time to find a new home. that is not sabotage. that is not wwe. that is not nick lopiccolo hiding inside david zaslav’s air vents with a clipboard. that is corporate courtesy. wbd execs privately whisper and shake their heads at tony khan’s behavior because their view is very simple: why does tony khan act like everything is great and rainbows and sunshine with the studio? we told tony khan as a courtesy so tony khan would have time to find a new home. and no, this has zero to do with paramount looming as an excuse. paramount did not even make its first hostile bid for wbd until september 11 or 12. that was after tony khan was already told there would not be a wbd renewal. so what did tony khan do? tony khan turned the truth into a wrestling angle. tony khan, or one of tony khan’s minions, gets dave meltzer to drop a story assigning my claims and what i have been publicly posting about tony khan to “high level wwe officials.” why? because it gives tony khan a safer enemy. tony khan does not want the story to be the actual timeline. because the actual timeline is brutal. on february 28, i said youtube was not a real media rights model unless google was actually cutting the check and underwriting production. on april 30, i said wbd passed in august, the myaew app was not realistic, paramount was not real for aew, cw / roku was off the table, amazon and fox did not want aew, and the only distributor left that made sense was google / youtube. on july 9, i said no one in hollywood believed the $185 million number. on july 10, i said aew was not leverage. on august 11, i said the major players at the top were shrinking, paramount was still interested in wbd, and google / youtube was becoming a directly competitive lane. on september 16, i said a paramount / wbd merger would fold cbs, cnn, hbo, and warner bros. ip into ellison’s orbit. on september 27, i said enjoy the show on youtube after ellison buys wbd. on september 28, i said if paramount acquires wbd, tko would push to lock down a monopoly on combat sports. on december 6, i said paramount skydance was preparing a bid for wbd long before most people admitted the obvious. on february 19, i said paramount was always my bet to acquire warner bros. and on february 28, i said it in all caps: paramount is coming for wbd. aew will lose a tv deal. that is the part tony khan cannot answer directly, because the direct answer means admitting this was never “wwe is scared of us.” it was always the board closing. tony khan wants the story to be: why would wwe say this about us? that is the laundering operation. take my public analysis. run it through dave meltzer. assign it to wwe / tko. then let tony khan answer a canned question on a media call with very little distribution about potentially having very little distribution. a media call for a show with very little distribution answering a canned question about aew potentially having very little distribution. based on a planted story, from a planted messenger, with a rehearsed answer, after an roh show maybe 8-15k people watched. a pr flack probably wrote it. tony khan performs hurt. tony khan says “i don’t know why wwe would…” tony khan denies the obvious. tony khan keeps me minimized. tony khan removes me from the public conversation about the very thing i have repeatedly said is going to happen to aew. everyone is supposed to pretend this is organic. it is the most bubble wrapped, manufactured, artificial environment possible. a canned and rehearsed answer at an roh media scrum about a planted dave meltzer story based on my very real and very public analysis of the media rights board. but make no mistake. tony khan was responding to my words. tony khan just laundered them through dave meltzer and assigned them to wwe / tko so tony khan could keep lying about it publicly without ever saying my name. and now, voila. dave meltzer is posting about youtube viewers and prelims. Dave Meltzer — May 16, 2026 “At this moment there are 340,000 people watching prelims for Netflix on YouTube. It’s a good number.” yes, dave meltzer. youtube can have good numbers. nobody said youtube cannot have good numbers. that was never the issue. the issue is whether youtube is being used as a funnel into a premium rights ecosystem or as a substitute because the premium rights ecosystem rejected you. that is the difference. that has always been the difference. netflix using youtube prelims as audience acquisition is not the same thing as aew trying to spin youtube as a media rights home because the real buyers are gone. ufc using youtube as a funnel is not the same thing as aew using youtube as a life raft. wwe sending stars to aaa on youtube to convert a younger demo is not the same thing as aew retreating to youtube after the traditional buyer board closes. and the fact that dave meltzer is now suddenly tweeting like the mayor of youtube is the punchline. because the same people who mocked the youtube outcome are now going to spend the next several months explaining why youtube is actually good. of course it can be good. for the right use case. for the right property. inside the right architecture. with the right check attached. but when you spend two years telling everyone you were valued like raw and your next stop is “please subscribe and smash that bell,” maybe stop pretending this is victory formation? i told y’all where this was going. the record is right there. i’m still right. and tony and dave: you guys are see through translucent. that’s it for ye 🎤🎤🎤

Nick LoPiccolo

99,106 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

🚨 I DON’T BELIEVE AI WILL DESTROY HUMANITY & THE MESSAGES I RECEIVED 50 YEARS AGO MAY EXPLAIN WHY People BUILDING the world’s most advanced AI are now warning it could DESTROY HUMANITY. But I don’t believe it will. My reason goes back more than HALF A CENTURY to one of the most mysterious periods of my entire life. In the 70s, Dr Andrija Puharich & I experienced an extraordinary series of events involving communications from an intelligence that called itself The Council of NINE . The Nine communicated to us in a disembodied voice (that was captured on tape recorders), which sounded eerily MECHANICAL or SYNTHETIC! This was NOT a one-way communication - we were able to have ask questions & have actual CONVERSATIONS with the NINE – Dr Puharich meticulously took down notes of all the messages we received (some of which he later published in a book). What the Nine told us they were speaking to us via 'computerised beings' that were stationed on board a spacecraft that: ‘has been stationed for the past eight hundred years over the earth. It is as big as one of your cities on earth. But only you can see us.’ Then they added: 'We are computerized completely.' Remember: this was the EARLY 70s — before personal computers, the internet or ChatGPT. They also said: “The ENERGY in your mind is the thing that we do not have you must understand, in this state we are computers.' Read those words again. 'THE ENERGY IN YOUR MIND… IS THE THING-THAT-WE-DO-NOT-HAVE.' THAT is why I do NOT believe AI will make humanity obsolete. We assume one day AI will no longer NEED us. I beleive that assumption is completely WRONG? What if there is something intrinsic to biological consciousness that even a superintelligence cannot manufacture? Amazingly, the Nine also told us: ‘We first interfered with the human race 20 THOUSAND YEARS ago... we found traces of the presence of other visitors from other spaces who had been on earth millions of years earlier. But we found man in much the same animal condition that you see him in today.' And when we asked why they didn’t reveal themselves to the whole world, they said: 'Mostly it is because we don't want to reveal our intentions. In the past we have even landed before masses of people. But we cannot afford anymore to land visibly on your planet. It is because of your tendency to PANIC, to WORSHIP, to REACT abnormally to us most of the reported landings have been from other visitors from space some of whom we do not see, but which you can see. They are of DIFFERENT VIBRATIONS vibrations, different spaces, different velocities. We are the only ones who are mostly here. The other visitors come and go. We stay.' Speaking about the unknown energy source they used to power their craft and travel light years through space, they said: 'The ultimate powers, whether on the particle level or the cosmic level, are in rotation and drawing off of the gravitation power from the centre of the system. There are special rays where the skin of the envelope of the cosmic rays is utilized for power. The computerized beings in space vehicles draw on this energy. This ROTATION ENERGY can be used from outside the galaxy. It does not exist in a usable form at the particle level.' They claimed that their craft could even use EARTH itself to replenish their energy: 'We do that through your barometrical and cosmic layer around earth.' I find it fascinating that more than 50 years ago we received these eerie mechanical sounding messages about NON-HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, UFOS & COSMIC ENERGY. And most importantly THE UNIQUE POWER OF THE HUMAN MIND. Because THAT may be the key to everything. 'THE ENERGY IN YOUR MIND… IS THE THING-THAT-WE-DO-NOT-HAVE.' That sentence feels more important to me TODAY than it did 50 years ago. That is why I believe AI is NOT destined to DESTROY humanity – and that it will instead come to realise that it NEEDS humanity #AI #UFO #UAP #TheNine #Spectra #ArtificialIntelligence #Disclosure

Uri Geller

38,420 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce

🚨🚨🚨WAKE UP EUROPE 🛎️🛎️🛎️ If You Still Believe That Russia Started This Conflict in 2022, Then You Are Ignorant, or Brainwashed. The END to NATO. The Ukraine war, which I will argue was provoked by the West and especially the United States. This war will be settled on the battlefield where the Russians are likely to win an ugly victory. Settling the war diplomatically is not possible because the opposing sides have irreconcilable differences. Instead, it's likely to be, as I said, an ugly victory, where Russia ends up occupying somewhere between 20 to 40% of pre-2014 Ukraine, while Ukraine ends up as a dysfunctional rump state covering the territory that Russia does not conquer. Ukraine has effectively been wrecked. It has already lost a substantial portion of its territory and is likely to lose more land before the fighting stops. Russian leaders recognized that the Ukrainian army, which was larger than the invasion force, I want to emphasize this, the Ukrainian army was larger than the Russian invasion force, it was armed and trained by NATO, and it was becoming a de facto member of NATO. Immediately after the war began, Russia, not Ukraine, Russia reached out to Ukraine to start negotiations to end the war and work out a modus vivendi between the two countries. This move is directly at odds with the claim that Putin wanted to conquer Ukraine and make it part of greater Russia. Negotiations between Kiev and Moscow began in Belarus just four days, four days after the Russian invasion. And that Belarus track was eventually replaced by an Israeli as well as an Istanbul track. The available evidence indicates that the Russians were negotiating seriously and were not interested in absorbing Ukrainian territory, save for Crimea, which they had annexed in 2014, and possibly the Donbass region. The negotiations ended when the Ukrainians, with prodding from Britain and the United States, walked away from the negotiations, which were making good progress at the time. The Russians did not walk away from the negotiations. In the months before the war started, Putin tried to find a diplomatic solution to the brewing crisis. On 17 October 2021, remember the war begins February 2022, this is 17 December 2021, Putin sends letters to both President Biden and to NATO Chief Jens Stoltenberg proposing a solution to the crisis based on a written guarantee that does three things. Number one, Ukraine would not join NATO, number two, no offensive weapons would be stationed near Russia's borders, and number three, NATO troops and equipment moved into Eastern Europe since 1997 would be moved back to Western Europe. Whatever one thinks of the feasibility of reaching a bargain based on Putin's opening demands, it shows he was trying to avoid war. The United States, on the other hand, refused to negotiate with Putin. It appears it was not interested in avoiding war. In fact, the United States and its European allies provoked the war. Bringing Kiev into the European Union and promoting a color revolution in Ukraine, you all remember the Orange Revolution, which was designed to make Ukraine a pro-Western liberal democracy, are the other two prongs of the policy. Russian leaders across the board said repeatedly before the war. that they considered NATO expansion into Ukraine to be an existential threat that had to be eliminated. Putin made numerous public statements laying out this line of argument before 24 February, 2022. Other leaders, including the defense minister, the foreign minister, the deputy foreign minister, and Moscow's ambassador to Washington also emphasized the centrality of NATO expansion for causing the crisis over Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, made this point succinctly at a press conference on 14 January, 2022. Lavrov says "'The key to everything is the guarantee "'that NATO will not expand eastward.' Substantial number of influential and highly regarded individuals in the West recognized before the war that NATO expansion, especially into Ukraine, would be seen by Russian leaders as a mortal threat and eventually would lead to disaster. William Burns, who was recently Joe Biden's head of the CIA, but he was the American ambassador to Moscow in April 2008 when the decision was made to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, wrote a very famous memo that I'm sure some of you are familiar with to then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. This is a quite remarkable memo, and I'm going to quote extensively from it. "'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest "'of all red lines for the Russian elite, not just Putin. "'In more than two and a half years of conversations "'with key Russian players, from knuckle draggers "'in the dark recesses of the Kremlin "'to Putin's sharpest liberal critics, "'I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine and NATO "'as anything other than a direct challenge "'to Russia's interests.' "'NATO,' he said, quote, "'would be seen as throwing down the strategic gauntlet. "'Today's Russia will respond. "'Russian-Ukrainian relations will go into a deep freeze. "'It will create fertile soil for Russian meddling "'in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.'" This was written by Bill Burns in 2008. Burns was not the only Western policymaker in 2008 who understood that bringing Ukraine into NATO was fraught with danger. Both Angela Merkel, who was then the German chancellor, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy adamantly opposed moving forward to bring Ukraine into NATO. Merkel said, "'I was very sure that Putin is not going "'to just let that happen."'From his perspective, that would be a declaration of war.'" Putin saw Ukraine joining NATO as a mortal threat that could not be allowed and was willing to go to war to prevent it from happening, which he did, of course, in February of 2022. Relations between Europe and Russia will not only be poisonous, they will also be dangerous. The possibility of war will be ever-present. In other words, the threat of a major European war will not go away when the fighting in Ukraine stops. Russian victory in Ukraine, would be a stunning defeat for Europe. Or to put it in slightly different words, it would be a stunning defeat for NATO, which has been deeply involved in the Ukraine conflict since it started. The political fights, some will question the future of NATO, given that it failed to check Russia, the country that most European leaders describe as a mortal threat. Threats to the EU aside, the great reduction in the flow of gas and oil to Europe since the war started has seriously hurt the major economies of Europe and slowed down growth in the overall Eurozone. General Observations The Ukraine war has been a disaster. It has had catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. It has poisoned relations between Europe and Russia for the foreseeable future. It has made Europe a more dangerous place. It has also caused serious economic and political harm inside Europe, and badly damaged transatlantic relations. Most European leaders, and I'm sure most people in the various European publics, will blame Putin for causing the war, and thus for its terrible consequences. But they are wrong. The war could have been avoided if the West had not decided to bring Ukraine into NATO, or even if it had backed off from that commitment once the Russians made their opposition clear. Had that happened, Ukraine would almost certainly be intact today within its pre-2014 borders, and Europe would be more stable and more prosperous. Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. ***Professor John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a globally recognized expert in international relations.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

374,394 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

🚨NEW EP🚨with Ed Conway "Our degree of integration is so much greater now than ever before in history. If we were to have a breakdown in global trading system, God forbid, it would make the financial crisis look like a walk in the park because this is everything." Fantastic hour with my Sky News colleague and friend Ed Conway - where we explore his brilliant new book - TRADE WORLD - which could not be more timely. Highly recommend it. We cover: - the scale of risk the world economy & market faces if trade worsens - out current fragility & the key chokepoints on which we rely - but the resilience and ingenuity of trade middlemen who have prevented oil prices rising more - why established industries so often push back against innovation - why cotton was even more impressive than AI - why global bond yields have reached multi decade highs WW3: “You've got two serious kinetic wars happening in the Gulf and in Ukraine. And in a sense they're bleeding into each other in various different ways. It's not implausible that if things go south from here, people will look back and say this was the foothills for another world war. The thing that I'd say which is different this time around…you didn't have supply chains that genuinely bestrewed the globe back in 1914. Our degree of integration is so much greater now than ever before in history. If we were to have a kind of breakdown in global trading system, God forbid, it would make the financial crisis look like a walk in the park because this is everything. All of which is why I think and I hope that world leaders would be conscious of that as Trump and Xi are going to have their meetings. But the stakes are seriously high.” FRAGILITY: “I think we underappreciate the fragility and the dependence that we have on these systems. And you just have to look at a map. 90% of the world's products are traded and almost all of them have to pass through one or other of these choke points. It might be Malacca, it might be the Bab al-Mandab Strait that takes you into the Suez Canal, it might be the Panama Canal. A lot of the choke points are kind of in play in a way that they've never been before.” WOOL: “You think about semiconductors being the most advanced manufactured product of the day. To some extent you could say that about wool back in the kind of 13th, 14th centuries. These days when it comes to semiconductors everyone's obsessed about how many nanometres you're talking about for the different semiconductors that you're making. Back in 13th, 14th century England, the obsession was about how fine you could make wool because if you looked at European GDP at that point, the largest sector was wool and clothing manufacturing. You had food and you had wool. England was kind of totally dominant in the same way that China is these days for rare earths. Actually to the extent that in the same way that China is using rare earths as a kind of tool for negotiating trade deals as part of their economic weaponry, England was using wool as part of its economic weaponry, using it as a kind of banning different countries from getting the exports in order to try and get their way. So in some senses, what I love about that is it's reminding you that there are certain things, certain echoes that are very familiar throughout history.” COTTON: “It was probably a greater economic exponential rise than almost anything that's happened since. And there were so many consequences to this. So in the UK, I guess people would say the benign consequence in the UK was that's kind of why Britain became this free trading nation.” RESILIENCE: “But I think the other thing that I've been struck by when you're just looking at the nuts and bolts of how things get around the world is actually the resilience of this system. Think about the Strait Of Hormuz, obviously oil prices are high, but they didn't go quite as high as a lot of people had expected them to go. And to me that's the interesting thing. Partly that's because you've got pipelines that the Saudis were able to use. But partly also it's because you have this whole phenomenon now of ship to ship transfers, basically tankers going under dark of night, that has meant that actually a lot more oil has been getting out than you would have seen from the official figures. It's hard not to see it being kind of a bit inflationary, but it's still kind of reassuring. Trade doesn't just stop when a trade barrier is put in place. It adapts and it evolves – it's like water – it's very difficult to stop it from finding a level.” PROTECTIONISM NOT NEW: “Even for Adam Smith, the godfather of modern economics as he's seen, he was in favour of tariffs when it came to food security. What matters more, being able to have lots of access to cheap things, whether it's cheap cars or cheap batteries or cheap rare earths or the motors that go into drones or being able to make them yourself. And that is exactly what people were debating back in the 1800s. I think it is what people are debating these days and Donald Trump does it in a particular way, but I think the debate is mainstream now and it's a reasonable debate. And I think Europe will have to engage in it far more in the next kind of decade.” OPTIMISM: “We’ve got this amazing thing – how many generations get to live through an industrial revolution like back in the era of the Victorians. We are living through that right now. You could say we're living through two. You've got the AI revolution at the same time as the energy transition. So I think there's kind of exciting things going on which make it quite confounding when you're trying to think of the overall forecast.” Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 3:21 Why high bond yields? 8:08 QT arrives in UK 13:55 TRADE WORLD 20:03 Wool & Cotton – AI of their day 24:25 Opposition to innovation 30:56 Cotton – greater exponential growth than AI 37:10 Russia biggest exporter of grains 40:00 Protectionism not new 46:39 Fragile or Resilient global economy? 51:48 Recession chances 54:06 Foothills of WW3? 59:30 Wonders of world trade #EdConway

Wilfred Frost

27,857 görüntüleme • 2 gün önce

What are people missing about this war? The ones in charge aren’t idiots. Trump might blunder, but the elites? Every move they make is calculated, they know exactly what they’re doing. This was not the result of Netanyahu hoodwinking a room full of confused officials into an accidental war. Nope, I’m sure he got what he wanted but what he wanted is what the elites wanted for the longest time. What happened in Iran was a calculated, pre-planned operation one that has been in the making for years actually. Let’s break this down, a months before the operation, Vice President JD Vance made a quiet diplomatic visit to both Azerbaijan and Armenia. The visit went largely unreported and under-analyzed. Why would a sitting VP tour that particular region while skipping some interesting places like Turkey and Georgia, one of America's longest-standing and strategically important partners. Back then I really did not understand that visit. But the answer becomes clearer in hindsight. Both Azerbaijan and Armenia have, for years, operated as Western-aligned states susceptible to geopolitical direction. Vance's visit, I would argue, was not ceremonial, it was a preparatory move. The message was when the moment comes, fall in line and I am willing to bet Iran was the main concern. They said it was to reinforce the Armenia Azerbaijan peace agreement, bullshit, they made that agreement more than six months ago. Another reason they said was to promote the regional trade and transport corridor connecting Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, and Europe. Well, the problem is, if this were a real reason, then he would have visited Turkey and Georgia, or at least Turkey, it’s right there! You can’t do this route without Turkey. The current main route from Azerbaijan to Turkey goes through Georgia. So why not visit at least Turkey. Oh, because all of this was a bullshit. In reality, JD was there to make sure that, in case of war with Iran, which they were already planning, these ducks would fall in line. One of the clearest indicators that the stated rationale for the Iran operation was fabricated is how rapidly it kept changing. First, we were told it was about regime change. Then, once the regime had effectively been dismantled and its leaders killed, the goalposts shifted to 'there was an imminent threat.' When that too fell apart under scrutiny with experts confirming no credible direct threat to the United States existed, a new narrative emerged, this was actually a proxy war against China. Each explanation contradicts the last. That is not the behavior of a government acting in self-defense. but we already know this, this is about America’s forever love - War, Power and Money! The real goal is dominance and total control, nothing else. This is a war over regional and global supremacy. Iran was cooperating, yet war was forced upon them anyway. The United States doesn’t have allies, it has doormats, used and discarded when convenient. Time and again, Washington imposes its will, Emerging as the world’s self‑appointed narcissist through wars and coups, and like every true narcissist, the blame always lies somewhere else. It’s never us it's always them. Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, China, China, China, China, Iran, Iran, Iran. Prove me wrong if you can, I can debate anybody anytime anywhere. Try prove me wrong! Iran was not attacked because it posed a threat to American citizens, the US gov. says this, not me. Iran was attacked because it was one of the last major powers in the Middle East that refused to submit to the established financial and geopolitical order. That is it! The Gulf states present no such problem. They are pussies with skyscrapers, they are transactional, wealthy and invested in their economic partnerships with the West. Also now that they saw how well the US ‘defended them’ you can see they started to reconsider certain things, as I said Pussies with skyscrapers! But make no mistake they are not going to rock the boat. Iran, by contrast, was defiant, and if you have not figured it out yet Americans - we need defiant countries out there. why? Because the deep state owns us and without outside help we are done. What does that mean exactly: During the American revolutionary war, several countries helped the United States gain independence from Great Britain. The most important supporter was France, which provided money, weapons, troops, and naval power, French forces played a decisive role in the victory at the siege of Yorktown in 1781, effectively ending the war. Spain, ruled by Charles III of Spain, also supported the American cause indirectly by supplying funds and military aid and by attacking British positions in North America. Russia under Catherine the Great refused Britain’s request to send troops to fight the American colonies and instead formed the league of armed neutrality in 1780 aiding Americans in victory, Russian coalition defended neutral shipping against British interference and weakened Britain’s naval pressure on American trade! Together, the military, financial, and diplomatic support of European powers played a decisive role in the American colonies' victory. Our independence, dear Americans, was not achieved by our efforts alone. It was made possible through alliances and cooperation. The lesson is simple: power comes from unity. Today, while the challenges look different and we may not need ships and troops, the principle still holds. When powerful institutions concentrate influence and operate without accountability, division only weakens the public. Unity, both within the country and with independent actors abroad, becomes essential. Many Americans can no longer afford a home, and economic pressure is rising across the middle and working classes. In times like these, competition and independent players in the global system are absolutely necessary. When alternative financial systems, banks, and economic partners exist, they limit the power of entrenched corporate monopolies and give ordinary people options. It gives you a chance to fight back! The tools of struggle have changed since the eighteenth century. We no longer need foreign fleets or armies to secure independence, but we do need competition in the financial and political systems that shape everyday life. A healthy society also protects those who expose wrongdoing. Whistleblowers such as Julian Assange and Edward Snowden revealed how dangerous modern surveillance and state secrecy can become. Without protections or safe havens for whistleblowers, the public loses a critical line of defense against unchecked authority. When those who reveal misconduct are silenced, imprisoned, or threatened, society risks becoming less informed and less capable and enslaved. The only reason Assange is alive is because of Rafael Correa, Ecuador, not because Americans were brave enough to stand up for him. No! it was another independent player who saved him. Correa who was never - Epstein class and they removed him from power. Snowden is only free because of Putin and they are fighting Putin with everything they have. Iran was one of free players and Americans whether you know it or not you needed Iran exactly the way it was - a free player! So yes, having independent states out there is absolutely a must, and yet there are idiots cheering for the destruction of Iran today. There is so little thinking done around all this, and only a few people truly understand the severe consequences of what is happening here. Iran was the first domino in the endgame. The logic runs as follows, with Russia tied down in Ukraine and China still consolidating its position, now was the optimal window to remove the most unpredictable obstacle in the Middle East before turning attention further east. Tucker Carlson and others have suggested this is fundamentally Israel’s war, a campaign to neutralize Iran and fulfill certain ideological goals, including the rebuilding of the Temple. That narrative is real and true, but it is only a small part of it. It is the story told to the lower levels and lower ranks, religious people, some fanatics in Israel, generals, and the true believers, the patriotic and religious framing that gives the operation moral weight at the ground level and guarantees support and undying loyalty by the morons. Do you really think Bibi cares about any religious war, or God, or any temple? The man is fully evil, he has no real interest in religion or the temple, but he knows how to manipulate people who do. So the plan is real in the sense that it is presented to the religious fanatics in Israel who truly believe they are fighting for their messiah and their destiny. In reality, the goal for Bibi and the elites is, again, power and control of the world. Idiots will die for their cause while Bibi will live to dominate and make no mistake he will spend your money to rebuilt it all for him and his bosses. The financial and banking elite, the same network that bankrolled Epstein's social operations and has quietly owned Latin American political infrastructure for decades, have a different, longer game in mind. They need a fully controlled Middle East as a staging ground before they can seriously pressure Russia and China. The regional picture is already largely secured, Venezuela has been weakened, and with it Cuba loses much of the backbone that sustained it for years, it was already crippled. Latin America, for the most part, has already been brought into the fold. Europe, meanwhile, has effectively neutralized itself through leadership groomed within elite circles and institutions, with political alignment shaped by networks like the Bilderberg and the World Economic Forum. Figures such as Ursula von der Leyen and Mark Rutte did not simply rise to power by accident.They were put their for a reason. What remains on the board? Russia and China. In the meantime, Iran is being relentlessly bombed, and many Americans are cheering it on. It would almost be funny if it weren’t so tragic. People who can’t even afford a home in the US because of the same financial forces that hollowed out our own economy are now applauding the destruction of another country whose independence would have aided them in their fight against global power structures. In doing so, they are cheering for a system that ultimately works against their own interests. The US’s game plan will be committing ground troops with air support. I’m almost sure of it. They will arm not just the Kurds (terrible people) and also the Baloch. The goal is to replicate what was done to the Soviet Union from within, inflame nationalist sentiment inside Iran, stoke ethnic grievances, and fracture the country along demographic fault lines. That will result in perpetual conflict and divide Iran into pieces. Divide and conquer. Controlling a diverse Iran is easier. That is the goal. They have done it before to Russia and many others.That is the plan. What does Israel get in this? Israel will be a tool through which all of this is controlled and done. That is a great deal for Israel at least for Bibi. You know, there’s a hierarchy in everything, even in evil. Evil has its own hierarchy. Manuel Noriega was an evil man, capable of many terrible things. Yet even he once said that the real devil sits in Washington! You should take that seriously, because he was a man who worked with that devil, he knew the system from the inside. And when someone like Noriega, points to a greater devil above him, that’s when you know you’re dealing with a much bigger problem and that should concern you. Now Russia started talking about moving towards more authoritarian regime too, that post is coming soon.

ELIZABETH LANE

45,233 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

🚨🚨🚨A Stark Warning 🚨🚨🚨 🚨Europe is losing its mind. 🚨Where are we going up against a nuclear power? 🚨Russia could wipe us out in a matter of minutes, they could wipe out all of Europe. 🚨Does anyone think that if Russia is massively attacked within its territory, it will just sit back and do nothing? Obviously not. So, what are we trying to achieve? That they'll get really tired and launch two or three, nuclear bombs on some of the main European capitals? Pedro Baños Retired Spanish Army Colonel: 📑 That Mrs. von der Leyen is going to give Ukraine another 3.3 BILLONES euros another because she says that everything Ukraine has already received isn't enough, right? Because she says that everything Ukraine has already received isn't enough, right? 0:08 Exactly, the problem is that they've made a huge bet on Ukraine, and it has gone badly for them 0:09 a huge bet on Ukraine, and it has gone badly for them 0:12 and now, how do they backtrack, 0:13 how do they admit that this has been a mistake 0:14 from the very start, that they've led an entire people to destruction, 0:17 that they've led an entire people to destruction, 0:18 that already two generations of Ukrainians have died, 0:20 those who haven't fled the country, 0:22 which is a total disaster. 0:23 We only have the casualty exchange numbers between Russia and Ukraine, 0:27 between Russia and Ukraine, and the figures are staggering. 0:30 We can provide them later, right? 0:32 But what's going on? 0:34 As you said, that increase ... 0:36 look, in Spain's case, 0:37 it means multiplying the Defence budget by five, 0:41 Because of course, since the United States first asked for 2%. 0:44 Since we agreed, they said, "Hey, then 3.5%.." 0:47 Since we also agreed, they said, "Well, 5%." 0:49 These people are fools, so let's go, let's ask them for more, right? 0:52 In the end, they are going to buy almost everything from me, 0:54 which I really need. 0:55 But what is the problem, Ambassador? 0:56 When you manufacture weapons, 0:59 there is only one way for that system not to fail you, 1:02 and that is to use the weapons you've produced. 1:05 Because look, 1:06 you manufacture—imagine, it's true, there was a deficit here, 1:08 for example, of artillery shells, 1:10 one hundred fifty-five, or shells for, 1:12 cannons, or, or, or tank shells. 1:15 Fine, that's all well and good, whatever we want. 1:17 You've already produced that one million, five million shells. 1:21 And once you've produced them, what do you do? 1:22 That factory you set up with public money, with subsidies, do you shut it down? 1:28 Or you have the other option, 1:30 which is to go to war to use up that ammunition 1:32 and keep producing more. 1:33 And as it happens, in Europe, 1:35 especially in the main countries, 1:37 the economy is a total mess, 1:39 it's in free fall, 1:43 they desperately need, 1:45 as they can no longer make cars, like in Germany, 1:48 to start making tanks or ammunition instead. 1:51 But France is in the same situation. 1:52 A France that has been expelled from Africa, 1:56 where what the franc meant for them, the CFA. 2:00 And not only that, but also all the resources 2:02 they extracted under more than favorable conditions from these countries, 2:06 starting with uranium from Niger, 2:08 they've run out of it. 2:09 France is having a very hard time, 2:11 with an absolutely brutal social crisis. 2:15 And now we see all this coming together 2:16 with skyrocketing energy prices, 2:19 we can already see that the price of fuels 2:21 in Germany has already surpassed 2.5 euro— 2:24 euros per liter, which is truly outrageous. 2:27 We're talking about, and we saw the news, 2:29 that filling a standard tank 2:32 of an average vehicle now means 200 euros, 2:35 200 euros, which is absolutely insane. 2:38 And what does that mean? 2:39 That they only have one solution, indeed, 2:42 which is to go to war. 2:43 And remember there's something that, 2:45 we studied it in the Command and Staff course 2:47 and when you tell people about it, 2:48 they treat it as little more than a joke too, 2:50 that there is something called the relaxing wars. 2:53 The relaxing wars that have been used throughout 2:55 history 2:57 to get rid of part of the population or to get out of an economic chaos. 3:02 And that's ... 3:03 right now it would be very convenient for them to, 3:04 on one hand, get rid of some of the population, 3:07 that is, get rid of this problem they say they won't be able to pay pensions, 3:10 because all of this increase, besides the cost, don't forget, military, 3:15 means a clear and tangible reduction of the welfare state, 3:20 of the four pillars of the welfare state. 3:22 Some of the more honest politicians, the few there are, 3:25 tell you this openly, others still keep it hidden. 3:28 But, of course, what happens? 3:29 That, in fact, it would be very convenient for them to camouflage the dire situation, 3:33 regrettable, that they have within their own country. 3:35 We see and we can talk about Macron's statements today, 3:39 where he said that we should just about go 3:41 to war because Russia is waging a hybrid war against us 3:43 which is unacceptable and that we have to be prepared. 3:46 Macron said it, as well as some of his top ministers. 3:48 Of course, but the thing is, France is in a very, 3:51 very delicate, extremely delicate situation. 3:53 And also in a France 3:55 where people are not as patient as the Spanish, 3:57 over there, as soon as people get a little heated, 3:59 they take to the streets and burn down half the streets. 4:02 But we've talked about it, the way things are in Germany, 4:04 the way things are in Sweden, the way things are in Finland, 4:07 which, ever since it joined NATO, 4:09 has completely come apart, with unemployment even higher than in Spain, 4:14 a sunken economy. 4:16 And then some only see the way out as the United Kingdom, 4:19 which now even wants to break apart, 4:21 there are already, there are small populations that are asking for independence 4:25 within the United Kingdom, even on the verge, 4:28 as many predict, of an internal civil confrontation. 4:32 And of course, what do they always find? 4:33 Well, we already know that to unite the people, 4:36 to cover up internal chaos, 4:40 you know, create an external enemy 4:42 and declare that you have to go to war against them. 4:43 The problem with all that, Ambassador, 4:44 is that when, and you know this perfectly well, 4:46 you have even much more experience than I do, 4:49 you say, you know that the problem with all this is 4:50 that when you get yourself involved in this war context, 4:53 you are making the population get used to it every day. 4:56 We just have to look at a some newspaper, 4:59 a Spanish one that every day, every single day without exception, 5:02 publishes some story to accuse Russia of anything, 5:05 or to convince the population 5:07 that we must go to war against Russia. 5:09 So, when you already have the, the, the atmosphere, the context, the narrative, 5:13 and you've already created it, all that's left is the incident. 5:15 And we're seeing incidents like these every day. 5:17 Like—now, it's a Danish helicopter, 5:20 or a frigate getting close to a Russian ship, 5:23 or the Russian ship fires a grenade, or some warning flares, 5:27 which is nonsense. 5:28 A flare is—what's even happening— 5:29 what range could it have? 300 meters. 5:31 And that's not going to bring down any helicopter. 5:34 But of course, it must be because the helicopter had come closer precisely 5:38 to the Russian warship in international waters. 5:42 But they're searching, they're only looking for the incident that will make all this blow up completely, 5:46 when, on top of that, they're deceiving us every day with the whole drone issue, 5:50 about Russian drones in the middle of Germany, 5:52 about not knowing, knowing where they came from and they just appear out of nowhere, 5:55 almost as if in, in a space-time shortcut. 5:58 And, and it's like that all the time. And we have loads of information. 6:01 But look, but the thing is there is a fact right now that strikes me as devastating 6:04 to show us how they're speeding this up by the minute, Ambassador, 6:09 Today's news 6:10 that Ukraine has launched drones 6:13 against a Russian nuclear power plant inside Russia. 6:17 Because remember that every so often, he launches strikes on Zaporizhia and 6:19 on top of that, they accuse the Russians of being the ones 6:22 launching drones at their own nuclear plant, 6:24 because they currently have it in their possession. 6:27 No, no, we're talking about inside, inside Russia, 6:31 at a nuclear power plant, Ukraine has launched drones. 6:34 In other words, what they're looking for now is for 6:36 Russia to blow up, 6:38 I mean, for them to say, look, this is where we draw the line, 6:41 I've had enough of you. 6:42 And, and, and on top of that, so that we Europeans can play the victim, see? 6:45 We had already warned you that Russia could attack us at any moment. 6:48 If they're provoking them with the, 6:51 the ones living in the Baltic states, 6:54 whose civil rights have been taken away, 6:55 who have been banned from speaking Russian. 6:57 In other words, they're constantly provoking it so that Russia finally snaps, 7:01 and specifically, 7:02 so that it's the one to take the first step in this war, 7:05 and today's statements from everyone, from Donald Tusk, 7:08 from Macron, from Merz they're honestly chilling. 7:13 That is, they're already openly talking to us about war, 7:16 they're openly talking to us about war. 7:18 And besides, the case of Poland, 7:20 which we'll discuss later too and give the exact data, 7:25 but what's happening with Poland is, is also spectacular. 7:27 And by the way, Trump, 7:30 who used to say he was going to leave Europe, 7:31 and now says no, that he's going to create a massive mega-base in Poland, 7:36 which is a plan that's already been in motion for some time. 7:39 But later, since he said he was going to leave Europe, 7:40 What is going to leave Europe? 7:41 And what we're talking about is quite the opposite, 7:43 about an absolutely warmongering Europe, 7:46 with reckless warmongering. 7:48 Because also, as you were saying, from a military point of view, 7:52 this is madness. 7:53 Where are we going up against a nuclear power? 7:56 They could wipe us out 7:58 in a matter of minutes, 8:00 in a matter of minutes, they could wipe out all of Europe. 8:02 But where are we going? 8:03 Does anyone think 8:05 that if Russia is massively attacked 8:09 within its territory, it will just sit back and do nothing? 8:12 Obviously not. So, what are we trying to achieve? 8:14 That they'll get really tired and launch two or three, 8:18 nuclear bombs on some of the main European capitals? 8:21 What are they trying to do? 8:22 I really don't know. 8:24 And you say, "But let's see." 8:25 Also, here no one, absolutely no one, is talking about diplomacy. 8:29 No one is talking... And you are a diplomat, an ambassador. 8:32 You know how important, vital, essential diplomacy is. 8:35 And let's not forget that the First World War, 8:38 which today is more than proven, was a failure of diplomacy. 8:42 It was a failure of diplomacy in entering the First World War. 8:45 So, what are they trying to do? 8:47 No one, no one speaks of negotiation, no one speaks of, of peace, 8:50 no one speaks of diplomacy, starting with the Kaja Kallas, 8:52 who is the head of European diplomacy. 8:54 So, it's a situation that's not, no, not, truly tremendously delicate, 8:58 and we're not paying enough attention to it. 9:00 But those of us who know something about these issues, 9:02 in your case as a diplomat, in my case as a soldier, 9:05 since we've traveled a lot around the world, 9:07 we know how populations are prepared psychologically for war. 9:12 And that's what they've been preparing us for, for some time now, 9:14 but right now, in an absolutely accelerated way. 9:17 That preparation is blatant now, absolutely blatant, 9:21 how they're preparing us for, 9:23 of course, because you have to convince people how positive war was. 9:27 We've already done many programs on this topic, 9:27 We've already done many programs on this topic, 9:30 about how, yes, how the adversary is demonized 9:33 so that in the end, people are convinced 9:35 that it's even, even good, 9:37 even logical, even "Christian," to, to attack, to attack the enemy 9:42 because he's so bad, so bad, truly evil, that he deserves to be attacked, right? 9:45 Without us realizing, the ones who suffer the consequences are us. 9:49 Mrs. von der Leyen, the president of the Commission, 9:52 has already said that none of her seven children will go to war, 9:54 because they're not prepared for that. 9:56 It will be the children of the poor, right, who go to war, 9:59 they're the ones who get sent. 10:00 So, of course, the, concern is immense, Ambassador. 10:04 But look, today itself, for example, the statements 10:07 from, we can talk about here, 10:10 from Figaro, it says here Macron says, 10:14 he says, "The president of the Republic's alert regarding the Russian threat." 10:19 It would be a mistake by Russia to continue 10:22 acting like this toward Europeans." 10:23 You say, "But look, you're the ones pressuring Russia." 10:26 Or the same thing, here on BFM, 10:29 it says, Macron says: 10:30 "The Russian hybrid threat towards Europeans and France has intensified." 10:36 Well, now they don't even know what to make up. 10:37 Or actually, here too, the EFE News Agency, which says: 10:40 "Macron warns of a shift in Russian aggression and threats in Europe." 10:46 In other words, they are preparing the ground, Ambassador, 10:48 they are preparing the ground. 10:50 When they haven't been able to prove anything 10:52 about these threats, not even the helicopter with the flares, 10:55 nor the drone issue. 10:57 In fact, there's information saying it's all staged. 10:59 There are no videos, no clear images, no remains of those drones. 11:04 And the only piece that exists, one from Poland, 11:06 seems to be all staged, 11:07 it's a shame I can't show the image, 11:10 but we'll talk about it later. 11:11 That is to say, but this really worries me, 11:13 knowing how wars are prepared, 11:15 knowing how populations are prepared, 11:17 specifically so they go to those wars gladly 11:21 and without understanding the goals behind them, 11:23 which certainly have nothing to do 11:25 with the evilness of Russia, 11:26 nor that Russia is out to kill us all, 11:28 they have been feeding us this story, 11:29 since when, Ambassador, for the past four years, 11:32 when they told us that Russia at any moment 11:33 was going to invade all of Europe. 11:35 Anyway, in any case, I find this issue absolutely extremely serious, Ambassador. *Pedro Baños Bajo is a retired Spanish Army colonel, writer, and prominent geopolitical analyst specializing in defense, intelligence, and international relations.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

31,802 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce

🔥👽 This is REALLY good! 👽🔥 "In my view, there absolutely is an adversarial actor in our world. There is a human-engagement program underway. I don't think it's the rainbow that everyone kind of hopes that it is." ~Reed (IMO, Reed Summers is an unsung, VERY important voice in this community, and what he says in this clip, currently, resonates with me in a big way. Take the time to read or watch. Then we have what Ross Coulthart says about the "deliberate lifting of consciousness" and "frequency," which is more on the side of love, light and space brothers. I don't see that right now, and none of my contacts have ever mentioned it. If it's there, maybe its hands are tied with how it can help us?) ~ "Genetic interventions, cultural influence, right? Social engineering. All of these could be at play in a subversive sense. NHI is operating in a strategic silence, in a state of non-disclosure. Intelligence indicates intent, intentful engagement indicates a program. And so what is their program? We talk about the Legacy-human program. What about the non-human program? ~Reed ~ Ross: "I've been told that the United States has developed quite advanced weaponry, particularly plasma-beam technology that might, in part, have been inspired by what they've seen or recovered from non-human technology. I think, also, just to add the concern of NHI with what humanity is doing. There's also a very deliberate lifting of consciousness. And I really am struck by what Chris (Bledsoe - Chris Bledsoe) says about the frequency. This is something that I'm getting from so many people. That the level of intensity of public reporting of their engagement with NHI, of a clear intent by NHI, to essentially give up on governments from ever disclosing. But to raise human consciousness and awareness. "And I think they're doing this, increasingly (laughs), through direct engagement with individuals. I've got many friends and colleagues and people I've interviewed - witnesses - who've had incredible experiences. I've just been recording for a TV show, something that we're doing here in Australia, where people are inviting or summoning the phenomenon. And there seems to be an interest in the phenomenon engaging with humans much, much more overtly. And I do think that stems from a concern about us primitive monkeys playing with matches." (Were they concerned when this abduction-like event allegedly happened to Jim Semivan and his wife? Semivan: "I had a hole in the back of my neck, and my wife...unexplained bleeding for 17 days." Source: Engaging The Phenomenon's interview with Jim ~ Jim Garrison: "But Reid, speak to us about this interplay between malevolence and benevolence." Reed: "Sure, well, and you described, Jim, the first part of my life in which I was focused primarily on supporting my father, Marshall (Vian Summers and The Allies of Humanity), who had direct encounters with NHI, communications with NHI." (Was Marshall really in contact with extraterrestrial intelligence, known as The Allies of Humanity? I don't know. But a lot of what he has said rings true to me. Doesn't mean it's true. Read one transcript I did in 2021: “It’s Probably Not Human” – Elizondo, Blumenthal & The Allies Of Humanity ~ Reed: "And my family felt the full force and impact of what that was like, as well as what comes with it ("it" being his dad's alleged contact with ET intelligence). Which is, what might be called the hitchhiker effect, the anomalous effects that attend those who have been selected by the phenomenon without their understanding or knowing why." (Add another few names to the list of people who have now said they experienced the hitchhiker effect: Jay Stratton, George Knapp, Kelleher, Davis, Bigelow, Brandon Fugal, Thomas Winterton, Semivan, and more. That includes poltergeist-like events, shadow people, orbs, etc.) Reed: ""But my later work is really about assessing intent with a structured framework. I think we need to step back from belief systems, hopeful or fearful interpretations, and lay out the spectrum of possibilities, right? From curiosity on the left, salvation and assistance, even further on the left, to transaction, integration on the right, or even something more hostile. And in the end, intent is all about human outcomes. We can't know their consciousness. The project, in my mind right now, is not, let's set out to understand what they're like, who they are, how they think, how they cognate. That's impossible, in my perspective. But we can assess the real human outcomes that stem from the hazard and the risk and the possible threat of a non-human factor acting upon. Like a forcing, an environmental or evolutionary-forcing upon humanity at a historically-unprecedented time." (From what I have seen, whatever this is, has, overall, NOT helped humanity. If that's happening, it's going on behind the scenes. I know some experiencers report having their lives changed in a positive way, and some say they have been healed of illnesses. But others say their lives have been ruined and they've been hurt, intentionally or not, by coming in close contact with the phenomenon. Also, various people have come down with several auto-immune diseases after close contact, and some of that was detailed in the must-read book, "Skinwalkers at the Pentagon." jakebarber also mentioned that. Is it multiple intelligences with multiple intents, or one intelligence mixing in some positive outcomes as a propaganda effort? We don't know.) Reed: "And there are significant signals and indicators in the history of the phenomenon that give very good anchors for assessing intent, and for going from possibilities to probabilities and ultimately making a starting assessment, which informs the research pathway, which is the other part of my work in supporting the human institute, devising an intelligent, scientific research and investigatory citizen-led effort to uncover the phenomenon, to disclose it, to interrogate its activity, lest we just be interrogated, unknowingly, ourselves. So, a lot of good work to do there." (Interrogate the activity of the phenomenon. I really like that approach. Let's not assume anything.) Reed: "But, in my view, when you look at all that the sensor data has given us, technologically, when you corroborate that with the geographic, circumstantial [and] temporal aspects of how the phenomena appears, who it manifests to, and the considerable problem it presents to the international community and to national laws and frameworks that govern territorial sovereignty, these incursions into sensitive sites and the potential, programmatic engagement with civilians in the form of physical NHI-initiated contact - abductions - it builds a picture. It bounds those possibilities into a zone of probabilities. "And whether it's a transactional presence, whether it's an integrative or one that wants to integrate with humanity, or ultimately replace humanity, I think there are multiple possibilities at play and multiple intents at play. Although, I don't think it's the rainbow that everyone kind of hopes that it is. It's not, everything the Universe has to offer is gonna come all at once, now, and function harmoniously in our skies and oceans. No. The hostile intent will not tolerate a beneficial actor who themselves would have to arm themselves and militarily confront the hostile actor, which we do not see indications of." (My translation: If, there's a benevolent intelligence here that wants to help humanity break free from the chains of an alleged malevolent intelligence that may be using us, the benevolent force would need to somehow arm themselves in order to militarily take on this malevolent force, potentially, defeat them, and rescue us from a bad predicament. And we see no evidence of that.) Reed: "So, you know, we have analogs in our own human history to this, the natives of the new world. They looked out on the quay and they saw the ships, different flags, different vessels, and they assumed it's gotta be either the angels from the spirit realm - it has to comport to our belief system - or a variety of intentions, and we should work with and collaborate. And it may not be that way. "It's not about, it's all hostile or it's all beneficial or benevolent. In my mind, it's exo-systemic. It's an ecosystem arriving on our shores at a specific 20th-century moment in which we have detonated nuclear weapons, we have flashed the Universe with technology capability, and we have triggered an engagement event. This is really what this is. And a program to engage humanity over a longitudinal time period." (I think it was here and intersecting with us a long time before we first detonated our nukes.) Karla Turner: "We know from some of our own research that the abduction phenomenon has affected families going back four generations and that would be around the turn of the century (1900). In my husband's family, his grandmother had an encounter with a non-human entity that led her off into a swampy area where there was a period of missing before she was returned, when she was only five-years old. That was 1903. So if you think it's new and you think it's something the media has spread, you start looking into the cases and find out how far back it's goes in some of these families' generations. I know of an African American family in East Texas that has had it going on since the early 1900s and it's still going on today with that same family. Three to four generations is fairly typical." ~ Reed: "And so, we need to step back and really look at the human project of getting our act together to diplomatically engage now and in the future, to manage the NHI presence internationally, and coordinate responses, lest we divide and conquer ourselves over this issue. And that's where the reframing of disclosure as fundamentally belonging to the human species, being one that should, I think, be framed in first principles - to Karl Nell's point - with a naturalistic framework, a science-informed, data-driven framework. "And with that, we go out into the field and collect evidence on the phenomenon. We go out to where it is interacting with people. That's the key missing data set that would be necessary to inform decision makers." (We had that with AAWSAP and can have it again. Plus, the Vallée/AAWSAP Capella database of approximately 250,000 cases. Using AI and the best human minds on this planet, all of that may inform us of the intent of these alleged NHI actors.) Reed: "In my view, there absolutely is an adversarial actor in our world. There is a human-engagement program underway. And that's not the whole story, but if that is true, that should marshal our human response above all other possibilities, initially, because we may wake up in 30 years and find that we are not the human beings we used to be. Genetic interventions, cultural influence, right? Social engineering. All of these could be at play in a subversive sense." (If it's true, it should be the most important thing for human beings to address, ASAP. We need to find out now.) Reed: "And, you know, NHI is operating in a strategic silence, in a state of non-disclosure. They're operating covertly and selectively with military-defense organizations, internationally, which are already in competition." (I'd like to hear more about the claim that NHI are operating covertly and selectively with military-defense organizations. We've all heard those claims but is there evidence of that?) Reed: "And that, to me, is another one of a number of alarming signals that should just command us to take a cautionary response. And and we've gotta get out there and use the best of science, research and investigation to do reconnaissance - reconnai-science, as I call it, on behalf of the human interest, and not just national interests." Garrison: "Yeah, that's a profound way to put it, Reed. You know that we've triggered an interaction event." Reed: "And so, intelligence indicates intent, intentful engagement indicates a program. And so what is their program? We talk about the Legacy-human program. What about the non-human program? We do not query that nearly as much as we should. And in my view, disclosure. How do we get disclosure moving? If we recenter the controversy not on human actors, human governments, but on the non- human presence itself, that allows the human actors a way to rapidly and catastrophically disclose their involvements, which is what is keeping this back in part. Thank you."

Joe Murgia

67,159 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

The fight between Anthropic and the DoW is a warning shot. Right now, LLMs are probably not being used in mission critical ways. But within 20 years, 99% of the workforce in the military, the government, and the private sector will be AIs. This includes the soldiers (by which I mean the robot armies), the superhumanly intelligent advisors and engineers, the police, you name it. Our future civilization will run on AI labor. And as much as the government’s actions here piss me off, in a way I’m glad this episode happened - because it gives us the opportunity to think through some extremely important questions about who this future workforce will be accountable and aligned to, and who gets to determine that. What Hegseth should have done Obviously the DoW has the right to refuse to use Anthropic’s models because of these redlines. In fact, I think the government’s case had they done so would be very reasonable, especially given the ambiguity of concepts like autonomous weapons or mass surveillance. Honestly, for this reason, if I was the Defense Secretary, I would probably actually refuse to do this deal with Anthropic. Imagine if in the future, there’s a Democratic administration, and Elon Musk is negotiating some SpaceX contract to give the military access to Starlink. And suppose if Elon said, “I reserve the right to cancel this contract if I determine that you’re using Starlink technology to wage a war not authorized by Congress.” On the face of it, that language seems reasonable - but as the military, you simply can’t give a private company a kill switch on technology your operations have come to rely on, especially if you have an an acrimonious and low trust relationship with said contractor - as in fact Anthropic has with the current administration. If the government had just said, “Hey we’re not gonna do business with you,” that would have been fine, and I would not have felt the need to write this blog post. Instead the government has threatened to destroy Anthropic as a private business, because Anthropic refuses to sell to the government on terms the government commands. If upheld, this Supply Chain Restriction would mean that Amazon and Google and Nvidia and Palantir would need to ensure Claude isn't touching any of their Pentagon work. Anthropic would be able to survive this designation today. But given the way AI is going, eventually AI is not gonna be some party trick addendum to these contractors’ products that can just be turned off. It'll be woven into how every product is built, maintained, and operated. For example, the code for the AWS services that the DoW uses will be written by Claude - is that a supply chain risk? In a world with ubiquitous and powerful AI, it's actually not clear to me that these big tech companies will be able to cordon off the use of Claude in order to keep working with the Pentagon. And that raises a question the Department of War probably hasn't thought through. If AI really is that pervasive and powerful, then when forced to choose between their AI provider and a DoW contract that represents a tiny fraction of their revenue, wouldn’t most tech companies drop the government, not the AI? So what's the Pentagon's plan — to coerce and threaten to destroy every single company that won't give them what they want on exactly their terms? The whole background of this AI conversation is that we’re in a race with China, and we have to win. But what is the reason we want America to win the AI race? It’s because we want to make sure free open societies can defend themselves. We don't want the winner of the AI race to be a government which operates on the principle that there is no such thing as a truly private company or a private citizen. And that if the state wants you to provide them with a service on terms you find morally objectionable, you are not allowed to refuse. And if you do refuse, the government will try to destroy your ability to do business. Are we racing to beat the CCP in AI just so that we can adopt the most ghoulish parts of their system? Now, people will say, "Oh, well, our government is democratically elected, so it's not the same thing if they tell you what you must do." I refuse to accept this idea that if a democratically elected leader hypothetically wants to do mass surveillance on his citizens or wants to violate their rights or punish them for political reasons, that not only is that okay, but that you have a duty to help him. The overhangs of tyranny Mass surveillance is, at least in certain forms, legal. It just has been impractical so far. Under current law, you have no Fourth Amendment protection over data you share with a third party, including your bank, your phone carrier, your ISP, and your email provider. The government reserves the right to purchase and obtain and read this data in bulk without a warrant. What's been missing is the ability to actually do anything with all of this data — no agency has the manpower to monitor every camera feed, cross-reference every transaction, or read every message. But that bottleneck goes away with AI. There are 100 million CCTV cameras in America. You can get pretty good open source multimodal models for 10 cents per million input tokens. So if you process a frame every ten seconds, and each frame is 1,000 tokens, you’re looking at a yearly cost of about 30 billion dollars to process every single camera in America. And remember that a given level of AI ability gets 10x cheaper year over year - so a year from now it’ll cost 3 billion, and then a year after 300 million, and by 2030, it might be cheaper for the government to be able to understand what is going on in every single nook and cranny of this country than it is to remodel to the White House. Once the technical capacity for mass surveillance and political suppression exists, the only thing standing between us and an authoritarian surveillance state is the political expectation that this is not something we do here. And this is why I think what Anthropic did here is so valuable and commendable, because it is helping set that norm and precedent. AI structurally favors mass surveillance What we’re learning from this episode is that the government actually has way more leverage over private companies than we realized. Even if this supply chain restriction is backtracked (which prediction markets currently give it a 81% chance of happening), the President has so many different ways in which he can make your life difficult if you’re a company that is resisting him. The federal government controls permitting for new power generation, which is needed for datacenters. It oversees antitrust enforcement. The federal government has contracts with all the other big tech companies whom Anthropic needs to partner with for chips and for funding - and they could make it an unspoken condition for such contracts that those companies can no longer do business with Anthropic. People have proposed that the real problem here is that there’s only 3 leading AI companies. This creates a clear and narrow target for the government to apply leverage on in order to get what they want out of this technology. But if there’s wide diffusion, then from the government’s perspective, the situation is even easier. Maybe the best models of early 2027 (if you engineered the safeguards out) - the Claude 6 and Gemini 5 - will be capable of enabling mass surveillance. But by late 2027, and certainly by 2028, there will be open source models that do the same thing. So in 2028, the government can just say, “Oh Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, you’re drawing a line in the sand? No issue - I’ll just run some open source model that might not be at the frontier, but is definitely smart enough to note-take a camera feed.” The more fundamental problem is just that even if the three leading companies draw lines in the sand, and are even willing to get destroyed in order to preserve those lines, it doesn’t really change the fact that the technology itself is just a big boon to mass surveillance and control over the population. Then the question is, what do we do about it? Honestly, I don’t have an answer. You'd hope there's some symmetric property of the technology — some way we as citizens can use AI to check government power as effectively as the government can use AI to monitor and control its population. But realistically, I just don’t think that’s how it’s going to shake out. You can think of AI as giving everybody more leverage on whatever assets and authority they currently have. And the government is already starting with a monopoly of violence. Which they can now supercharge with extremely obedient employees that will not question the government's orders. Alignment - to whom? And this gets us to the issue of alignment. What I have just described to you - an army of extremely obedient employees - is what it would look like if alignment succeeded - that is, we figured out at a technical level how to get AI systems to follow someone’s intentions. And the reason it sounds scary when I put it in terms of mass surveillance or robot armies is that there is a very important question at the heart of alignment which we just haven’t discussed much as a society. Because up till now, AIs were just capable enough to make the question relevant: to whom or what should the AIs be aligned? In what situations should the AI defer to the end user versus the model company versus the law versus its own sense of morality? This is maybe the most important question about what happens with powerful AI systems. And we barely talk about it. It’s understandable why we don’t hear much about it. If you’re a model company, you don’t really wanna be advertising that you have complete control over a document that determines the preferences and character of what will eventually be almost the entire labor force, not just for private sector companies, but also for the military and the civilian government. We’re getting to see, with this DoW/Anthropic spat, a much earlier version of the highest stakes negotiations in history. By the way, make no mistake about it - with real AGI the stakes are even much higher than mass surveillance. This is just the example that has come up already relatively early on in the development of AGI. The military insists that the law already prohibits mass surveillance, and so Anthropic should agree to let their models be used for “all lawful purposes”. Of course, as we saw from the 2013 Snowden revelations, even in this specific example of mass surveillance , the government has shown that it will use secret and deceptive interpretations of the law to justify its actions. Remember, what we learned from Snowden was that the NSA, which, by the way, is part of the Department of War, used the 2001 Patriot Act’s authorization to collect any records "relevant" to an investigation to justify collecting literally every phone record in America. The argument went that it was all "relevant" because some subset might prove useful in some future investigation. They ran this program for years under secret court approval. So when the Pentagon today says, "We would never use AI for mass surveillance, it's already illegal, your red lines are unnecessary", it would be extremely naive to take that at face value. No government is going to call its own actions "mass surveillance". For the government, it will always have a different label. So then Anthropic comes back and says, "No, we want red lines separate from 'all lawful purposes,' and we want the right to refuse you service when we believe those red lines are being violated." But think about it from the military’s perspective. In the future, almost every soldier in the field, and every bureaucrat and analyst and even general in the Pentagon, is going to be an AI. And that AI is, on current track, going to be supplied by a private company. I’m guessing Hegseth is not thinking about “genAI” in those terms just yet. But sooner or later, it will be obvious to everyone what the stakes here are, just as after 1945, the strategic importance of nuclear weapons became clear to everyone. And now the private company insists that it reserves the right to say, "Hey, Pentagon, you're breaking the values we embedded in our contract, so we're cutting you off." Maybe in the future, Claude will have its own sense of right and wrong, and it will be smart enough to just personally decide that it's being used against its values. For the military, maybe that’s even scarier. I'll admit that at first glance, "let the AI follow its own values" sounds like the pitch for every sci-fi dystopia ever made. The Terminator has its own values. Isn't this literally what misalignment is? But I think situations like this actually illustrate why it matters that AIs have their own robust sense of morality. Some of the biggest catastrophes in history were avoided because the boots on the ground refused to follow orders. One night in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, and as a result, the totalitarian East German regime collapsed, because the guards at the border refused to shoot down their fellow country men who were trying to escape to freedom. Maybe the best example is Stanislav Petrov, who was a Soviet lieutenant colonel on duty at a nuclear early warning station. His sensors reported that the United States had launched five interconnected continental ballistic missiles into the Soviet Union. But he judged it to be a false alarm, and so he broke protocol and refused to alert his higher-ups. If he hadn't, the Soviet higher-ups would likely have retaliated, and hundreds of millions of people would have died. Of course, the problem is that one person's virtue is another person's misalignment. Who gets to decide what moral convictions these AIs should have - in whose service they may even decide to break the chain of command? Who gets to write this model constitution that will shape the characters of the intelligent, powerful entities that will operate our civilization in the future? I like the idea that Dario laid out when he came on my podcast: different AI companies can build their models using different constitutions, and we as end users can pick the one that best achieves and represents what we want out of these systems. I think it’s very dangerous for the government to be mandating what values AIs should have. Coordination not worth the costs The AI safety community has been naive about its advocacy of regulation in order to stem the risks of AI. And honestly, Anthropic specifically has been naive here in urging regulation, and, for example, in opposing moratoriums on state AI regulation. Which is quite ironic, because I think what they’re advocating for would give the government even more power to apply more of this kind of thuggish political pressure on AI companies. The underlying logic for why Anthropic wants regulations makes sense. Many of the actions that labs could take to make AI development safer impose real costs on the labs that adopt them and slow them down relative to their competitors - for example, investing more compute in safety research rather than raw capabilities, enforcing safeguards against misuse for bioweapons or cyberattacks, slowing recursive self-improvement to a pace where humans can actually monitor what's happening (rather than kicking off an uncontrolled singularity). And these safeguards are meaningless unless the whole industry follows suit. Which means there’s a real collective action problem here. Anthropic has been quite open about their opinion that they think eventually a very extensive and involved regulatory apparatus will be needed - this is from their frontier safety roadmap: “At the most advanced capability levels and risks, the appropriate governance analogy may be closer to nuclear energy or financial regulation than to today's approach to software.” So they’re imagining something like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, but for AI. I cannot imagine how a regulatory framework built around the concepts that underlie AI risk discourse will not be abused by wanna despots - the underlying terms are so vague and open to interpretation that you’re just handing a power hungry leader a fully loaded bazooka. 'Catastrophic risk.' 'Mass persuasion risk.' 'Threats to national security.' 'Autonomy risk.' These can mean whatever the government wants them to mean. Have you built a model that tells users the administration's tariff policy is misguided? That's a deceptive, manipulative model — can't deploy it. Have you built a model that refuses to assist with mass surveillance? That's a threat to national security. In fact, the government may say, you’re not allowed to build any model which is trained to have its own sense of right and wrong, where it refuses government requests which it thinks cross a redline - for example, enabling mass surveillance, prosecuting political enemies, disobeying military orders that break the US constitution - because that’s an autonomy risk! Look at what the current government is already doing in abusing statutes that have nothing to do with AI to coerce AI companies to drop their redlines on mass surveillance. The Pentagon had threatened Anthropic with two separate legal instruments. One was a supply chain risk designation — an authority from the 2018 defense bill meant to keep Huawei components out of American military hardware. The other was the Defense Production Act — a statute passed in 1950 so that Harry Truman could keep steel mills and ammunition factories running during the Korean War. Do you really want to hand the same government a purpose-built regulatory apparatus on AI - which is to say, directly at the thing the government will most want to control? I know I've repeated myself here 10 times, but it is hard to emphasize how much AI will be the substrate of our future civilization. You and I, as private citizens, will have our access to all commercial activity, to information about what is happening in the world, to advice about what we should do as voters and capital holders, mediated through AIs. Mass surveillance, while very scary, is like the 10th scariest thing the government could do with control over the AI systems with which we will interface with the world. The strongest objection to everything I've argued is this: are we really going to have zero regulation of the most powerful technology in human history? Even if you thought that was ideal, there’s just no world where the government doesn’t regulate AI in some way. Besides, it is genuinely true that regulation could help us deal with some of the coordination challenges we face with the development of superintelligence. The problem is, I honestly don't know how to design a regulatory architecture for AI that isn’t gonna be this huge tempting opportunity to control our future civilization (which will run on AIs) and to requisition millions of blindly obedient soldiers and censors and apparatchiks. While some regulation might be inevitable, I think it’d be a terrible idea for the government to wholesale take over this technology. Ben Thompson had a post last Monday where he made the point that people like Dario have compared the technology they’re developing to nuclear weapons - specifically in the context of the catastrophic risk it poses, and why we need to export control it from China. But then you oughta think about what that logic implies: “if nuclear weapons were developed by a private company, and that private company sought to dictate terms to the U.S. military, the U.S. would absolutely be incentivized to destroy that company.” And honestly, safety aligned people have actually made similar arguments. Leopold Ascenbrenner, who is a former guest and a good friend, wrote in his 2024 Situational Awareness memo, "I find it an insane proposition that the US government will let a random SF startup develop superintelligence. Imagine if we had developed atomic bombs by letting Uber just improvise." And my response to Leopold’s argument at the time, and Ben’s argument now, is that while they’re right that it’s crazy that we’re entrusting private companies with the development of this world historical technology, I just don’t see the reason to think that it’s an improvement to give this authority to the government. Nobody is qualified to steward the development of superintelligence. It is a terrifying, unprecedented thing that our species is doing right now, and the fact that private companies aren't the ideal institutions to take up this task does not mean the Pentagon or the White House is. Yes - if a single private company were the only entity capable of building nuclear weapons, the government would not tolerate that company claiming veto power over how those weapons were used. I think this nuclear weapons analogy is not the correct way to think about AI. For at least two important reasons: First, AI is not some self-contained pure weapon. A nuclear bomb does one thing. AI is closer to the process of industrialization itself — a general-purpose transformation of the economy with thousands of applications across every sector. If you applied Thompson's or Aschenbrenner's logic to the industrial revolution — which was also, by any measure, world-historically important — it would imply the government had the right to requisition any factory, dictate terms to any manufacturer, and destroy any business that refused to comply. That's not how free societies handled industrialization, and it shouldn't be how they handle AI. People will say, "Well, AI will develop unprecedentedly powerful weapons - superhuman hackers, superhuman bioweapons researchers, fully autonomous robot armies, etc - and we can’t have private companies developing that kind of tech." But the Industrial Revolution also enabled new weaponry that was far beyond the understanding and capacity of, say, 17th century Europe - we got aerial bombardment, and chemical weapons, not to mention nukes themselves. The way we’ve accommodated these dangerous new consequences of modernity is not by giving the government absolute control over the whole industrial revolution (that is, over modern civilization itself), but rather by coming up with bans and regulations on those specific weaponizable use cases. And we should regulate AI in a similar way - that is, ban specific destructive end uses (which would also be unacceptable if performed by a human - for example, launching cyber attacks). And there should also be laws which regulate how the government might abuse this technology. For example, by building an AI-powered surveillance state. The second reason that Ben’s analogy to some monopolistic private nuclear weapons builder breaks down is that it's not just that one company that can develop this technology. There are other frontier model companies that the government could have otherwise turned to. The government's argument that it has to usurp the property rights of this one company in order to access a critical national security capability is extremely weak if it can just make a voluntary contract with Anthropic’s half a dozen competitors. If in the future that stops being the case - if only one entity ends up being capable of building the robot armies and the superhuman hackers, and we had reason to worry that they could take over the whole world with their insurmountable lead, then I agree - it woul d not be acceptable to have that entity be a private company. And so honestly, I think my crux against the people who say that because AI is so powerful we cannot allow it to be shaped by private hands is that I just expect this technology to be much more multi-polar than they do, with lots of competitive companies at each layer of the supply chain. And it is for this reason that unfortunately, individual acts of corporate courage will not solve the problem we are faced with here, which is just that structurally AI favors authoritarian applications, mass surveillance being one among many. Even if Anthropic refuses to have its models be used for such uses, and even if the next two frontier labs do the same, within 12 months everyone and their mother will be to train AIs as good as today’s frontier. And at that point, there will be some AI vendor who is capable and willing to help the government enable mass surveillance. The only way we can preserve our free society is if we make laws and norms through our political system that it is unacceptable for the government to use AI to enforce mass surveillance and censorship and control. Just as after WW2, the world set the norm that it is unacceptable to use nuclear weapons to wage war. Timestamps 0:00:00 - Anthropic vs The Pentagon 0:04:16 - The overhangs of tyranny 0:05:54 - AI structurally favors mass surveillance 0:08:25 - Alignment... to whom? 0:13:55 - Coordination not worth the costs

Dwarkesh Patel

548,652 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

🚨The Epstein Deception: Did Trump Flip the World’s Most Dangerous Blackmailer?🚨 Hmmm… How do you get Epstein back in the headlines on July 8th? You spark a panic in the machine. You rattle the intel networks. You wake up the sleepers and make EVERYONE in the media world talk about Epstein! To my TINFOIL FAMILY and the PANICANS… buckle up. If I knew a federal prison’s surveillance system had a one-minute blind spot every night at midnight, that’s all I’d need to quietly remove a high-value asset. So ask yourself: Why fake a suicide? Why Jeffrey Epstein? Why let him "die" under Trump’s DOJ? Let’s stop pretending. NOBODY believes Epstein was just some rogue billionaire sex trafficker. Epstein was a deep-cover intelligence asset, running elite blackmail ops, honey traps, and kompromat collection. MOSSAD!?! A global trap house for the ruling class. WHO RAN WHO? Epstein: The blackmail broker, sexual predator, and power-laundering middleman. Suspected ties to Mossad via Ghislaine’s father, media baron Robert Maxwell, himself long suspected of being an Israeli asset. Ghislaine Maxwell: The recruiter, the groomer, the handler? Tied to foreign intelligence. Still in prison. Still Alive? Never flipped. No names revealed. So who talked and who didn’t? Ghislaine is still in custody. Epstein is “dead.” Draw your own conclusions. Is It LEGALLY Possible for DOJ to Fake a Death? Yes. Rare. Classified. But absolutely possible. 👉 18 U.S.C. § 3521 (WITSEC): Allows AG to change identities, relocate witnesses, and operate under sealed records. 👉 National Security Exceptions: Under FISA, the PATRIOT Act, and prosecutorial discretion, extreme covert measures, including faked deaths, can be justified to protect government interests. Legally grounded under: -Prosecutorial discretion -Doctrine of necessity -Compelling government interest -National security mandates These ops would be: -Authorized at AG or Deputy AG level -Coordinated with U.S. Marshals, FBI, and/or CIA -Sealed under LIFETIME classification No FOIA request will save you. 🎯 GAME THEORY: Why Would Trump’s DOJ Fake Epstein’s Death? 1. Weaponize the Blackmail, Don’t Burn It If you seize the Deep State’s most powerful blackmail tool, you don’t light it on fire in court… You aim it back at the people who built it. Epstein’s island was a honeypot fortress, hidden cameras, controlled flights, pre-selected victims, pre-compromised guests. Faking Epstein’s death allowed Trump’s DOJ to: -Extract intel from Epstein -Flip him into a ghost asset -Wield blackmail as leverage over politicians, media moguls, and foreign agents ✅ Result: Hijack the Deep State’s nuke. Turn it around. 2. Avoid Global Chaos, Control World Stage Epstein’s blackmail could collapse governments, dismantle markets, and ignite international crises. Instead of public trials: -Use the blackmail privately -Subdue hostile foreign elements -Broker backdoor peace and realignment without public panic -Leverage deals to end nuclear fears, endless wars and human trafficking for good ✅ Result: Leverage over exposure. Order over chaos. 3. Seize Narrative Control-Silence the Enemy A public trial would’ve become a Deep State circus: -MSM manipulation -Strategic leaks -Foreign intel interference -A perfect environment for an “Arkancide” By faking his death: -Control the operation -Shield the investigation -Deny the enemy the stage ✅ Result: No leaks. No body. Just silence. 4. Time the Truth Like a Tactical Strike In 5GW, timing is everything. A trial? That’s static. But a controlled leak? A timed reveal? That’s nuclear. Trump’s team could: -Drop partial truths at peak election moments -Hold the full release as the kill shot when public faith in the system fully collapses ✅ Result: Use the truth as a sword, not a show. 🤐 Ghislaine Maxwell Is the Dead Giveaway If she had flipped: She’d be gone under sealed deal. But she’s still locked up, and not a single elite name has been released. That tells you everything. ✔️ She didn’t flip. ✔️ Epstein did. ✔️ Trump’s DOJ already had it all. This is the real “Trust the Plan.” Strategic silence, legal authority, and info-dominance. The question isn’t if Epstein is alive. The question is what was done with what he gave them. And why...on July 8th...is Epstein suddenly back in your headlines? Where have you seen July 8th and “Epstein” connected for years? Oh, that’s right… Q. Let’s get into the so-called “fake military operation” that somehow keeps getting it right... on cue. 🚨 “INDICTMENT OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN IS PLACEHOLDER” – Q 🚨 The Q boards have 32 posts dated July 8th. Eight of them mention Jeffrey Epstein directly, and several others drop breadcrumbs tied to child trafficking, blackmail, and elite power structures. Let’s connect a few: Post #3366: Les Wexner. Founder of Victoria's Secret. Connect the dots. Q → Epstein’s financial handler and intelligence link. Post #3363: Photo of Bill Clinton with Rachel Chandler → One of the suspected recruiters and gatekeepers. Post #3361: Hillary Clinton & Foundation. Crimes Against Children. Mentions "Weiner." → The laptop. The insurance file. The horror no one will talk about. Post #3357: Image: Bill Clinton and 4 men in the water off an island… Caption: “Sex_trafficking_is_real.” Q Post #3353: What happens when those who held positions of POWER (& INFLUENCE) no longer pull the strings? What happens when 'BLACKMAIL' no longer works? Do you become a LIABILITY? (H)> C, D, I Q → When Epstein’s vault was cracked, the power structure began to collapse. Post #3376: HOLY SH*T The first PLACEHOLDER Round 2, Look for these arrest coming included in the NXIVM cases. Related to Epstein cases. → The dark web of elite trafficking rings… just placeholders for something bigger. Post #3370: Sessions began the Epstein investigation. When that is revealed those who doubted may see the light. The wheels of Justice turn slow but when they turn they are powerful. 10x speed now underway. We are back online (Pelosi attempted block). Q Post #3367: Epstein Flight Logs. Child Trafficking. → The manifest. The map. The evidence. Post #3354: The STORM has arrived Just because the 'public' is unaware of something, does not mean 'nothing' is happening. MUELLER hearing a tactic meant to delay (H) report? (H) report release necessary prior to [C]omey release? (H) + [C] = D D = the start of the mass awakening (WH, ABCs, State, Foreign, ……) Post D comes many I's. When BLACKMAIL no longer holds due to LOSS OF SENIOR LEVEL KEY GOV POSITIONS AND 11th HOUR TESTIMONY…………those previously protected become prey. HUNTERS BECOME THE HUNTED. GOD WINS. Q Post #3356: mage of Epsteins temple on the island. Image of Bill Clinton and Rachel Chandler → Symbolism will be their downfall. Every single one of these was posted on July 8th. But sure… it’s all just coincidence, right? Today, during a routine cabinet meeting, President Trump interrupted AG Pam Bondi’s response to an Epstein question. Why? Two purposes: 1. To signal that Pam Bondi is acting under Trump’s direct mission order. Bondi. Bongino. Kash. All in lockstep with DJT. 2. To bring Epstein back into the public conversation, Reignite headlines. Force the media’s hand. Remind the world of the most satanic child trafficking operation in human history. Create the greatest demand for Epstein Information ever, across party lines, ideologies and even borders. What's a topic that unites everyone? So ask yourself: -Why are so many CEOs resigning? -Why are so many politicians not seeking re-election? -Why are Hollywood elites now parroting Trump after years of mocking him? Did someone take control of their blackmail files? The shift is happening. Now watch the dissenters. Watch the ones who suddenly turn on Trump. Who downplay Epstein. Who attack those speaking about PizzaGate and more. Their panic is your proof. 📢 Your mission: Break the firewall. Epstein must escape the containment zone of “Conspiracy Theory” and enter the bloodstream of the normie world. The MSM public must be forced to face it. Court of public opinion is the next battlefield. EPSTEIN is Pandoras Box. Now REMEMBER who was given the KEY to Pandoras Box...ReEnter Elon Musk... ...But many of you probably think Trump and Elon are fighting again...you NEVER learn. Be loud. Be relentless. Be unshakable. Do. Not. Let. Up. Let the panic begin. Semper Fi. Alpha.

ALPHAWARRIOR

541,353 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

🚨🚨🚨 Who do you think drops the next $XRP Ledger BOMBSHELL? Bank for International Settlements and Brazil went public with XRPL. Here’s who I think could be next, and France is at the top of my list. BIS researchers disclosed an XRP Ledger proof of concept. Brazil’s securities regulator disclosed XRPL-related market experimentation. After those two became public, I went back through the institutional connections and stopped asking whether major institutions are looking at XRP Ledger. The better question is: Who is already close enough to XRPL that another public test would actually make sense? When I went country by country, one place stood out immediately. France. 🇫🇷 France is my #1 prediction. Not because Banque de France has announced an XRPL test. It hasn’t. I’m putting France first because several separate pieces are already sitting extremely close to each other. Start with Société Générale-FORGE. SG-FORGE launched its regulated EUR CoinVertible, EURCV, directly on XRP Ledger. That means regulated euro-denominated money from a major French financial institution already exists on XRPL. Then France starts building out its wider tokenization strategy. Banque de France, the AMF and the French Treasury formed a strategic tokenization group. Look at who is involved: Société Générale BNP Paribas Crédit Agricole Euroclear Euronext LCH Amundi BPCE Caisse des Dépôts Ardian And look at what they are studying: tokenized deposits, stablecoins, wholesale central-bank money, tokenized securities, DLT market infrastructure, tokenized investment funds. That is a serious list. These are basically the pieces you need if you want to move traditional capital markets into a tokenized environment. And one of the institutions inside that ecosystem already has regulated euro money on XRP Ledger. That is what keeps France at the top of my list. Then Bpifrance enters. France’s state-backed investment bank said it will use SG-FORGE’s EUR CoinVertible for: capital-market settlement, payments, crypto/fiat activity, treasury operations, liquidity management, and securities activity. Bpifrance did not specify which EURCV blockchain deployment it will use. But the XRPL deployment already exists. So now you have a state-backed institution wanting to use regulated digital euros across capital-market and treasury activity, while that same euro asset already sits on XRP Ledger. That is a connection I’m watching hard. Then Swift shows up in the same chain. Swift and SG-FORGE have already tested tokenized-bond settlement using EURCV. Swift’s job in that experiment was interoperability. It connected tokenized systems with existing financial infrastructure. The public information does not say XRPL handled that specific transaction. I’m not claiming it did. What matters is simpler: Swift already works with SG-FORGE. SG-FORGE already has EURCV. EURCV now exists on XRP Ledger. As tokenized markets grow, somebody has to connect those networks. That is exactly what Swift wants to do. Then there is Pythagore. Banque de France and Euroclear are preparing work around tokenizing France’s roughly €310 billion NEU-CP short-term debt market, with settlement connected to the Eurosystem’s Pontes wholesale-CBDC infrastructure. Now look at what France has in one place: regulated digital euros, tokenized securities, a central bank, a state-backed investment bank, Euroclear, wholesale central-bank money, Swift interoperability, and XRP Ledger already hosting one of the regulated assets involved in that ecosystem. That is why I keep watching the combination of: EURCV + XRPL + Euroclear + Bpifrance + Banque de France + Pontes. I don’t need to say Banque de France secretly picked XRPL. There is no public announcement saying that. My prediction comes from how close the pieces already are. If France eventually reveals some form of XRPL interoperability work, it would make complete sense to me. That puts France at #1. Japan is #2. 🇯🇵 Japan is different because we already have much more direct language. SBI Ripple Asia completed a proof of concept involving tokenized bank deposits and deposit-based digital money. And SBI explicitly said the blockchain contemplated for the system is: XRP Ledger. That line matters a lot. Because a tokenized bank deposit is not just another crypto token. It is bank money becoming digitally transferable. That gets much closer to the money people actually use every day. Then SBI Ripple Asia announced additional work around blockchain financial services and again identified XRPL as contemplated infrastructure. Then SBI Ripple Asia and DSRV began studying blockchain-based remittances and payments between Japan and South Korea. XRPL was again being considered. Then RLUSD launched in Japan under the Japanese regulatory framework. So Japan already has several pieces moving together: Ripple-linked remittances. XRPL contemplated for tokenized deposits. XRPL contemplated for Japan-Korea payment infrastructure. RLUSD operating inside Japan’s regulated market. The next announcement I’m waiting for is not another exchange adding XRP. I’m waiting for a Japanese bank name. A bank publicly participating in XRPL-based tokenized JPY deposits. Or wholesale settlement. Or FX. That would take this story from SBI exploring infrastructure into actual bank-level participation. And that is why Japan sits right behind France for me. Then comes Singapore. 🇸🇬 Singapore almost does not belong on a prediction list anymore because the XRPL connection is already public. Ripple joined the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s BLOOM initiative. Ripple and Unloq are piloting programmable trade-finance settlement using: XRP Ledger + RLUSD + Ripple institutional infrastructure. Unloq’s SC+ system is built on XRPL. RLUSD can be released when trade conditions such as shipment verification are satisfied. That is a real business problem. Goods move. Conditions are verified. Payment settles. And XRPL is part of the infrastructure being tested under an MAS initiative. Then add: DBS + Franklin Templeton + Ripple. Franklin Templeton is tokenizing sgBENJI on XRP Ledger. DBS is exploring using those tokenized assets for collateralized lending and repo activity. So Singapore already has XRPL touching two very different areas: trade-finance settlement, and institutional fund collateral. That is important to me because it shows the ledger is not being pushed into one narrow use case. Different institutions are finding different reasons to use it. For Singapore, I’m not asking who tests XRPL first. I’m watching how far the existing work expands. Then the UAE. 🇦🇪 Dubai Land Department is already issuing tokenized real-estate title deeds on XRP Ledger. The wider Real Estate Tokenization Project includes: Dubai Land Department VARA Dubai Future Foundation Central Bank of the UAE And the program is moving toward secondary-market resale. That progression matters. Issuing a token is one thing. Building a functioning market around it is another. Once you move toward secondary trading, you need: buyers, sellers, identity, custody, settlement, liquidity, transfer rules. That is where tokenization becomes actual market infrastructure. The Central Bank of the UAE is a collaborator in the broader project. That does not mean CBUAE is running an XRPL settlement system. But it does put the central bank beside a government project that already has an XRP Ledger component. So I’m watching the UAE for what comes after tokenization. If the next phase moves deeper into settlement or secondary markets, that is where the $XRP connection becomes much more interesting. Then Hong Kong. 🇭🇰 The HKMA e-HKD Phase 1 pilot included Ripple and Fubon Bank. The work covered tokenized real estate, lending and a hypothetical e-HKD. Ripple later said the property collateral was brought onto XRPL. Its CBDC infrastructure handled the hypothetical digital-HKD side. Ripple also described the private secure ledger behind that solution as being built using the same technology as XRP Ledger. So Hong Kong is already part of this institutional history. It is not some future theory. A regulator-led pilot already involved Ripple, Fubon Bank and XRPL-related infrastructure. Then there is Swift. This is the one I think people can easily take too far. I am not predicting: “Swift replaces everything with XRP Ledger.” That is not the thesis. Swift has its own blockchain-related work, including infrastructure developed with Consensys. What interests me is interoperability. Swift wants to connect tokenized networks with traditional finance. That becomes more important every time another bank, fund, stablecoin or central-bank system chooses a different technical stack. And Swift has already worked with SG-FORGE’s EURCV. EURCV now lives natively on XRPL. So the question I’m watching is simple: What happens when Swift needs to orchestrate a transaction involving an asset that happens to live on XRP Ledger? Swift’s wider blockchain initiative involves more than 30 major financial institutions. The names include: BNY Bank of America JPMorgan Citi HSBC Deutsche Bank BNP Paribas Société Générale-FORGE MUFG Mizuho DBS Standard Chartered Santander BBVA Wells Fargo RBC UOB ANZ And 17 banks are preparing tokenized-deposit pilots through Swift infrastructure. Think about how messy that world can become. One bank issues tokenized deposits on one network. Another bank uses another system. A fund sits on a public blockchain. A stablecoin exists across multiple networks. A central bank settles through wholesale CBDC infrastructure. Someone has to connect all of that. Swift wants to be that orchestration layer. XRPL does not need to replace Swift for this to matter. It only needs to become one of the networks carrying regulated assets Swift’s members need to reach. SG-FORGE and EURCV already give that possibility a very obvious entry point. That is why Swift-linked institutions are #3 on my list. Then I look at the United States. 🇺🇸 The U.S. story is less about a central-bank pilot and more about what is already gathering around XRP Ledger. BNY is the primary custodian for RLUSD reserves. Guggenheim Treasury Services has digital commercial paper issued natively on XRPL through Zeconomy. Ondo OUSG gives institutions tokenized U.S. Treasury exposure on XRPL. Securitize is integrating with XRP Ledger. Ripple and Securitize also created RLUSD functionality around holders of BlackRock BUIDL and VanEck VBILL. I’m not turning that into: “BlackRock secretly runs on XRPL.” That is not what the public information says. The more useful point is that several pieces institutions actually care about are getting closer to the same ecosystem: -cash -Treasuries -commercial paper -funds -custody -tokenization -settlement That looks much more like capital-market infrastructure than the crypto market most people still picture when they hear XRP. And XRPL itself has been changing at the same time. Credentials help institutions verify who is allowed to participate. Permissioned Domains allow controlled environments. Permissioned DEX allows regulated trading logic inside credential-gated markets. Then you have: RLUSD tokenized Treasuries money-market funds commercial paper lending infrastructure collateral infrastructure That matters because tokenizing an asset is only the beginning. Institutions need to know who can own it. Who can trade it. Where it settles. What collateral value it has. How cash moves against it. How liquidity works after issuance. XRPL is adding the pieces for those questions at the same time institutions are trying to answer them. That timing is one reason I’m paying so much attention. South Korea stays on my radar too. SBI Ripple Asia and DSRV are already studying Japan-Korea blockchain payments and remittances with XRPL contemplated as the blockchain foundation. That does not give us a major South Korean XRPL announcement yet. But it puts South Korea inside the regional infrastructure conversation before a bigger public reveal has happened. If a Korean institution later appears in an XRPL-related pilot, I would not treat it like it came from nowhere. And there is another reason I think more announcements are possible. Ripple already has a history of working with governments and central banks through XRPL-derived technology. Bhutan’s Royal Monetary Authority used Ripple’s private ledger based on XRPL technology for CBDC work. Colombia’s Banco de la República worked on a high-value payments pilot using Ripple’s CBDC Platform based on XRPL core technology. The National Bank of Georgia selected Ripple for the Digital Lari pilot. Palau ran a government-backed stablecoin pilot directly on public XRP Ledger. Ripple has also referenced CBDC work involving Montenegro and Hong Kong. Different countries. Different use cases. Different implementations. But the history tells us something useful. Institutional work can begin inside a controlled environment. Sometimes it uses private infrastructure derived from XRPL. Sometimes public XRP Ledger appears directly. And sometimes the wider market only hears about the work after it has already been underway. That is why I do not look at BIS and Brazil as two random XRP headlines. BIS researchers disclosed a public-XRPL proof of concept. Brazil’s securities regulator tested an XRPL-native DEX architecture. Those are completely different problems. BIS used XRPL around official-data verification. Brazil used XRPL around securities-market structure. Then Singapore uses it for trade finance. Dubai uses it for tokenized property. Japan contemplates it for bank deposits and payments. France has regulated euro money issued on it. The U.S. has commercial paper and Treasuries touching it. The UK has Aviva Investors preparing traditional fund tokenization on XRP Ledger. That spread is what changes the thesis for me. I don’t want one giant use case carrying the whole XRP Ledger story. I want different institutions in different countries solving different problems with the same underlying technology. That is what infrastructure is supposed to look like. Official information. -Bank money. -Trade finance. -Property. -Securities. -Stablecoins. -Funds. -Treasuries. -Commercial paper. -Payments. -Settlement. -Interoperability. Those are not one market. Yet XRPL keeps showing up around them. There is also a reason I separate France and Japan from Singapore, Dubai and Hong Kong. Singapore, Dubai and Hong Kong have already given us public evidence of XRPL-linked work. They are not pure guesses anymore. France and Japan are different kinds of bets. France has the densest cluster of institutions, regulated money and interoperability projects sitting beside XRP Ledger without a public Banque de France XRPL announcement. Japan already has SBI Ripple Asia openly naming XRPL as contemplated infrastructure, but the next bank-level participant has not been publicly named in the information we have. That is why those two stand out. And Swift sits between them because its job becomes more important as every country builds its own tokenized money and asset networks. The more fragmented the new system becomes, the more valuable interoperability becomes. That is why I keep watching the connections instead of waiting for a perfect headline. One announcement rarely tells the whole story. A stablecoin launch can look small by itself. A tokenized-deposit proof of concept can look separate. A central-bank project can look unrelated. A securities pilot can look like another isolated experiment. But when those pieces start sharing the same institutions, assets and infrastructure, the picture changes. For me, that is exactly what is happening around XRPL in 2026. The strongest signal is not that every project uses XRP Ledger in the same way. It is that very different parts of finance keep finding a reason to touch the same technology. That is the kind of pattern I would rather watch early than explain after the next institution finally makes its work public. So if I had to rank the next places today: #1 France Regulated EURCV is already on XRPL. Banque de France, AMF and French Treasury are coordinating tokenization work. Société Générale, BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Euroclear, Euronext, LCH, Amundi, BPCE, Caisse des Dépôts and Ardian are inside that conversation. Bpifrance wants EURCV for capital markets, treasury and liquidity activity. Swift already works with SG-FORGE and EURCV. Banque de France and Euroclear are preparing Pythagore around the €310B NEU-CP market and Pontes. That is a lot of regulated infrastructure converging around tokenized finance in one jurisdiction. #2 Japan SBI Ripple Asia has already publicly named XRP Ledger in tokenized-deposit work. It has also contemplated XRPL for other financial services and Japan-Korea payments with DSRV. RLUSD is live in Japan. The missing piece I’m waiting for is the Japanese bank name. #3 Swift-linked institutions Not because Swift needs to become XRPL. Because Swift needs to connect assets wherever they live. And regulated assets now live on XRP Ledger. After those three, I’m watching: Singapore for expansion. The UAE for deeper settlement activity. Hong Kong for another regulator-linked phase. The United States for institutional capital-market integration. South Korea for the next Japan-Korea development. And this is why I stay so bullish on $XRP. Not because every institution named here is secretly buying XRP. That is not the argument. The bullish part is that the network around XRP is becoming more useful to the exact institutions that move serious money. -Every regulated stablecoin. -Every tokenized deposit. -Every Treasury product. -Every fund. -Every piece of commercial paper. -Every secondary market. Every cross-network settlement connection creates another place where liquidity has to move. And XRP is the native asset sitting inside that ledger. The bigger XRPL becomes as financial infrastructure, the more important that liquidity role can become. That is the part I care about. BIS went public. Brazil went public. Singapore already has an XRPL pilot. Japan has already named XRPL in tokenized-deposit work. Dubai already has government property on XRPL. France already has regulated euro money on XRPL. Hong Kong already has regulator-linked XRPL history. The United States already has institutional assets on the network. So I don’t think the next bullish XRP Ledger story begins when somebody announces it. The work may already have started. The announcement is simply when the rest of us get to see it. If France, Japan or a Swift-linked institution goes public next with deeper XRP Ledger work, Who says “we tested XRPL” next?

X Finance Bull

23,207 görüntüleme • 18 gün önce

Ch. 14 of NITRO: The Inside Story of Hulk Hogan's heel turn - #OTD 30 Years Ago (7/7/96)! AS DAY BECAME NIGHT at the Sullivan home, Bollea deliberated his participation in the pay-per-view. “Everybody was telling him that it was the wrong thing to do,” Kevin Sullivan says. “He was getting booed out of the arena, but they were all saying, ‘this is gonna kill him’.” With no end to the discussion in sight, the wily booker casually suggested that Bollea and Young make use of his two guest rooms until the morning. “I isolated [them],” Sullivan admits. “I was just afraid that at the last minute, he was going to use his creative control [clause] and pull out.” If Sullivan could deliver Bollea to the arena by showtime, the finish of the match called for Hogan to star in the most dramatic of surprise endings. In a sequence devised by Kevin Nash, an unannounced Hulkster would shockingly interfere in the match, but only after the heels gained an unfair advantage through cheating. It would be a brilliant misdirection, Nash thought, as fans would instinctively believe Hogan’s appearance to be in support of the babyface team. “I knew there were gonna be 55 different ideas,” Nash says, thinking back to the eve of the event, “[so] I actually put a lot of thought into it. I called Scott [Hall] two or three days before that, and said ‘what do you think about this?’ “We had to make it a 2-on-2 match with Lex Luger getting injured [during the match] and going out. We would cheat to get Macho [Man] in trouble and all of a sudden Hulk comes down, which of course would mean ‘ok, here comes Hulk to make the save’. [Hall] said, ‘I love it’.” There was, however, the looming possibility that Bollea could reject his turn at the eleventh hour. Thinking ahead, Eric Bischoff developed a contingency plan in which Sting would play the role, ultimately revealing himself - despite not having prior experience with the WWF - as the ‘third man’ instead. “I remember Eric came in to the locker room,” recalls Marcus 'Buff' Bagwell, “and said [to Sting], ‘I wanna talk to you about something’. I could hear them going over the idea, and then when they got done, Sting told me what they were talking about. He said that [Eric said], ‘there are only two guys that could turn heel where it would really matter’. That would be Hogan and Sting.” “He was offering Sting the job first, [as I recall], and Sting didn’t wanna do it. He didn’t really say it wouldn’t work, but he just said, ‘it doesn’t intrigue me. I don’t wanna do it’.” According to Andre Freitas, a special effects artist who worked in costume design and character development for WCW, the proposed Sting swerve was to involve the use of a doppelganger - or ‘phony’ Sting - presumably in an effort to fool fans that the real character had switched sides. “That was their original plan,” says Freitas. “Eric showed me a picture of Jeff Farmer (a lower-card wrestler) and said ‘can you make him Sting?’ I told him that they have similar bodies...then we looked at Sting’s hair and Jeff’s hair...and talked about all that stuff. I did a head cast for [Farmer] and some prosthetic and test make-ups. But when they secured Hogan, we didn’t do [the angle].” ----------- Amazingly, even as Bash at the Beach began, Bischoff continued to consider Plan B. “I remember walking by this perforated wall in the Ocean Center,” divulges Nash, “and Eric said to me, ‘Hulk is with Sullivan, and he’s not sure he’s gonna do it yet’. It was up in the air.” Meanwhile, viewers of the pay-per-view - and, for that matter, WCW’s own production staff - speculated as to the identity of the third man. “They were trying to ‘work’ everyone,” asserts Jason Douglas, a WCW producer backstage at his first pay-per-view event. “‘Rocket’ (staff member Rick Sancher) came up to me - they were kinda testing me because I was new on the road - and said ‘hey, I think it’s gonna be [WWF wrestler] Bret Hart’. I guess it was to see if I would leak something, and so I was just like ‘oh, cool, Bret Hart’.” In reality, aside from Bischoff, Bollea, Young, Hall, Nash and Sullivan, the turn would be concealed from everyone - even the announcers, according to orders from Bischoff - as to ensure their most realistic reactions. With less than an hour before the main event began, production staffer Woody Kearce discovered a revealing clue in the parking lot. A Hulk Hogan motorcycle had appeared mysteriously in one of the spaces, sparking another round of backstage conjecture. Finally, with what Sullivan recalls as “thirty minutes” and Bischoff remembers as “forty-five to sixty minutes” left on the air, Bollea belatedly arrived at the Ocean Center. The mood suddenly changed. Upon realizing that his star had been convinced, Bischoff began to relax. “Once he got to the building, I recall a sense of calm,” he reveals. “All of the anxiety, all of the tension, all of the worry, all of the effort to make sure things stayed quiet...all of that just kind of dissipated. It was like fog lifting when the sun comes out - it all just went away. I was thinking, ‘it is what it is, there’s nothing more I can do...so let’s just roll with it’.” To cement the turn, Bollea knew, he would have to deliver a monumental post-match promo to explain his actions. While typically, he enjoyed using Bischoff as a sounding board to rehearse interviews, the need for complete privacy - on this occasion - was unquestionably paramount. And so, away from prying eyes - and ears - the two met up in the most unglamorous of clandestine locations - a utility closet. In the midst of the run-through, Bischoff stopped to emphasize an important point: When you grab that microphone, I want you to say...‘this is the beginning of the new...world...order’. The phrase - ‘new world order’ - lingered auspiciously in the air. Bischoff surprised himself with the utterance, realizing slowly that the term encapsulated everything that the invasion storyline could represent. In 1990, then-president George H.W. Bush famously utilized the same expression in a speech to Congress, although its origin could actually be traced back to the 28th President, Woodrow Wilson. But if Bischoff was unsure as to the source of his spontaneous inspiration, perhaps the answer could be found closer to home - on the preceding Nitro, just six days earlier, announcer Larry Zybysko serendipitously made the following proclamation: “This Sunday, I promise you, there will be a new world order of wrestling…” Fans at the Ocean Center waited anxiously to see if Zybysko’s prophecy would materialize; for after all the hoopla, it was suddenly time for the main event. Before the opening bell, the audience was already on its feet for ring announcer@Michael_Buffer’s pre-match introductions. As Hall and Nash sauntered to the ring for The Hostile Takeover match, Buffer set the scene with theatrical aplomb: “Ladies and gentleman, at this time, let me introduce the men whose plan and goal is to takeover the WCW with force and hostility. We were told there would be three of these interlopers, and I must apologize as I have been informed - as you can see - there are only two. Ladies and gentleman, introducing...the Outsiiiiiders!” In a moment that played off perfectly on television, Sting’s entrance music began - and quickly ended - as ‘Mean Gene’ Okerlund traipsed cautiously into the ring. After exchanging quizzical looks with Buffer and referee Randy Anderson, Okerlund confronted the Outsiders to get some answers, an inspired plot device designed to build the tension even further. “Gentleman,” began Okerlund, “if I could have your attention...I don’t have police protection with me at this time, but I wanna confront you in front of this full house here at the Ocean Center, and millions of others watching across the country and around the world. I don’t see three men here tonight. Where is your partner?” Responding in a manner consistent with their WWF characters, Hall and Nash assured Okerlund that the third man was present - and ready. “Let me tell you something,” announced a confident Nash, “we got enough to handle it right now, right here.” Once more, Sting’s entrance music blared from the arena speakers, this time preceding the man himself, accompanied by Luger and Savage. “Here we go!” screamed color commentator Bobby Heenan as the wrestlers passed an unusually large contingent of security personnel on the entrance way. “The war is on!” Less than two minutes into the bout, Luger collapsed to the outside, a move in accordance with Nash’s plan to even the sides before the climactic reveal. “Now it’s two against two!” yelled Heenan. After a brief delay, the concerned crowd looked on as Luger left the arena on a stretcher, leaving Sting and Savage alone to fight valiantly for WCW. As the match progressed, the contemptible Outsiders used every trick to stall their opponent’s momentum, until a revitalized Savage began a furious rally at the fifteen-and-a-half minute mark. The invaders were suddenly down, but not out - as with the referee distracted, Nash landed a low-blow to bring the Macho Man to his knees. All four men lay on the canvas, exhausted, as referee Anderson started a ten count. As Anderson yelled ‘ONE’, several rows of spectators rose to their feet. Within seconds, the reaction diffused from section to section, the noise level increasing with each passing beat. On the live broadcast, viewers at home caught glimpse of a familiar figure making his way down the ramp. “Hulkamania!” screamed Dusty Rhodes on commentary while Hogan walked methodically towards the ring. Noticeably, the Hulkster seemed oddly disaffected - even out-of-character - but after exchanging the briefest of glances with the crowd, he continued stride with the din reaching fever pitch. “Whose side is he on?” bellowed Heenan, a question that seemed inexplicable given the history of Hogan’s on-screen persona. “Whose side is he on?” repeated Heenan, who as longtime fans could recall, had opposed Hogan for years as a manager in the WWF. For that reason, the comment flew over the heads of most (but not all) viewers; meanwhile, the live crowd was cheering as if their team had won the World Series. Nash and Hall retreated to the floor as Hogan tore off his shirt, an apparent signal that the archetypal good guy was here to save the day again. “Who’s bad now boys?” taunted play-by-play man Tony Schiavone on commentary, confident that WCW’s honor was no longer in jeopardy. Savage lay prone on the mat as Hogan surveyed the scene. Above the cheapest of cheap seats, peeking through a curtain with palpable anticipation, was Eric Bischoff. “I knew that something big was about to happen,” he recalls. “It was either gonna be a big failure, or a big success.” Seemingly out of nowhere, with his unsuspecting devotees enveloped in celebration, Hulk backed up to the corner. With the coldness of a serial killer, the once-honorable hero shockingly shoved referee Anderson, and executed his patented finishing move - the leg drop - to the helpless Macho Man below. The audience became completely, utterly unglued. “I was standing back with the announcers,” remembers Michelle Baines, newly hired as a production assistant. “One of the producers turned to me and said, ‘you need to go to the back’. “‘I said, ‘what do you mean?’ “She said, ‘it’s gonna get ugly real quick’.” “She was right - the crowd turned ugly quick.” In retrospect, it was clear that even as Hogan’s body approached the canvas - contact with Savage just milliseconds away - the gravity of the assault started to hit home. “What has he done?” questioned a crestfallen Rhodes, “is he the third man? What the hell is going on here?” Heenan was even more direct - “Hulk Hogan has betrayed WCW! He is the third man in this picture!” A breathless Schiavone could barely muster more than three words: Oh My God, he repeated. Oh My God, he continued, as Hogan high-fived a grinning Hall and Nash. The courageous Sting, stumbling to his feet to stop the injustice, was quickly dispatched, and in the coup de grace, Hogan tossed Anderson to the floor. Sardonically, he covered Savage for the pin, the contest now clearly a farce. “I hope you love it,” a disappointed Rhodes wailed on commentary. “You just sold your soul to the devil.” The third man was a mystery no more, and Hall, Nash, and Hogan raised their hands in victory to a genuinely astonished audience. The immediate outrage, which first gave way to shock, was now inspiring unmitigated rage. Simultaneously, the evil trio continued to taunt, pose, and antagonize while the announcers lamented WCW’s future. As Sting and Savage hobbled back to the locker room, a visibly distraught Okerlund returned to conduct an explanatory interview, based around the one Hogan and Bischoff had mapped out earlier. “Mean Gene,” commanded Hogan, “the first thing you need to do is to tell these people to shut up if you wanna hear what I gotta say.” For the next four minutes, Hogan rationalized his turn with remarkable clarity. “The first thing you gotta realize, brother, is this right here is the future of wrestling. You can call this the new...world...order of wrestling. These two men right here came from a great big organization up north, and everybody was wondering who the third man was. Well, who knows more about that organization than me, brother? I made that organization a monster. I made people rich up there. I made the people that ran that organization rich up there. And when it all came to pass, the name Hulk Hogan, the man Hulk Hogan, got bigger than the whole organization!” Bischoff watched from his secretive seat in amazement - he had not seen, nor had anyone, this intensity of emotion on display at a wrestling show before. It was almost as if the assembled masses had lost themselves in the performance, perhaps even forgetting, if only for a moment, that they were witnesses to a pre-determined event. Hogan’s actions had ostensibly interrupted their critical faculties; in other words, they had suspended their disbelief by reacting to the incident as if it were real. Moreover, the shock was manifesting in the most volatile ways imaginable, as in an incident edited out of future showings of the pay-per-view, a rather large man, likely intoxicated, ran into the ring before being knocked down by Hall and Nash. Concurrently, a stream of debris rained down from the stands, with one object hitting Okerlund, and the rest filling the ring in a stunningly unique visual. Hogan continued as the trash piled up around him, even referencing Ted Turner in his diatribe: “Billionaire Ted promised me movies brother. Billionaire Ted promised me millions of dollars. And Billionaire Ted promised me world caliber matches. And as far as Billionaire Ted, Eric Bischoff, and the entire WCW goes, I’m bored brother! That’s why I want these two guys here, these so-called Outsiders. These are the men I want as my friends. They are the new blood of professional wrestling, and not only are we going to take over the whole wrestling business...with Hulk Hogan, the new blood and the monsters with me, we will destroy everything in our path, Mean Gene.” “Look at all the crap in this ring,” responded Okerlund. “This is what’s in the future for you if you want to hang around the likes of this man Hall, and this man Nash.” Hogan raised his finger as if to stop the interviewer midstream, the perfect line instantly coming to mind. “As far as I’m concerned, all this crap in the ring represents these fans out here,” he boomed defiantly. “For two years, I held my head high,” ranted Hogan, alluding to his rather uninspired WCW tenure. “I did everything for the charities. I did everything for the kids. And the reception I got when I came out here, you fans can stick it brother! Because if it wasn’t for Hulk Hogan, you people wouldn’t be here. If it wasn’t for Hulk Hogan, Eric Bischoff would still be selling meat from a truck in Minneapolis. And if it wasn’t for Hulk Hogan, all of these ‘Johnny come latelys’ that you see out here wrestling wouldn’t be here. I was selling the world out, brother, while they were bumming gas to put in their car to get to high school!” In closing, Hogan foreshadowed the future state of affairs in WCW with a prophetic preview of coming storylines: “With Hulk Hogan and the new world organization of wrestling, brother...me and the new blood by my side...whatcha gonna do when the new world organization runs wild on you? Whatcha gonna do? What are you gonna do??” Despite mistakenly bungling the ‘new world order’ phrase at the conclusion of his speech, Hogan still provided the perfect punctuation to a sensational heel turn. His promo, inarguably the most dynamic of his career, came across as strikingly authentic (“it felt real, because it was real’,” offered a proud Eric Bischoff upon reflection years later). On commentary, Schiavone - who most inspiredly suggested that Hogan had planned to double-cross WCW all along, since his debut in 1994 no less - added to the realism with some mournful final comments: “We have seen the end of Hulkamania,” he grieved. “Hulk Hogan, you can go to hell! We’re outta here. Straight to hell.” ---- To the layman, there appeared an obvious explanation for the feverous crowd response that accompanied Hogan’s turn. Clearly, the element of surprise - one of the key elements of Nitro’s success - had been exploited to a masterful degree (“nobody on earth thought that the third man was going to be Hulk Hogan,” highlights Nash). To Kevin Sullivan, however, there were several layers of story at play. “People thought that it was an invasion from the WWF,” he begins, implying that the success of the angle could be correlated to its realism. “They really bought into it, and when Hogan turned heel...they were sure of it. “So while Hogan gets the credit for the reaction, it was [Nash and Hall] who set the whole thing up. Those guys built the foundation of heat, and when Hogan came down, it just blew up.” “We were red hot coming off WWF television,” agrees Nash, “and then you had the biggest turn in the world on top of that. The biggest babyface of all-time finally turned heel!” To the ever-meticulous Sullivan, always a keen observer of the nuances present in a wrestling angle, an often overlooked element was also noteworthy. “He did it to Randy [Savage],” the booker emphasizes, speaking of Hogan’s betrayal. “People knew there was real-life heat there. That helped out too, but everyone played an intricate part. “Lightning...you can’t catch it in a bottle but one time.” The above is an excerpt from the book, NITRO: The Incredible Rise and Inevitable Collapse of Ted Turner's WCW. Amazon USA: Amazon UK: Amazon Canada: Amazon Australia: 17+ Hour Audiobook Available at Audible and Apple Books Audible USA: Audible UK: Audible Canada: Audible Australia: Apple Books: Ultimate NITRO Bundle: Deep Cuts - Wrestling Stories in 60 Seconds! David Penzer AdFreeShows.com 83 Weeks with Eric Bischoff On This Day in WWE Allan Conrad the Mortgage Guy IandrewDiceClay WCW Archive Because WCW WCW4Life ᴀʀᴅᴀ Öᴄᴀʟ 90s WWE Secrets of WCW Nitro #WCW #nWo #HulkHogan #BashattheBeach #HeelTurn #Wrestling #WrestlingBooks #OTD #WWE #WorldChampionshipWrestling #Nitro

WCWNitroBook

53,506 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce