Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Cybercab launches Thursday. Expect it to look small. There are already over 2,000 Cybercabs built. VINs past 2,400. The fleet exists. You just won't see it on day one. And that's on purpose. There is zero reason to deploy a hundred cars the first time they go commercial. All... show more

Jo Bhakdi

39,596 subscribers

30,417 просмотров • 27 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 25

Фото профиля Vulcan Maximus

Vulcan Maximus27 дней назад

Take it slow? What do you think they've been doing for over a year? Another few years of taking it slow and we may find they are no longer in the lead. Chinese competition is coming hard and fast. They are alrrady in Europe. Its time to get in the game.

Фото профиля Will

Will27 дней назад

We keep revising "ALL AT ONCE". We used to make fun of GEO FENCED now we pretend like that was the original plan.

Фото профиля JMoney

JMoney27 дней назад

I was with you @JOBhakdi until I saw Elon's latest posts. I think it's going to be a storm of Cybercabs.

Фото профиля Test La 🇺🇦

Test La 🇺🇦27 дней назад

Elon said Austin gonna be flooded with Cybercabs so if I'm hyped it's on him lol

Фото профиля John Leupp

John Leupp27 дней назад

Great way to adjust $TSLA expectations lower. The slower the rollout, the better!

Фото профиля J Peter Eisenschenk

J Peter Eisenschenk27 дней назад

I don't get this post at all. There are many posts about Cybercabs flooding Austin this week. It is the Cybercab roll-out event.

Фото профиля mike

mike27 дней назад

Jo, do you think they have not been doing this for the last several weeks nonstop? That’s what all of the cyber Cab movement in the middle of the night and now in the middle of the day in Austin Texas is all about.

Фото профиля James VanWinkle

James VanWinkle27 дней назад

It's not the number deployed 9/3, it's the software, does it meet rollout requirements? The rest is continuing unbox ramp (no snags). Tomorrow the status pronouncement will be made. Ramp will follow production (cities already in progress will handle the ramp this year.) SP will follow ramp.

Фото профиля Wisi Fawe

Wisi Fawe27 дней назад

@grok which one is correct?

Фото профиля Kanden Keo

Kanden Keo27 дней назад

I can't wait maybe they will best out the 500 promised by end of 2025.

Фото профиля cream puff daddy

cream puff daddy27 дней назад

10 cabs is not “flooding Austin”

Фото профиля Danny Hudson

Danny Hudson27 дней назад

What?? Everyone was told last year that there would be 1 million Robo taxis on the road by the end of 2026. WTF?

Фото профиля Coast Mode

Coast Mode27 дней назад

We trained ourselves to score a launch by how many cars show up in the parking-lot photo. So a fleet that already exists and mostly stays parked looks like nothing happened. The quiet day-one is the point. The parade was never the product.

Фото профиля Tom Lenz

Tom Lenz27 дней назад

What will happen at the event? What does it mean to "launch"? Will there be rides given to attendees on public roads? Will cybercabs be available tomorrow to the public? Hope so

Фото профиля Joey

Joey27 дней назад

So many stocks to buy other then continue to Sweat out TSLA imo

Фото профиля Dollar Uwe

Dollar Uwe27 дней назад

No was

Фото профиля James95113983

James9511398327 дней назад

Are y'all still making predictions or not?

Фото профиля Dennis ♨

Dennis ♨27 дней назад

There will be 20+ Cybercabs all in one spot.. Downtown Austin... just to SEE it at high density... Once they take off with their cargo inside (Tesla invitees) they will spread out throughout the city and then "look like low numbers"... After that initial setup.. I wonder how/if they will be able to SPECIFY Model Y or Cybercab for a given trip? Probably not. Also: the network will most certainly have to ONLY ALLOW certain customers to actually hail a Cybercab, at least on Thursday...

Фото профиля Jake • Fitness & Motivation

Jake • Fitness & Motivation27 дней назад

💪💪💪💪

Фото профиля Cody the RV Guy

Cody the RV Guy27 дней назад

I prefer they don’t launch wide and thin. Pick a city, build the infrastructure of employees, charging and cleaning and go deep until your pricing, availability and user experience dominate. Then repeat. Definitely could handle the 5-6 cities already on. Keep testing everywhere else. Build infrastructure. Launch hard again!

