Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Explosive strength/Rate of force development - how fast can you generate force Reactive TB jump Banded TB drop catch Hang power snatch Depth jump Hang power clean Band split squat R. Leans ISO holds Anti rotation #basketball #strengthandconditioning #basketballtraining

David Ventress

3,600 subscribers

16,737 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

#basketball #strengthandconditioning #basketballtraining

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

3 Kommentare

Profilbild von StrengthCoachNetwork

StrengthCoachNetworkvor 1 Jahr

Love the work coach! Would love to see the RSI output from @HawkinDynamics plates on those jumps. I have some data on diff numbers based on height, weight, and position played. I know it's football, but it can guide you if you want.

Profilbild von David Ventress

David Ventressvor 1 Jahr

@HawkinDynamics I appreciate it! For sure I’ll have to break out the plates next time

Profilbild von Hank

Hankvor 1 Jahr

@KarrisBilal Putting in that work - Nephew

Ähnliche Videos

Lower Body Force Guards ISO push | DB squat jump TB pulls | Depth drop Front squat RDL Fwd Drop Lunge | Lat drop lunge Bigs ISO push | DB squat jump TB pulls | Depth drop Front squat Sumo DL RFE | Lat squat #strengthandconditioning #basketballtraining #basketball

Lower Body Force Guards ISO push | DB squat jump TB pulls | Depth drop Front squat RDL Fwd Drop Lunge | Lat drop lunge Bigs ISO push | DB squat jump TB pulls | Depth drop Front squat Sumo DL RFE | Lat squat #strengthandconditioning #basketballtraining #basketball

David Ventress

15,279 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨 Most people do squats wrong for real results after 40. Regular squats build strength. But they miss the explosive power their body needs to stay strong, mobile, and independent as they age. Enter squat jumps. This movement is a plyometric upgrade that fires up fast-twitch muscle fibers, one that builds strength and power. They also torch calories, and trigger bone remodeling through impact. Studies show just weeks of jump training can boost vertical jump height by ~25%. I see the vicious cycle all the time: declining muscle power → poor balance → higher fall risk → loss of independence. Squat jumps break this cycle by building explosive strength in your quads, glutes, hamstrings, core, while supporting bone density. Try this: 3 sets of 8-10 squat jumps. 1.Stand with feet shoulder-width apart. 2.Squat down. 3.Propel upward into a jump. soft and repeat. No equipment needed. Are you ready to jumpstart your power? #LongevityTraining #StrengthAfter40 #SquatJumps

🚨 Most people do squats wrong for real results after 40. Regular squats build strength. But they miss the explosive power their body needs to stay strong, mobile, and independent as they age. Enter squat jumps. This movement is a plyometric upgrade that fires up fast-twitch muscle fibers, one that builds strength and power. They also torch calories, and trigger bone remodeling through impact. Studies show just weeks of jump training can boost vertical jump height by ~25%. I see the vicious cycle all the time: declining muscle power → poor balance → higher fall risk → loss of independence. Squat jumps break this cycle by building explosive strength in your quads, glutes, hamstrings, core, while supporting bone density. Try this: 3 sets of 8-10 squat jumps. 1.Stand with feet shoulder-width apart. 2.Squat down. 3.Propel upward into a jump. soft and repeat. No equipment needed. Are you ready to jumpstart your power? #LongevityTraining #StrengthAfter40 #SquatJumps

Kristie Leong M.D.

33,049 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen

The Most Underrated Way to Gain 3–5 MPH. This might be the most underrated way to add three to five miles an hour. Almost nobody in baseball is talking about it. It’s called overcoming isometrics. When I first started training to throw a hundred, I thought getting stronger just meant lifting heavier. But throwing isn’t just about strength. It’s about how fast you can fire those muscles. You have to go from relaxed to full effort in a split second. I wasn’t training that at all. That’s when I found overcoming isos. Pushing as hard as possible against something that doesn’t move. It sounds simple, but it works. It teaches your nervous system to fire everything at once. It improves rate of force development and neural drive. That carries over to throwing harder, jumping higher, and sprinting faster. Once I added them in, my velocity jumped about three miles an hour in a few weeks. Here’s how I use them. Split stance isos that match my throwing position. That trains my lower body to put force into the ground. Trap bar iso pulls for total body force. Bench press isos for upper body power. My favorite is tempo isos. Relax for a second, then push as hard as possible for one to two seconds. Reset and repeat. It trains you to go from relaxed to max effort fast. That’s exactly what you need in the pitching delivery.

The Most Underrated Way to Gain 3–5 MPH. This might be the most underrated way to add three to five miles an hour. Almost nobody in baseball is talking about it. It’s called overcoming isometrics. When I first started training to throw a hundred, I thought getting stronger just meant lifting heavier. But throwing isn’t just about strength. It’s about how fast you can fire those muscles. You have to go from relaxed to full effort in a split second. I wasn’t training that at all. That’s when I found overcoming isos. Pushing as hard as possible against something that doesn’t move. It sounds simple, but it works. It teaches your nervous system to fire everything at once. It improves rate of force development and neural drive. That carries over to throwing harder, jumping higher, and sprinting faster. Once I added them in, my velocity jumped about three miles an hour in a few weeks. Here’s how I use them. Split stance isos that match my throwing position. That trains my lower body to put force into the ground. Trap bar iso pulls for total body force. Bench press isos for upper body power. My favorite is tempo isos. Relax for a second, then push as hard as possible for one to two seconds. Reset and repeat. It trains you to go from relaxed to max effort fast. That’s exactly what you need in the pitching delivery.

Josh Gessner

28,123 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Why do stronger players run slower! 🥲 🙋🏿‍♂️Hands up if you have observed athletes get stronger in the gym , vertical jump higher, broad jump further , but with little to no impact on their speed. 😖 🚩Heavy squats , and deadlifts are great for physical conditioning but often this can be at the detriment to coordination and speed development🚩 ❌To lift close to maximal weights , athletes often sacrifice form for force. ❌ 🚩They hinge using their back more than their hip extensors. 🚩 🫠They illustrate poor trunk and shin discipline. 🫠 ❌They fail to use their BUM BEFORE BACK❌ 💡Proximal to Distal Sequencing during leg drive is an effective way to use the pelvis as an engine. This encourages appropriate folding/unfolding, winding/unwinding and essentially loading and exploding in the desired DIRECTION.💡 🤨The weight room rewards slow, vertical forces. 🧐 ✅Useful for neural drive, explosive strength and often great displays of force production✅ 🧭The weight room doesn’t discriminate DIRECTION of force production. 🧭 👉🏾👈🏾👆🏾👇🏾Even when selecting exercises focused on horizontal muscles (posterior chain), we have a choice on how to express our hips. 👇🏾👆🏾👈🏾👉🏾 💡Trunk Discipline and Shin Discipline encourage appropriate orientation of your force (Horizontal Projection). Stability at the proximal ends provides a foundation for efficient and effective triple joint extension (Sequencing > Full Extension)💡 💡The weight room can encourage a more quad dominant / ground based strategy , rewarding strong trunk extension (like a back hyper) which can ultimately shift your projection vertically.💡 🔥Creat large forces , in a short time , in the right DIRECTION !🔥 🙋🏿‍♂️Question time ❓ What coaching or programming strategies can you use to encourage proper hip hinging in the gym, in order to make your athletes faster on the grass? To learn more sign up for our newsletter.

Why do stronger players run slower! 🥲 🙋🏿‍♂️Hands up if you have observed athletes get stronger in the gym , vertical jump higher, broad jump further , but with little to no impact on their speed. 😖 🚩Heavy squats , and deadlifts are great for physical conditioning but often this can be at the detriment to coordination and speed development🚩 ❌To lift close to maximal weights , athletes often sacrifice form for force. ❌ 🚩They hinge using their back more than their hip extensors. 🚩 🫠They illustrate poor trunk and shin discipline. 🫠 ❌They fail to use their BUM BEFORE BACK❌ 💡Proximal to Distal Sequencing during leg drive is an effective way to use the pelvis as an engine. This encourages appropriate folding/unfolding, winding/unwinding and essentially loading and exploding in the desired DIRECTION.💡 🤨The weight room rewards slow, vertical forces. 🧐 ✅Useful for neural drive, explosive strength and often great displays of force production✅ 🧭The weight room doesn’t discriminate DIRECTION of force production. 🧭 👉🏾👈🏾👆🏾👇🏾Even when selecting exercises focused on horizontal muscles (posterior chain), we have a choice on how to express our hips. 👇🏾👆🏾👈🏾👉🏾 💡Trunk Discipline and Shin Discipline encourage appropriate orientation of your force (Horizontal Projection). Stability at the proximal ends provides a foundation for efficient and effective triple joint extension (Sequencing > Full Extension)💡 💡The weight room can encourage a more quad dominant / ground based strategy , rewarding strong trunk extension (like a back hyper) which can ultimately shift your projection vertically.💡 🔥Creat large forces , in a short time , in the right DIRECTION !🔥 🙋🏿‍♂️Question time ❓ What coaching or programming strategies can you use to encourage proper hip hinging in the gym, in order to make your athletes faster on the grass? To learn more sign up for our newsletter.

Jonas Dodoo

346,075 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

People always ask me how I’m so good at pull ups given I’m 280+ pounds. My simple answer is bc I started treating them and training them just like my barbell strength exercises. Here are 3 variations to improve muscle density and strength The key IMO got real density should start at training muscles at end range. There are 3 approaches that I use and that I program for others. First, you’ll see a traditional rep. The important thing is the rep is using full range of motion. The traditional rep allows me to utilize the stretch shortening cycle to improve my elastic strength. Next, you’ll see me using Deadhang Pull Ups. Think of this like a paused rep on bench or squat. You are eliminating the stretch shortening cycle and improving rate of force development WHILE your feet are suspended and the lats are fully loaded and have tension. This is a key distinction from the 3rd approach Power Pull Up. This is the same idea the I use on the Power Row, or some may be more familiar with the Pendlay Row. The difference you will see is I’m standing on a pad. This allows me to pause at the bottom BUT my lats are lengthened but UNLOADED. There’s no weight or tension when I start and initiate my pull up. You’ll even see I remove my fingers completely got each rep Using the all together in an intelligent program that organizes stress and variation appropriately is the key to maxing your pull up potential.

People always ask me how I’m so good at pull ups given I’m 280+ pounds. My simple answer is bc I started treating them and training them just like my barbell strength exercises. Here are 3 variations to improve muscle density and strength The key IMO got real density should start at training muscles at end range. There are 3 approaches that I use and that I program for others. First, you’ll see a traditional rep. The important thing is the rep is using full range of motion. The traditional rep allows me to utilize the stretch shortening cycle to improve my elastic strength. Next, you’ll see me using Deadhang Pull Ups. Think of this like a paused rep on bench or squat. You are eliminating the stretch shortening cycle and improving rate of force development WHILE your feet are suspended and the lats are fully loaded and have tension. This is a key distinction from the 3rd approach Power Pull Up. This is the same idea the I use on the Power Row, or some may be more familiar with the Pendlay Row. The difference you will see is I’m standing on a pad. This allows me to pause at the bottom BUT my lats are lengthened but UNLOADED. There’s no weight or tension when I start and initiate my pull up. You’ll even see I remove my fingers completely got each rep Using the all together in an intelligent program that organizes stress and variation appropriately is the key to maxing your pull up potential.

Official Strength Debates

91,696 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Worth watching every second. Bryce Ferman is beginning his 3rd day here at the WeckMethod Lab. Two things… 1. Power Vest Zero Learning Curve — immediate results, faster fly-10’s when the athletes take the Vest off. Bryce has Data with 50 athletes 100% positives. 2. Wings & Springs Significant Learning Curve. Bryce is faster with the technique already, and getting faster as proficiency grows. We are proving the concepts — which is our obligation. And there is a buzz… But this must be acknowledged: the inertia and aversion to New and better results is unfortunately the norm for many. We will continue to move the ball forward and you can mark my words Faster is FASTER. At some point in the near future the “peer pressure” shifts on itself. Those who do not adapt to superior results early will adapt to them late. “Skate to where the puck is going to be” is how you position yourself to the marketplace of training athletes for greater success. Or be late and play catch up, and explain why they were not early when that time arrives. I can tell you former “stiff spine” anti-rotation guys have Weckonized where the puck is — and have converted to truth and accuracy. Fosbury is how you high jump — and the majority were late to this innovation when it was new and “weird”. Reconciliation will be the end result. The only question is when a person acknowledged the transition. Were they an anchor, or did they lead the way? Every Step Stronger

Worth watching every second. Bryce Ferman is beginning his 3rd day here at the WeckMethod Lab. Two things… 1. Power Vest Zero Learning Curve — immediate results, faster fly-10’s when the athletes take the Vest off. Bryce has Data with 50 athletes 100% positives. 2. Wings & Springs Significant Learning Curve. Bryce is faster with the technique already, and getting faster as proficiency grows. We are proving the concepts — which is our obligation. And there is a buzz… But this must be acknowledged: the inertia and aversion to New and better results is unfortunately the norm for many. We will continue to move the ball forward and you can mark my words Faster is FASTER. At some point in the near future the “peer pressure” shifts on itself. Those who do not adapt to superior results early will adapt to them late. “Skate to where the puck is going to be” is how you position yourself to the marketplace of training athletes for greater success. Or be late and play catch up, and explain why they were not early when that time arrives. I can tell you former “stiff spine” anti-rotation guys have Weckonized where the puck is — and have converted to truth and accuracy. Fosbury is how you high jump — and the majority were late to this innovation when it was new and “weird”. Reconciliation will be the end result. The only question is when a person acknowledged the transition. Were they an anchor, or did they lead the way? Every Step Stronger

David Weck

12,038 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen

I have never seen the American president, Donald Trump, bootlick someone like this, literally kissing ass, as he himself likes to say. This was Trump today with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and boy oh boy, Trump was praising him like crazy. What I found interesting is what I did with this video. I first inserted a clip of Trump during his campaign days attacking and mocking China, then followed it with this latest clip of him praising and flattering the Chinese president in a way we have rarely seen before, today. It perfectly shows how power and economic strength change global power relationships. This should be a lesson for Africa and African leaders who embarrass themselves grovelling for recognition to Western leaders. In 1975, China’s economy was nowhere near where it is today. Back then, China was still a relatively poor developing country and nowhere close to being a global superpower. Today, depending on which economic measurement is used, China is either the largest economy in the world or the second largest after the United States. What did the Chinese do? They did not spend decades begging the West for validation or recognition. They rolled up their sleeves and went to work. They industrialised. They built infrastructure. They invested in manufacturing, education, technology, and long-term planning. And because they built something powerful, the world had no choice but to take them seriously. That is why today you can see an American president publicly flattering a Chinese leader. China now has something the world wants and needs. African leaders waste too much time begging for approval, validation, and symbolic recognition from the West instead of fixing their countries and building functional economies. You even hear leaders like Emmerson Mnangagwa of Zimbabwe demanding a permanent seat or influence at the United Nations Security Council, yet he presides over a country that struggles to provide electricity for even 10 hours a day. Zimbabwe has massive unemployment, collapsing public services, hospitals without medication, broken roads, a currency that cannot be freely exchanged internationally, and widespread corruption. The list is long. The country’s biggest hospital has operated for long periods with severe shortages of equipment and functioning theatres. Citizens are heavily taxed while public services continue collapsing. How do you expect the world to place you at the top table when your own country is struggling to provide the basics for its citizens? Serious nations do not hand out respect because of liberation war slogans or revolutionary rhetoric from 50 years ago. Respect is earned through performance, stability, production, innovation, and competence. You cannot talk about sovereignty and greatness while importing maize because you failed to properly utilise some of the best agricultural land in Africa. You cannot demand global influence while your citizens depend on food aid and medical support and donations from the same international system you constantly criticise. What we are seeing with Trump and Xi Jinping is a lesson in how the world works. Hard work, economic strength, production, and strategic planning force the world to respect you. Even the most powerful country in the world cannot ignore you once you become economically indispensable. Zimbabwe has enormous potential. We have vast mineral wealth, fertile land, talented people, and strategic opportunities. We have over 80 different minerals and some of the best farming land in the region. Yet millions of Zimbabweans live in poverty and struggle to survive because of corruption, poor governance, and misplaced priorities. We even import toilet paper and tooth picks from South Africa. No serious global institution will fully respect leaders who cannot first build functioning societies at home. The world respects results, not empty slogans, rhetoric and childish propaganda. What we have also learned from this video is that Trump has a domestic audience in America that he clearly does not fully respect intellectually. He says whatever he believes will win him votes, even if it means making exaggerated or hostile statements about countries like China during campaign periods. He understands the emotions and intellectual emptiness of his audience and plays to them politically. And it does not end with his domestic audience only. Trump also has loyal but ignorant supporters and bootlickers across the world, including in Africa, people who treat him almost like a god. But politicians do not necessarily respect people simply because they worship them blindly. They respect power, leverage, influence, and results. During his campaign, Trump spoke about China in derogatory and confrontational terms because it suited his political objectives at the time. But when he came face to face with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the tone changed completely. There was respect, praise, and careful language. In Trump’s own language, he practically “kissed ass”. And that is the reality of how global politics works. You do not get respect simply because you shout loudly, insult others, or demand recognition. You get respect when you build something powerful enough that the world cannot ignore you. China earned that respect through decades of hard work, industrialisation, discipline, economic expansion, infrastructure development, and strategic planning. They built an economy and a system that the world now depends on. That is the lesson Africans and African leaders must take from this video. Stop wasting time begging for validation and recognition from the West. Stop thinking respect is something that can be demanded through slogans, liberation war rhetoric, or political noise. Respect is earned through competence, production, economic strength, innovation, and delivery to your own people. When you build a strong country, the world respects you automatically because you have something valuable to offer. When you have more than 80 minerals in your country and yet your citizens are walking on top of sewage, nobody will respect you. You become a laughing stock. The world looks at that contradiction and sees failure of leadership, not potential. You can steal as much money as you want from your people, build mansions, drive convoys, and surround yourself with praise singers, but when a clown enters a State House, it does not become a palace. It becomes a circus. Real leadership is not measured by slogans, propaganda, or how long you stay in power. It is measured by whether ordinary citizens have clean water, functioning hospitals, decent roads, electricity, jobs, dignity, and hope for the future. A country rich in minerals but poor in governance will never command real respect internationally. Respect comes when national wealth is converted into prosperity for the people, not luxury for the political elite.

I have never seen the American president, Donald Trump, bootlick someone like this, literally kissing ass, as he himself likes to say. This was Trump today with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and boy oh boy, Trump was praising him like crazy. What I found interesting is what I did with this video. I first inserted a clip of Trump during his campaign days attacking and mocking China, then followed it with this latest clip of him praising and flattering the Chinese president in a way we have rarely seen before, today. It perfectly shows how power and economic strength change global power relationships. This should be a lesson for Africa and African leaders who embarrass themselves grovelling for recognition to Western leaders. In 1975, China’s economy was nowhere near where it is today. Back then, China was still a relatively poor developing country and nowhere close to being a global superpower. Today, depending on which economic measurement is used, China is either the largest economy in the world or the second largest after the United States. What did the Chinese do? They did not spend decades begging the West for validation or recognition. They rolled up their sleeves and went to work. They industrialised. They built infrastructure. They invested in manufacturing, education, technology, and long-term planning. And because they built something powerful, the world had no choice but to take them seriously. That is why today you can see an American president publicly flattering a Chinese leader. China now has something the world wants and needs. African leaders waste too much time begging for approval, validation, and symbolic recognition from the West instead of fixing their countries and building functional economies. You even hear leaders like Emmerson Mnangagwa of Zimbabwe demanding a permanent seat or influence at the United Nations Security Council, yet he presides over a country that struggles to provide electricity for even 10 hours a day. Zimbabwe has massive unemployment, collapsing public services, hospitals without medication, broken roads, a currency that cannot be freely exchanged internationally, and widespread corruption. The list is long. The country’s biggest hospital has operated for long periods with severe shortages of equipment and functioning theatres. Citizens are heavily taxed while public services continue collapsing. How do you expect the world to place you at the top table when your own country is struggling to provide the basics for its citizens? Serious nations do not hand out respect because of liberation war slogans or revolutionary rhetoric from 50 years ago. Respect is earned through performance, stability, production, innovation, and competence. You cannot talk about sovereignty and greatness while importing maize because you failed to properly utilise some of the best agricultural land in Africa. You cannot demand global influence while your citizens depend on food aid and medical support and donations from the same international system you constantly criticise. What we are seeing with Trump and Xi Jinping is a lesson in how the world works. Hard work, economic strength, production, and strategic planning force the world to respect you. Even the most powerful country in the world cannot ignore you once you become economically indispensable. Zimbabwe has enormous potential. We have vast mineral wealth, fertile land, talented people, and strategic opportunities. We have over 80 different minerals and some of the best farming land in the region. Yet millions of Zimbabweans live in poverty and struggle to survive because of corruption, poor governance, and misplaced priorities. We even import toilet paper and tooth picks from South Africa. No serious global institution will fully respect leaders who cannot first build functioning societies at home. The world respects results, not empty slogans, rhetoric and childish propaganda. What we have also learned from this video is that Trump has a domestic audience in America that he clearly does not fully respect intellectually. He says whatever he believes will win him votes, even if it means making exaggerated or hostile statements about countries like China during campaign periods. He understands the emotions and intellectual emptiness of his audience and plays to them politically. And it does not end with his domestic audience only. Trump also has loyal but ignorant supporters and bootlickers across the world, including in Africa, people who treat him almost like a god. But politicians do not necessarily respect people simply because they worship them blindly. They respect power, leverage, influence, and results. During his campaign, Trump spoke about China in derogatory and confrontational terms because it suited his political objectives at the time. But when he came face to face with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the tone changed completely. There was respect, praise, and careful language. In Trump’s own language, he practically “kissed ass”. And that is the reality of how global politics works. You do not get respect simply because you shout loudly, insult others, or demand recognition. You get respect when you build something powerful enough that the world cannot ignore you. China earned that respect through decades of hard work, industrialisation, discipline, economic expansion, infrastructure development, and strategic planning. They built an economy and a system that the world now depends on. That is the lesson Africans and African leaders must take from this video. Stop wasting time begging for validation and recognition from the West. Stop thinking respect is something that can be demanded through slogans, liberation war rhetoric, or political noise. Respect is earned through competence, production, economic strength, innovation, and delivery to your own people. When you build a strong country, the world respects you automatically because you have something valuable to offer. When you have more than 80 minerals in your country and yet your citizens are walking on top of sewage, nobody will respect you. You become a laughing stock. The world looks at that contradiction and sees failure of leadership, not potential. You can steal as much money as you want from your people, build mansions, drive convoys, and surround yourself with praise singers, but when a clown enters a State House, it does not become a palace. It becomes a circus. Real leadership is not measured by slogans, propaganda, or how long you stay in power. It is measured by whether ordinary citizens have clean water, functioning hospitals, decent roads, electricity, jobs, dignity, and hope for the future. A country rich in minerals but poor in governance will never command real respect internationally. Respect comes when national wealth is converted into prosperity for the people, not luxury for the political elite.

Hopewell Chin’ono

69,240 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Just in $AMD Anush "Speed is the moat"|ROCm🎙️ In the race to define the future of AI, what's the one advantage that truly lasts? It's not proprietary tech, argues Anush Elangovan Elangovan, VP of AI Software at AMD , but the sustainable speed of innovation. He explains why AMD is rejecting the "walled garden" model for its open source ROCm stack, betting that an open community flywheel is the key to victory. Listen to understand how this open strategy is designed to out-innovate closed systems by empowering developers to solve everything from frontier-model challenges to the mundane, everyday problems that define the "last mile" of AI. AMD ROCm Software: Part 1 Transcript [00:00:00] Andrew Zigler: Joining me is Anush Elangovan, VP of AI software at AMD. And when people talk about AI compute, the conversation often stops at hardware specs, but it's more than just physical chips that win the game. It's also the software ecosystems supporting them. [00:00:18] Andrew Zigler: The prevailing strategy in the industry has been to build something like a walled garden. You know, something closed, proprietary locks, developers in. But AMD is betting on an entirely different play, open source acceleration, and with rock, their open source AI software stack. AMD is building not just hardware parity, but an innovation flywheel that's powered by the community with interoperability and the freedom to scale without all of that pesky lockin. [00:00:48] Andrew Zigler: And in this world, speed is your moat and how fast you can innovate while your platform remains open, flexible, and standardize across all of its applications. That's what we're gonna explore [00:01:00] today. So Anush, I'm really excited to have you here. Welcome to Dev Interrupted. [00:01:04] Anush Elangovan: Thanks for having me. Uh, super excited to chat about it. [00:01:07] Andrew Zigler: Amazing. Well, let's go ahead and dive right in with kind of what I laid it out with in the beginning, the idea of the moat and it being about speed. I wanna unpack that a bit because that came from you when you and I first spoke. And I, and I want to know, you know, how do you define speed inside of AMD beyond just things like hardware, benchmarks. [00:01:27] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So when we typically talk about speed, everyone's like, Hey, hardware benchmark specs, right? Like, uh, memory bandwidth or, or flops. And that is one important part of it, uh, AMD does very well. With that, we do have, a, a very good history of executing on that axis. [00:01:47] Anush Elangovan: But when I say speed is the moat, it is about, uh, how we prepare, how we build the muscle to run the race for a long time and run it fast. And it is [00:02:00] not about a single point in time that you've, you've beat some you know, benchmark and, and you declare victory. It's about building the ability to consistently develop and deliver. [00:02:13] Anush Elangovan: Both hardware and software innovation at scale and do it fast, right? Like, you know, we we're increasingly getting to a point where models come out and they're, uh, you know, a year or two ago it was like, Hey, they work on AMD on day zero, which is great, but now they are performing on AMD the day it releases, right? [00:02:32] Anush Elangovan: So, what does it take to Prefetch where the industry is going? Be prepared to intercept. At that point is what you know, I, I refer to as you know, the, the speed factor in, in creating this mode, right? And the mode is just shed all things that hold you back and run as fast as you can. [00:02:53] Anush Elangovan: Uh, because the pace of innovation that is, uh, being seen in, in AI [00:03:00] industries is just. Amazing. Right? And it's like, it's transformational at at how you generate electricity. It's transformational as at how you build data centers. It's transformational at how you deploy compute, networking. It's transformational at what kind of use cases you, you know, uh, use AI for. [00:03:17] Anush Elangovan: Uh, and for that, you need to be prepared to, see what comes tomorrow and be prepared to run the race tomorrow. [00:03:23] Andrew Zigler: Yeah, it's a really great perspective because it highlights that it's not just like a checkpoint that you run through. I like how you called out, like it's not just hitting that benchmark or being the best in class at that moment, in that snapshot, it's about having a. The throughput and about having that dedication to the idea and continuing to deliver on it. [00:03:43] Andrew Zigler: It's not just crossing the threshold, but it's also being the engine. And that's what, that's what protects a business. That is the moat, because the moat is that innovation layer, the faster and more, uh, future forward. That you can work and think, [00:04:00] you know, the better. Uh, we, we talk a lot about like future forward work styles. [00:04:04] Andrew Zigler: Like what are the things I could be doing right now today that are gonna be like, way more useful tomorrow? Let, let's abandon those, workflows that are older and that kind of like, that translates into. An advantage when you work that way. You know, what kind of things have you learned working with, uh, like across all spectrums of people who would use ROCm, right? [00:04:23] Andrew Zigler: You have like the developers, but then you also have the enterprises and you have this large span of adoptees, right? So what is the, what does that look like that you learn? [00:04:32] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, so, so the way I look at it is there are gonna be pockets of different, uh, you know, cadences, right? Like, so people who are deploying in enterprises, for example, right? The validation and how long it takes for them to deploy an LLM that's secure. It's, with guardrails, et cetera, maybe longer. [00:04:52] Anush Elangovan: but you still have to go through the process and you have to be prepared to like, walk that walk to deploy an enterprises. That doesn't mean it's [00:05:00] not fast, that's as fast as you can do for that industry, right? And if you are deploying AI in healthcare, right, it's, it's got its own, uh, cycle. [00:05:07] Anush Elangovan: but in each one of these, you want to see how, like, go down to the essence of what is it that you actually have to do. And, you know, I, I, I like how you framed it. It's like it's, you shed your prior assumptions of how things are done, right. And, and you kind of build up from a, uh, first principles, uh, approach to say, this is how I could use AI to unlock, whatever I'm doing. [00:05:33] Anush Elangovan: And, and, some of it, you know, it's good to really step back and look at. Just question every part of it, right? Like right now you're getting chat GPT and, Gemini competing for like, math, olympiads and, and, uh, college, uh, reasoning, uh, tests. Right? And, and those are like that, that is amazing and increasingly like complex tasks that they're trying to do. [00:05:58] Anush Elangovan: But there may also be like. [00:06:00] More mundane things that AI could, could get applied to. Right? And, and so when we think about shedding old ways, you wanna shed it not just in like the tip of the spear. It's like, you know, I'm gonna see what's the frontier model. It's also, it could be something as simple as. [00:06:18] Anush Elangovan: How do you choose a, a movie, uh, you know, like a recommendation system, right? Or, or, uh, an automated, uh, flight, uh, rebooking system. So the moment, you know, your flight is late, uh, right now it's a notification, right? It's like, oh, you got a text message saying your flight's late. And I got that like three times this week. [00:06:38] Anush Elangovan: But anyway, uh, and, and, and, and, I was just like, okay, so if I were to rethink this. All this MCPs that we have that should be hooked up into an MCP that says, your flight's delayed. Here are your options. If you want, you know, these are the paid options. Yeah. Here are the free options. This will get you back into your you know, Toronto airport [00:07:00] tonight. [00:07:00] Anush Elangovan: Or if you stay, here's a hotel plus this, plus this, plus. It's just like, go ahead is all I should say. Versus now I'm like, okay, can someone, you know, can I call a travel agent? Can I do this? Can I go online and log into And you know, so we gotta fundamentally rethink even those like small, nuances of, things that we do that can be automated out and AI is really, really good at doing something like this, right? Maybe I just explained an AI startup idea right now. Somebody should just start that. [00:07:29] Andrew Zigler: I think you did. Yeah, you definitely did. Someone, one of our listeners is definitely going to lift that off of you. I, I, I, you know, I hate being on the receiving end of those. You feel a little helpless and then you have to like, follow the whole flow. So I know what you mean. Like I, I like how you called out that the build and this like. [00:07:45] Andrew Zigler: Where speed is your moat and the innovation layer is protecting you, is what makes you better than your competitors. How you scale that and you bring that to market. So by understanding the problems that you're solving, uh, throwing away those older assumptions, but also [00:08:00] recognizing that like. We're building every single day, new things and new ways of using stuff that we're still figuring out the implications of. [00:08:08] Andrew Zigler: And so when you have a lot of velocity and you're introducing a lot of new ideas, and maybe you have that workflow now that automatically rebook your flight off of your late flight text message, and uh, I know I would certainly use it, but you know, what kind of philosophies guide the way that y'all think about building this ecosystem to manage that stability while letting folks. [00:08:29] Andrew Zigler: Play with the speed and the assumptions and the airplane re bookings. [00:08:34] Anush Elangovan: so, so I think, you know, we need to peel one layer down, right? and the philosophy is, Hey, we, we just discovered electricity, right? And you know what we're gonna do? We are gonna make motors, uh, or dynamos, right? Like engines. Uh, sure. We don't know if it's gonna be a Ferrari that you're gonna make, or it's a a a a dump truck. [00:08:57] Anush Elangovan: That's good for doing this. But let's [00:09:00] let, which is also required, right? You need a dump truck. You need a garbage truck. And, [00:09:04] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. You need the [00:09:04] Anush Elangovan: course you need, uh, a Ferrari for a midlife crisis, right? So, [00:09:09] Andrew Zigler: precisely. [00:09:10] Anush Elangovan: But, but my, uh, point is what do we build next? And, uh, and this is what I meant by like, okay, let's, let's take those baby steps to build the. [00:09:20] Anush Elangovan: Infrastructure that's required that we know we'll have to use, right? So, so if I just discovered electricity, okay, great. Now one, how do I save this electricity and how do I use it? So there's battery technology, so you need to do something like that, right? Like so. But then you also want to make it into an actionable thing. [00:09:37] Anush Elangovan: You want to make it for like automobiles, or you wanna use it for, you know, powering, uh, entire cities. So it is that transformational. So, uh, AI is that transformational. So, if you distill down, it'll, it'll come down to how do we think about, what we can do with this this fundamental technology that, We may not be aware of what it [00:10:00] is gonna unlock next, but at least you know the next step is clear, right? It's like a dense fog, you know, it's gonna be like, it, it's the right path. You see the light, but it's kind of like out there and, and the steps you're taking are concrete and you're like, okay, this is good. [00:10:16] Anush Elangovan: I, this is better than where I was or where we were. So we are moving forward. So you can build with the. Intuition from what you see in the short term and a tactical view, but towards what you think the future is gonna be. [00:10:28] Andrew Zigler: Right. You almost like we're all in this like fog of war, right? And like you said, you're reaching out and you're trying to step through it. You could think of it too, as like you're in the dark and your hands are up in front of you and you know that. You're, you're not gonna run your face into a wall because your hands are out in front of you, but you're not gonna maybe do much better than that. [00:10:45] Andrew Zigler: So that's kind of like, I think the eco, the, the industry, the world that we find ourselves in, uh, and we all have to, then this becomes the power of an ecosystem, of a group of people working together to create that layer of, [00:11:00] uh, of establishing the [00:11:01] Anush Elangovan: exactly. And I, I, I just, instead of, you know, saying fog of war I describe it as like, you're in this. Beautiful valley with like a morning, uh, fog that's in. You can smell the flowers. You, you hear the birds. You are like, okay, it's, we are in like, uh, utopian paradise and yes, I just need to like, continue the walk, right? [00:11:24] Anush Elangovan: and then move forward with that, conviction that you're in the right spot. [00:11:27] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. So let's talk about that ecosystem world. This nice, I love how you describe it, this grassy side of a hill in the morning that's covered in some mist and maybe we can't see 30 feet in one direction, but it sure is a beautiful hill and it smells nice. And so we're all here. And why is, in that world, why is. [00:11:44] Andrew Zigler: You know, open source, their strategic advantage that y'all are going for in the AI hardware market. And, and then how does like ROCm turn that into wins for people within that ecosystem? [00:11:56] Anush Elangovan: you know, the, the way we look at it is this, is kind of like how I view [00:12:00] AI and the ecosystem, right? But, but it is for everyone to enjoy. Uh, and so we do want to make sure that. You know, it is, uh, beneficial for everyone. [00:12:09] Anush Elangovan: The ecosystem can come in and, and innovate. It's an open innovation engine. and uh, it is very different from, you know, having a walled garden with, Hey, only I know how to do this and I'm gonna do it and throw it over the fence and you can use it or keep walking, right? So we'd like to be good citizens that way, but also. [00:12:30] Anush Elangovan: Uh, it is self-fulfilling in a way, right? Like it, the, the pace at which we innovate with open source is unmatched. Like, you know, our serving engines are like VLLM and, and sg l. Those things, uh, those frameworks are like super, super aggressive in terms of how fast they come out with features and how fast they can you know, get performant models out. [00:12:52] Anush Elangovan: And that compared with what, uh, you'd get from, you know, the likes of like T-R-T-L-L-M or something is always lagging, right? Because you [00:13:00] just can't keep up with you know, 200 commits a week just on one particular model to get that model really performant [00:13:06] Andrew Zigler: And, and, and in that world where, you know, everyone can enjoy the winds of this, what kind of customer stories or innovation stories have really stood out to you and excite you about building and creating this place for developers? [00:13:19] Anush Elangovan: Yeah. So I think the parts that are super exciting for me are when when we get to see a customer that is first skeptical. Then they start a little like, okay, fine, we'll give you a chance. Uh, we do a simple, uh, POC and then they're like, huh, this seems to work. Yeah, we told you it works. [00:13:42] Anush Elangovan: You don't have to change one line of code. Really? Yes, no need to change one line of code. Okay, let's try a production workload. So then they try it. Oh, you're more performant than the competition. Yes. We're more performant than, than the competition. So how much does it cost? And we're like, oh, it's your TCO is better with, uh, [00:14:00] AMD. [00:14:00] Anush Elangovan: So again, they're like, wow, okay, good. So now how do we deploy at scale? And then we go deploy it at scale. And when they give a thumbs up on that and they say, this is good, right? That's when you know, you, you see it go full circle from like, oh, we, we've never heard about AMD to like actually deploy to tens of thousands of GPUs In the order of a few months, right? It, it, it really is fascinating to see and very exciting and invigorating to [00:14:28] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. At like a great exposure to a lot of interesting problems. And, and then people using the infrastructure, the, the technology available to solve those problems. Really specific problems by the way, that's often why they're bringing their data and AI to it, uh, is because it is really specific and important for them. [00:14:45] Andrew Zigler: And there's a, a lot I think that other engineering orgs can learn and even emulate from AMD's success and, and having this open source ecosystem and it causing this acceleration within. You [00:15:00] know, uh, customers and enterprises that use and adopt the tools and, and, and that creates an advantage. And that goes back to why we're talking and like the real thesis of our conversation today. [00:15:10] Andrew Zigler: So how do you think engineering leaders that are listening to this and obviously tapping into this great success AMD has from an open source flywheel, how do you think other, other folks building in the same space can foster that open, first, that open source oriented culture in order to, you know, accelerate their innovation goals? [00:15:29] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So the startup that um, was acquired by AMD we, we built, I mean, we started off doing iot stuff and you know, smart ring and all that, right? But in the, the end of like, uh, and not the end, the last six years of the company was building ML compilers. [00:15:47] Anush Elangovan: And ml, ML compilers are like super, uh, complicated, sophisticated, advanced algorithms, dah, dah, dah. but it was all open source, right? So our VCs were like, wait, what do you mean your core [00:16:00] IP is open source? And um, the speed is the moat applied even then, right? It was just like, yes, if you have an idea that. [00:16:08] Anush Elangovan: Because someone saw this idea that you are, they're gonna be able to catch up, then you probably have the wrong idea anyway. But if they are, you know, you execute and they're gonna catch up, that you should assume they're gonna catch up. Right? So you gotta move forward. So keeping it open source is super important. [00:16:25] Anush Elangovan: But also to your question on like, you know, the learnings from an AMD standpoint, right? If there are, hard problems, I'd say dig in and work through it, right? Like there's no way but through it, right? That should be the simple mentality. And more, uh, frequently than not. you'll see that you'll just make it through in a, in, in good form. [00:16:52] Anush Elangovan: But if you doubt it and you're like, oh, I don't know if I should commit, if I'm, I, you know, what should just commit to do the right thing [00:17:00] every step, right? Every step, and just keep taking one step in front of the other. And in no time you'll see that you'll be running. Right. And, and yes, the first few steps will be like, yeah, everyone's complaining about your software quality. [00:17:15] Anush Elangovan: Everyone's complaining about this and that, and it doesn't work. And, and a few steps in, you know, you get, you get the hang of all the complaints that are coming in. You get the feedback loop. You're like, okay, what, what are you prioritizing again? One step in front of the other, right? You just keep knocking that out and then you get to a point where you're, it just becomes second nature, right? To do the, to do the right thing. And, and then yes, if someone gives you two options, you'll be like, fine. This is, uh, you know, there's always the resource trade off. There's always a human capital trade off, but what's the right thing to do? of course, I, I'm pragmatic about what we choose, but, but if the right thing for your long-term success is dig in, go first, principles, make it [00:18:00] happen. [00:18:00] Anush Elangovan: Well. Then just go for that. There's, there is no shortcut to [00:18:04] Andrew Zigler: acknowledging, you know, how it aligns with your mission, your core company goals, and what you're looking to achieve. And, and I, I love how you rightfully called out that in the open source world and you know, you have your technology that you've built, what you think is your moat upon, right? [00:18:22] Andrew Zigler: It's your code and, and to open source that, or to just make it where anyone could peer in is, you know. Scary in one regard, but two, it just kind of feels like you're handing away your throne room in some kind of sense, a very direct feeling sense. But the ultimately, you were really right to call out, and this is something I think about all the time, that the real power there is still the speed This the speed. [00:18:42] Andrew Zigler: That was the moat at the beginning of our conversation. It's the speed in combination with your. Very specific domain understanding of what you're building and what you're creating, and your new role as the steward of that world and how people plug into it, which [00:19:00] has frankly, a lot more influence and power than lording over a closed. [00:19:04] Andrew Zigler: You know, repository or an ecosystem, and like you said, like throwing things over the wall. Sure. There, there might be people always on the other side of that wall, but you're not gonna have a great connection with them. You're not gonna be able to really clearly understand them. I, I like your metaphor of the side of the field of the mountain a lot more. [00:19:23] Andrew Zigler: But, but in the, in this world, you know, where. That speed is, is the power and, and open source is just one way that you can harness that speed to get really far ahead and to innovate. , There's other parts of this equation that you can be experimenting with too, and I'd love to pick your brain about them as a software leader and, and, and one of them is about looking forward and kind of understanding that future that we're all building towards and beyond today's models and hardware. [00:19:48] Andrew Zigler: You know, what do you see as the next major bottleneck or opportunity in the AI compute space? As, as you know, enterprises and folks start to get a little more mature about what's available to [00:20:00] them. [00:20:00] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, I think, the bottleneck and opportunity is, uh, what I'd call, call walking the last mile of ai. Right. Uh, and like I I, I gave you an example, uh, previously, but, but it's similar to that. It's like there are cases where Humans have so many, uh, things to do in your day. You know, like the, if we sit down and actually had a customer focus like, okay, these customers lives, I'm gonna save four hours of this customer's life. And if you actually sit down and look at all of that, it'll be. Easily automatable, easily you know, uh, applicable, uh, for ai, right? [00:20:39] Anush Elangovan: Like, but then making it happen is gonna take a little bit, right? It's like maybe it's, uh, paying your utility bill, right? Or something like that, right? Or, or, your healthcare explanation of benefits. Uh, like, I'm sure you get an explanation of benefits, and I'm like, I, I don't even know what that thing is. [00:20:55] Anush Elangovan: It's just like EOB and like. [00:20:57] Andrew Zigler: it's a big, a big old PDF. Yeah, [00:21:00] exactly. [00:21:01] Anush Elangovan: Like, like, I'm like great straight to the, uh, shredder, right? And but that could be, you know, automated with the ai, right? It, it, it'd be like, Hey, the summary of this thing is you went and visited this day. Everything is okay. Everything is paid for, so don't worry, it's not a bill. [00:21:17] Anush Elangovan: That again, the same, uh, thing, but the sense of what that information overload is could be. Digested by ai, uh, accumulated over time and retrieved when you need it. Like, I don't, I actually don't even need to know this EOB right now, unless of course, whenever I need to know it, that maybe, you know, like for some benefits I need to figure out what do, what did I do over the past year and how do I apply it? Source:

Just in $AMD Anush "Speed is the moat"|ROCm🎙️ In the race to define the future of AI, what's the one advantage that truly lasts? It's not proprietary tech, argues Anush Elangovan Elangovan, VP of AI Software at AMD , but the sustainable speed of innovation. He explains why AMD is rejecting the "walled garden" model for its open source ROCm stack, betting that an open community flywheel is the key to victory. Listen to understand how this open strategy is designed to out-innovate closed systems by empowering developers to solve everything from frontier-model challenges to the mundane, everyday problems that define the "last mile" of AI. AMD ROCm Software: Part 1 Transcript [00:00:00] Andrew Zigler: Joining me is Anush Elangovan, VP of AI software at AMD. And when people talk about AI compute, the conversation often stops at hardware specs, but it's more than just physical chips that win the game. It's also the software ecosystems supporting them. [00:00:18] Andrew Zigler: The prevailing strategy in the industry has been to build something like a walled garden. You know, something closed, proprietary locks, developers in. But AMD is betting on an entirely different play, open source acceleration, and with rock, their open source AI software stack. AMD is building not just hardware parity, but an innovation flywheel that's powered by the community with interoperability and the freedom to scale without all of that pesky lockin. [00:00:48] Andrew Zigler: And in this world, speed is your moat and how fast you can innovate while your platform remains open, flexible, and standardize across all of its applications. That's what we're gonna explore [00:01:00] today. So Anush, I'm really excited to have you here. Welcome to Dev Interrupted. [00:01:04] Anush Elangovan: Thanks for having me. Uh, super excited to chat about it. [00:01:07] Andrew Zigler: Amazing. Well, let's go ahead and dive right in with kind of what I laid it out with in the beginning, the idea of the moat and it being about speed. I wanna unpack that a bit because that came from you when you and I first spoke. And I, and I want to know, you know, how do you define speed inside of AMD beyond just things like hardware, benchmarks. [00:01:27] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So when we typically talk about speed, everyone's like, Hey, hardware benchmark specs, right? Like, uh, memory bandwidth or, or flops. And that is one important part of it, uh, AMD does very well. With that, we do have, a, a very good history of executing on that axis. [00:01:47] Anush Elangovan: But when I say speed is the moat, it is about, uh, how we prepare, how we build the muscle to run the race for a long time and run it fast. And it is [00:02:00] not about a single point in time that you've, you've beat some you know, benchmark and, and you declare victory. It's about building the ability to consistently develop and deliver. [00:02:13] Anush Elangovan: Both hardware and software innovation at scale and do it fast, right? Like, you know, we we're increasingly getting to a point where models come out and they're, uh, you know, a year or two ago it was like, Hey, they work on AMD on day zero, which is great, but now they are performing on AMD the day it releases, right? [00:02:32] Anush Elangovan: So, what does it take to Prefetch where the industry is going? Be prepared to intercept. At that point is what you know, I, I refer to as you know, the, the speed factor in, in creating this mode, right? And the mode is just shed all things that hold you back and run as fast as you can. [00:02:53] Anush Elangovan: Uh, because the pace of innovation that is, uh, being seen in, in AI [00:03:00] industries is just. Amazing. Right? And it's like, it's transformational at at how you generate electricity. It's transformational as at how you build data centers. It's transformational at how you deploy compute, networking. It's transformational at what kind of use cases you, you know, uh, use AI for. [00:03:17] Anush Elangovan: Uh, and for that, you need to be prepared to, see what comes tomorrow and be prepared to run the race tomorrow. [00:03:23] Andrew Zigler: Yeah, it's a really great perspective because it highlights that it's not just like a checkpoint that you run through. I like how you called out, like it's not just hitting that benchmark or being the best in class at that moment, in that snapshot, it's about having a. The throughput and about having that dedication to the idea and continuing to deliver on it. [00:03:43] Andrew Zigler: It's not just crossing the threshold, but it's also being the engine. And that's what, that's what protects a business. That is the moat, because the moat is that innovation layer, the faster and more, uh, future forward. That you can work and think, [00