Фото профиля DOS

DOS27 дней назад

Yes sir if it only 10 cars then the stock diips it is a failed launch. Wow 10 cars only? ? Higher!

Фото профиля David Chip”on”

David Chip”on”27 дней назад

Maybe… maybe not! :))

Фото профиля Paul (Human) 🇦🇺🇺🇸 🇺🇦

Paul (Human) 🇦🇺🇺🇸 🇺🇦27 дней назад

Fair But I want them ALL

Фото профиля Max

Max27 дней назад

Agree. Start small. Ramp up silently until can’t be ignored

Фото профиля Future Thesis

Future Thesis27 дней назад

Exactly, there is no point hoping for a massive roll out on day 1. A measured and safe rollout over time is in the best interest of everyone, including investors.

Похожие видео

the docs said the caching is automatic, so you did nothing automatic is where it happens, not whether it happens the cache lives on the machine that built it, and your next request lands wherever the fleet sends it, which is usually not there, so it pays full price for a prefix it already paid to build there is a key that pins a conversation to one machine and it is a single header cached input is fifty cents a million against two dollars you never needed a smaller prompt you needed the request to land in the same place twice

the docs said the caching is automatic, so you did nothing automatic is where it happens, not whether it happens the cache lives on the machine that built it, and your next request lands wherever the fleet sends it, which is usually not there, so it pays full price for a prefix it already paid to build there is a key that pins a conversation to one machine and it is a single header cached input is fifty cents a million against two dollars you never needed a smaller prompt you needed the request to land in the same place twice

Lagosaur

16,892 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Waymo just wrote a safety sermon without naming Tesla. I do not buy the idea that lidar plus a second checker is the only honest way to drive. That is their stack talking. Tesla is betting cameras and one network at fleet scale. 200 million miles is real. It is also miles on expensive purpose-built cars in mapped cities. Volume is the other test. That one has not started for them yet.

Waymo just wrote a safety sermon without naming Tesla. I do not buy the idea that lidar plus a second checker is the only honest way to drive. That is their stack talking. Tesla is betting cameras and one network at fleet scale. 200 million miles is real. It is also miles on expensive purpose-built cars in mapped cities. Volume is the other test. That one has not started for them yet.

Joe Hansen

57,434 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🗣️ Mikel Arteta on if it's surprised him to see players sold for over £100m: "Yes, it has. I wouldn't have bet on that to be fair. But that’s the market, that means that there are clubs that are happy to invest or they believe that the valuations of those players are that, and that's fair. "In the end, the value of the player is what somebody can pay for you, and they've done it, so that's the value and it's the right one because someone is happy to sell and someone is happy to buy, and in the middle, a player is happy to move from one club to the other. So I think that's fair."

🗣️ Mikel Arteta on if it's surprised him to see players sold for over £100m: "Yes, it has. I wouldn't have bet on that to be fair. But that’s the market, that means that there are clubs that are happy to invest or they believe that the valuations of those players are that, and that's fair. "In the end, the value of the player is what somebody can pay for you, and they've done it, so that's the value and it's the right one because someone is happy to sell and someone is happy to buy, and in the middle, a player is happy to move from one club to the other. So I think that's fair."

Connor Humm

47,828 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

ANTHROPIC LEAKED THE 6 REPOS THEY BUILT CLAUDE CODE ON - THEY REPLACE A $120K/MONTH TEAM AND COST $3 A DAY anyone can clone 6 repos - almost nobody assembles them into a team that runs for $3 a day. core → skills → patterns → gates → self-patch 4 executors on the core are the largest line on the bill - $1.10 a day, and that's where you get 4 PRs instead of one. move that layer to the priciest model and the bill doubles with almost nothing to show for it. 7 procedures sit on disk, exactly 1 enters the window - a convention pasted into a prompt is rent, a convention in a folder is storage. the most expensive model sits on exactly 2 layers out of 6 - it plans and it judges, and that's the second-smallest line on the bill. the template arrives with 4 problems already solved: auth, payments, deploy, errors - the ones you'd rediscover yourself in week three. at the gates the cheap model triages 80 findings and the expensive one reads 4 - which is why it costs 60 cents, not 6 dollars. security scans every commit for 20 cents a day - the cheapest line on the stack and the first one everyone cuts. and the key part: the gate doesn't just reject, it writes the missing rule into the procedures - next week the team works to rules it wrote itself. the wrong model on the wrong layer costs 5x overpaid or a month of rework - and that's the part nobody publishes. save this and paste it into Claude Code - the repos are public, the assembly isn't ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED THE 6 REPOS THEY BUILT CLAUDE CODE ON - THEY REPLACE A $120K/MONTH TEAM AND COST $3 A DAY anyone can clone 6 repos - almost nobody assembles them into a team that runs for $3 a day. core → skills → patterns → gates → self-patch 4 executors on the core are the largest line on the bill - $1.10 a day, and that's where you get 4 PRs instead of one. move that layer to the priciest model and the bill doubles with almost nothing to show for it. 7 procedures sit on disk, exactly 1 enters the window - a convention pasted into a prompt is rent, a convention in a folder is storage. the most expensive model sits on exactly 2 layers out of 6 - it plans and it judges, and that's the second-smallest line on the bill. the template arrives with 4 problems already solved: auth, payments, deploy, errors - the ones you'd rediscover yourself in week three. at the gates the cheap model triages 80 findings and the expensive one reads 4 - which is why it costs 60 cents, not 6 dollars. security scans every commit for 20 cents a day - the cheapest line on the stack and the first one everyone cuts. and the key part: the gate doesn't just reject, it writes the missing rule into the procedures - next week the team works to rules it wrote itself. the wrong model on the wrong layer costs 5x overpaid or a month of rework - and that's the part nobody publishes. save this and paste it into Claude Code - the repos are public, the assembly isn't ↓

Sprytix

18,110 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Elon Musk just told you why caution kills more companies than risk ever has. Musk: “One of the approaches we did take was to proceed at risk with temporary permits.” Hundreds of millions in concrete before the final signature exists. Knowing the full downside. Musk: “Your long-term permit could be denied, in which case you have to stop everything.” Tear it all down. Back to dirt. Every board on Earth calls that unacceptable. Musk calls it cheaper than the alternative. Musk: “Most companies are not willing to take the risk of the temporary permit, and then the risk of having to stop and tear down.” They think they are avoiding risk. They are selecting one. Waiting is not neutral. Waiting is a position. A bet that the market holds, the team stays, and momentum outlasts a system designed to outlast you. It never does. No one says no. The calendar says it for them. Not rejection. Erosion. Musk saw it for what it was. He chose the risk you can see over the risk you cannot. Gigafactories rose in months while the rest of the industry waited on the meeting about the permit. The gap was never resources. It was the willingness to see that waiting is not free. It is the most expensive decision in business. Because it is the only one nobody knows they are making.

Elon Musk just told you why caution kills more companies than risk ever has. Musk: “One of the approaches we did take was to proceed at risk with temporary permits.” Hundreds of millions in concrete before the final signature exists. Knowing the full downside. Musk: “Your long-term permit could be denied, in which case you have to stop everything.” Tear it all down. Back to dirt. Every board on Earth calls that unacceptable. Musk calls it cheaper than the alternative. Musk: “Most companies are not willing to take the risk of the temporary permit, and then the risk of having to stop and tear down.” They think they are avoiding risk. They are selecting one. Waiting is not neutral. Waiting is a position. A bet that the market holds, the team stays, and momentum outlasts a system designed to outlast you. It never does. No one says no. The calendar says it for them. Not rejection. Erosion. Musk saw it for what it was. He chose the risk you can see over the risk you cannot. Gigafactories rose in months while the rest of the industry waited on the meeting about the permit. The gap was never resources. It was the willingness to see that waiting is not free. It is the most expensive decision in business. Because it is the only one nobody knows they are making.

Dustin

18,985 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Sam Altman just handed every startup founder a one-question autopsy. Altman: “If you’re building something on GPT-4 that a reasonable observer would say we’re going to steamroll you.” Not might. Not could. Going to. He said it with the calm of someone describing weather. Because to him it is weather. The model improves. Whatever was built on the old version’s weaknesses gets washed away. That is not strategy. That is erosion. And most founders are building on the erosion line. They find a gap in the current model. They wrap a product around it. They raise money. They hire. They scale. Then OpenAI releases the next version and the gap closes and the product has no reason to exist anymore. Altman: “When we just do our fundamental job, which is make the model better with every crank, then you get the ‘OpenAI killed my startup’ meme.” He is telling you directly. They are not hunting you. They are not even thinking about you. They are just improving the model. You happen to be standing where the improvement lands. That is the part founders refuse to hear. OpenAI does not need to compete with you. It just needs to keep doing exactly what it was already doing and your entire company disappears as a side effect. You are not a competitor. You are a temporary symptom of incomplete intelligence. The moment the intelligence completes you become nothing. Then Brad Lightcap delivered the cleanest diagnostic ever spoken in venture capital. Lightcap: “Ask if a 100x improvement in the model is something they’re excited about.” One question. The entire investment thesis reduced to a single binary. Does the next model make your company more powerful or does it make your company pointless. There is no middle ground. Lightcap: “We know the companies that come to us saying, ‘We want the next model. When is it coming out? I want to be the first to try it.’” These companies built something that feeds on intelligence. The smarter the model gets the more their product can do. They are not threatened by progress. They are starving for it. Then there are the companies Lightcap never hears from. The ones who go quiet when a new model drops. The ones who read the release notes like a death sentence. The ones privately praying the next generation takes longer because every improvement shrinks the ground beneath them. If you are hoping the model stays roughly where it is you have already told the market everything it needs to know about your company. You are not building on intelligence. You are building on the absence of it. Altman: “95% of the world should be betting on the latter category.” The latter category is simple. Assume the model keeps getting better at the pace it has been getting better. Build for that world. Not the world where GPT-4 is the ceiling. The world where GPT-4 is the floor and the ceiling has not been built yet. Then Altman told a story that should be framed on the wall of every startup in the country. A medical AI company came to him that morning. They were not complaining about the model. They were not worried about being replaced. They were demanding it improve faster. Altman: “Here’s how many people are dying every day you delay.” That is what alignment with the trajectory looks like. A company so deeply built on intelligence improving that every day the model stays the same is a day someone dies who did not have to. They are not building on a flaw. They are building on a future that has not arrived fast enough. That is the difference. The wrapper startup patches what the model cannot do today. The real company builds what the model will unlock tomorrow. One is running from the train. The other is laying the track. Altman told you the train is not slowing down. Lightcap told you exactly how to know which side you are on. One question. Does a 100x smarter model make you more valuable or erase you. If you had to pause before answering you already did.

Sam Altman just handed every startup founder a one-question autopsy. Altman: “If you’re building something on GPT-4 that a reasonable observer would say we’re going to steamroll you.” Not might. Not could. Going to. He said it with the calm of someone describing weather. Because to him it is weather. The model improves. Whatever was built on the old version’s weaknesses gets washed away. That is not strategy. That is erosion. And most founders are building on the erosion line. They find a gap in the current model. They wrap a product around it. They raise money. They hire. They scale. Then OpenAI releases the next version and the gap closes and the product has no reason to exist anymore. Altman: “When we just do our fundamental job, which is make the model better with every crank, then you get the ‘OpenAI killed my startup’ meme.” He is telling you directly. They are not hunting you. They are not even thinking about you. They are just improving the model. You happen to be standing where the improvement lands. That is the part founders refuse to hear. OpenAI does not need to compete with you. It just needs to keep doing exactly what it was already doing and your entire company disappears as a side effect. You are not a competitor. You are a temporary symptom of incomplete intelligence. The moment the intelligence completes you become nothing. Then Brad Lightcap delivered the cleanest diagnostic ever spoken in venture capital. Lightcap: “Ask if a 100x improvement in the model is something they’re excited about.” One question. The entire investment thesis reduced to a single binary. Does the next model make your company more powerful or does it make your company pointless. There is no middle ground. Lightcap: “We know the companies that come to us saying, ‘We want the next model. When is it coming out? I want to be the first to try it.’” These companies built something that feeds on intelligence. The smarter the model gets the more their product can do. They are not threatened by progress. They are starving for it. Then there are the companies Lightcap never hears from. The ones who go quiet when a new model drops. The ones who read the release notes like a death sentence. The ones privately praying the next generation takes longer because every improvement shrinks the ground beneath them. If you are hoping the model stays roughly where it is you have already told the market everything it needs to know about your company. You are not building on intelligence. You are building on the absence of it. Altman: “95% of the world should be betting on the latter category.” The latter category is simple. Assume the model keeps getting better at the pace it has been getting better. Build for that world. Not the world where GPT-4 is the ceiling. The world where GPT-4 is the floor and the ceiling has not been built yet. Then Altman told a story that should be framed on the wall of every startup in the country. A medical AI company came to him that morning. They were not complaining about the model. They were not worried about being replaced. They were demanding it improve faster. Altman: “Here’s how many people are dying every day you delay.” That is what alignment with the trajectory looks like. A company so deeply built on intelligence improving that every day the model stays the same is a day someone dies who did not have to. They are not building on a flaw. They are building on a future that has not arrived fast enough. That is the difference. The wrapper startup patches what the model cannot do today. The real company builds what the model will unlock tomorrow. One is running from the train. The other is laying the track. Altman told you the train is not slowing down. Lightcap told you exactly how to know which side you are on. One question. Does a 100x smarter model make you more valuable or erase you. If you had to pause before answering you already did.

Dustin

39,652 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Apple spending $10B across 10 years to build a new product is equivalent to spending $83M per month or $3M a day. This was NOT just a side project, it was a MAJOR project that was supposed to build the first Apple Car to take on Tesla head on. This week the largest company in the world waved the white flag and gave up on it. Every Tesla you see on the road is proof that the company & team accomplished the impossible, which is creating an EV that autonomously drives itself, one that is produced at scale & at a profit, and one that people absolutely love.

Apple spending $10B across 10 years to build a new product is equivalent to spending $83M per month or $3M a day. This was NOT just a side project, it was a MAJOR project that was supposed to build the first Apple Car to take on Tesla head on. This week the largest company in the world waved the white flag and gave up on it. Every Tesla you see on the road is proof that the company & team accomplished the impossible, which is creating an EV that autonomously drives itself, one that is produced at scale & at a profit, and one that people absolutely love.

Teslaconomics

330,663 просмотров • 2 лет назад

your ai agent tested 1,262 trading strategies overnight. by morning it had forgotten every one of them. so tonight it tests some of them again. next week, again. everything it learned is sitting in a log file that nothing reads. every run starts on the same blank page. that's why it keeps handing you the idea that already died in a crash, with a new name on it, and you pay to find out twice. ai agent already does everything a fund does. finds the idea, writes the code, tests it against years of history, puts it live, reads what went wrong afterwards. all of it runs tonight for nothing. the one thing it can't do is remember. what got tried, what failed, in which market. nobody has built that part yet. that's the whole gap. not better models. a notebook. whoever builds it first gets a system that improves every week without them touching it. read the article below and save it. it's the full guide to how an ai trading agent is built, and how to make it remember every strategy it has already tested.

your ai agent tested 1,262 trading strategies overnight. by morning it had forgotten every one of them. so tonight it tests some of them again. next week, again. everything it learned is sitting in a log file that nothing reads. every run starts on the same blank page. that's why it keeps handing you the idea that already died in a crash, with a new name on it, and you pay to find out twice. ai agent already does everything a fund does. finds the idea, writes the code, tests it against years of history, puts it live, reads what went wrong afterwards. all of it runs tonight for nothing. the one thing it can't do is remember. what got tried, what failed, in which market. nobody has built that part yet. that's the whole gap. not better models. a notebook. whoever builds it first gets a system that improves every week without them touching it. read the article below and save it. it's the full guide to how an ai trading agent is built, and how to make it remember every strategy it has already tested.

cvxv666

48,965 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

The pull-up is the one exercise I see people quit on the fastest. They try a few, can't do them, decide they're just "not a pull-up person," and move on. But the thing is, strength is a skill. A lot of it is just your nervous system learning the exact movement, and your body only gets good at what you actually practise. That's why you can lift heavy on a barbell and still struggle to pull your own bodyweight up. It's a different skill, and it takes time. So no, you're not bad at pull-ups. You just haven't trained them yet. Start with regressions like slow negatives or banded reps, and try grease the groove method (thread below). That's exactly how a skill gets built. One day the bodyweight that felt impossible starts moving. Genuinely one of the best feelings in the gym.

The pull-up is the one exercise I see people quit on the fastest. They try a few, can't do them, decide they're just "not a pull-up person," and move on. But the thing is, strength is a skill. A lot of it is just your nervous system learning the exact movement, and your body only gets good at what you actually practise. That's why you can lift heavy on a barbell and still struggle to pull your own bodyweight up. It's a different skill, and it takes time. So no, you're not bad at pull-ups. You just haven't trained them yet. Start with regressions like slow negatives or banded reps, and try grease the groove method (thread below). That's exactly how a skill gets built. One day the bodyweight that felt impossible starts moving. Genuinely one of the best feelings in the gym.

Dr Neha Chawla || FreeGym

24,318 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONFUSED… We experience TIME as a straight line, one moment after another, PAST TO PRESENT TO FUTURE. But that is only how it appears from inside the system. Beings in higher dimensions, what some call “ORACLES” OR “GODS,” do not experience time like this. They do not move through it. They observe it in its entirety. A closer analogy would be CHANNELS ON A SCREEN. What is playing on FOX and what is playing on CBS is not separate in existence, it is only separated by perspective. Both are happening at the same time, fully active, fully real. In the same way, what we call 1950 and what we call 2004 are not distant points moving away from each other. They are both present within the same total field of reality. From that level of awareness, nothing is being “waited on.” There is NO DELAY. There is only ACCESS. A shift of perception is all that is needed, like changing the channel. So if everything exists at once, then your FUTURE is not something that is coming toward you. It is something that already exists. The version of you 20 YEARS FROM NOW is already there. You have already CHOSEN THAT PATH, you have already GONE THROUGH WHAT COMES WITH IT, you have already LIVED THROUGH IT ALL. And what you are doing now is not creating it. You are MOVING THROUGH IT. Slowly remembering why you are there at all.

FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONFUSED… We experience TIME as a straight line, one moment after another, PAST TO PRESENT TO FUTURE. But that is only how it appears from inside the system. Beings in higher dimensions, what some call “ORACLES” OR “GODS,” do not experience time like this. They do not move through it. They observe it in its entirety. A closer analogy would be CHANNELS ON A SCREEN. What is playing on FOX and what is playing on CBS is not separate in existence, it is only separated by perspective. Both are happening at the same time, fully active, fully real. In the same way, what we call 1950 and what we call 2004 are not distant points moving away from each other. They are both present within the same total field of reality. From that level of awareness, nothing is being “waited on.” There is NO DELAY. There is only ACCESS. A shift of perception is all that is needed, like changing the channel. So if everything exists at once, then your FUTURE is not something that is coming toward you. It is something that already exists. The version of you 20 YEARS FROM NOW is already there. You have already CHOSEN THAT PATH, you have already GONE THROUGH WHAT COMES WITH IT, you have already LIVED THROUGH IT ALL. And what you are doing now is not creating it. You are MOVING THROUGH IT. Slowly remembering why you are there at all.

THE VOICE 🌹 🗣🎙🇺🇸🦅🌎⚓💜♠️CHRIST CONSCIOUSNESS

40,362 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

you sent them all at once, because that is what fast means not one of them could read the cache an entry does not become readable, until the first response starts coming back, so a hundred identical prefixes fired together, are a hundred cold writes and zero reads you did not simply miss the discount you paid the write premium a hundred times in order to miss it send one, wait for the first token to land, then release the rest the delay is under a second it is the cheapest second in the whole run

you sent them all at once, because that is what fast means not one of them could read the cache an entry does not become readable, until the first response starts coming back, so a hundred identical prefixes fired together, are a hundred cold writes and zero reads you did not simply miss the discount you paid the write premium a hundred times in order to miss it send one, wait for the first token to land, then release the rest the delay is under a second it is the cheapest second in the whole run

Lagosaur

11,364 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

One guy built a wedding camera app in a month and it now makes him over $1,000,000 a year. No team, no investors, no marketing budget. 100,000 downloads in the first month. Zero dollars on ads. He did not bolt marketing onto the product. He made using the product the marketing. You cannot use the app alone. The host has to pull every guest into it. One wedding is not one user. It is 200 people scanning the same code in one evening. The guest liked it at someone else's wedding. A month later he throws his own event and brings his own crowd. The loop spins for free. It does not look like an ad. To the guest it is a gift. So they install it gladly. $2 to $50 subscriptions. 5% pay. That is $100,000 a month. He did not win on budget. He sewed the growth into the product itself. Could you build the loop, or is it just luck?

One guy built a wedding camera app in a month and it now makes him over $1,000,000 a year. No team, no investors, no marketing budget. 100,000 downloads in the first month. Zero dollars on ads. He did not bolt marketing onto the product. He made using the product the marketing. You cannot use the app alone. The host has to pull every guest into it. One wedding is not one user. It is 200 people scanning the same code in one evening. The guest liked it at someone else's wedding. A month later he throws his own event and brings his own crowd. The loop spins for free. It does not look like an ad. To the guest it is a gift. So they install it gladly. $2 to $50 subscriptions. 5% pay. That is $100,000 a month. He did not win on budget. He sewed the growth into the product itself. Could you build the loop, or is it just luck?

Marlow

513,913 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

You have 100 dollars and you want 200. Betting red one dollar at a time, your chance is one in 33,171. Betting the whole 100 on a single spin, it is 47.4 percent. The careful version is fifteen thousand times worse. This is also the arithmetic of your trading account, and it means almost everything you have been taught about managing risk is, in the strict mathematical sense, a method for losing more reliably. An MIT professor works this out on a blackboard in a lecture on random walks. The result is called gambler's ruin. Two and a half points of disadvantage is nothing on one spin. But a dollar at a time you are not making one spin, you are making hundreds, and the edge gets a fresh attempt at you on every one of them. It was never the size of the disadvantage. It is the number of times you agree to face it. One hundred on red, once: 47.4 percent. Twenty dollar bets: 37.3 percent. Five dollar bets: 11.1 percent. One dollar bets: 0.003 percent. Mathematicians call the right answer bold play. It was proved optimal for unfavourable games in 1965. It is not a strategy for winning. It is the least ruinous way to play a game you should not be in. If your edge after spread and fees is negative, and for most active retail accounts it is, then your position sizing rule is not protecting you. Risking one percent per trade is the one dollar bet. It arrives at zero with near certainty, just politely, over a longer period, with a spreadsheet. Discipline does not beat a negative edge. It schedules it. All of this reverses if you have a real edge. Then small and frequent is correct and bold play is madness. So the only question that has ever mattered is whether you have one, and the number of people certain they do has never resembled the number who do. Your broker does not need you to be wrong. It needs you to be frequent.

You have 100 dollars and you want 200. Betting red one dollar at a time, your chance is one in 33,171. Betting the whole 100 on a single spin, it is 47.4 percent. The careful version is fifteen thousand times worse. This is also the arithmetic of your trading account, and it means almost everything you have been taught about managing risk is, in the strict mathematical sense, a method for losing more reliably. An MIT professor works this out on a blackboard in a lecture on random walks. The result is called gambler's ruin. Two and a half points of disadvantage is nothing on one spin. But a dollar at a time you are not making one spin, you are making hundreds, and the edge gets a fresh attempt at you on every one of them. It was never the size of the disadvantage. It is the number of times you agree to face it. One hundred on red, once: 47.4 percent. Twenty dollar bets: 37.3 percent. Five dollar bets: 11.1 percent. One dollar bets: 0.003 percent. Mathematicians call the right answer bold play. It was proved optimal for unfavourable games in 1965. It is not a strategy for winning. It is the least ruinous way to play a game you should not be in. If your edge after spread and fees is negative, and for most active retail accounts it is, then your position sizing rule is not protecting you. Risking one percent per trade is the one dollar bet. It arrives at zero with near certainty, just politely, over a longer period, with a spreadsheet. Discipline does not beat a negative edge. It schedules it. All of this reverses if you have a real edge. Then small and frequent is correct and bold play is madness. So the only question that has ever mattered is whether you have one, and the number of people certain they do has never resembled the number who do. Your broker does not need you to be wrong. It needs you to be frequent.

Verax

85,294 просмотров • 27 дней назад

This past Thursday, Brian Hooker, PhD described getting the results back from his son's hair-metal test. Holding that paper from the doctor's office, and crumpling down on the bathroom floor and sobbing. Because you cannot unvaccinate your child. Once that vaccine is in, it's in. And with the vaccine policy the way it has been, no one gets a pass. There is damage done to every single child, whether you recognize it or not. That's not easy to say or easy to hear. Dr. Hooker says that if we can prevent even one family from living through what so many families already have, that's a good day. That's why this fight never stops.

This past Thursday, Brian Hooker, PhD described getting the results back from his son's hair-metal test. Holding that paper from the doctor's office, and crumpling down on the bathroom floor and sobbing. Because you cannot unvaccinate your child. Once that vaccine is in, it's in. And with the vaccine policy the way it has been, no one gets a pass. There is damage done to every single child, whether you recognize it or not. That's not easy to say or easy to hear. Dr. Hooker says that if we can prevent even one family from living through what so many families already have, that's a good day. That's why this fight never stops.

The HighWire

23,161 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Tesla dropped Thursday and most people blamed the event. That's not what happened. NHTSA opened an audit into Tesla's self-certification, the thing that lets them deploy Cybercab at scale. That's what hit the stock, and it's a much bigger deal than a lukewarm unveiling. Why the audit likely fails: FMVSS 135 requires human-usable brake pedals. Cybercab doesn't have them. Lars(Vice President of Vehicle Engineering at Tesla) argued the rule is satisfied in spirit. No humans, no need for a pedal. My read is there's no winning that argument in front of an auditor reading a checklist. No self-certification means Tesla needs an exemption. That exemption is capped at 2,500 vehicles by statute. Only Congress can move it. Path blocked. The real fix is already in motion. NHTSA published an NPRM in June to modernize FMVSS 135 for ADS-equipped vehicles. The comment period closed August 26th. Cybercab launched September 3rd. That sequencing isn't a coincidence. The main risk in those comments was always going to be competitors. Earliest the new rule could take effect is October. Waymo and Uber will spend every day between now and then trying to delay it. So going into next week: Tesla almost certainly can't scale past 2,500 control-less Cybercabs. October is a coin flip. The fallback is shipping Cybercabs with brake pedals, uglier but legal. The full $TSLA Master Model is now AVAILABLE to download at

Tesla dropped Thursday and most people blamed the event. That's not what happened. NHTSA opened an audit into Tesla's self-certification, the thing that lets them deploy Cybercab at scale. That's what hit the stock, and it's a much bigger deal than a lukewarm unveiling. Why the audit likely fails: FMVSS 135 requires human-usable brake pedals. Cybercab doesn't have them. Lars(Vice President of Vehicle Engineering at Tesla) argued the rule is satisfied in spirit. No humans, no need for a pedal. My read is there's no winning that argument in front of an auditor reading a checklist. No self-certification means Tesla needs an exemption. That exemption is capped at 2,500 vehicles by statute. Only Congress can move it. Path blocked. The real fix is already in motion. NHTSA published an NPRM in June to modernize FMVSS 135 for ADS-equipped vehicles. The comment period closed August 26th. Cybercab launched September 3rd. That sequencing isn't a coincidence. The main risk in those comments was always going to be competitors. Earliest the new rule could take effect is October. Waymo and Uber will spend every day between now and then trying to delay it. So going into next week: Tesla almost certainly can't scale past 2,500 control-less Cybercabs. October is a coin flip. The fallback is shipping Cybercabs with brake pedals, uglier but legal. The full $TSLA Master Model is now AVAILABLE to download at

Jo Bhakdi

13,088 просмотров • 24 дней назад

.Jack Posobiec: "The risks for the world are catastrophic. The risks are higher than ever ... Just because there is a high risk, does that not mean there is a high reward also potentially on the table? If there is one, President Trump is going to be the one to find it."

.Jack Posobiec: "The risks for the world are catastrophic. The risks are higher than ever ... Just because there is a high risk, does that not mean there is a high reward also potentially on the table? If there is one, President Trump is going to be the one to find it."

Human Events

13,813 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад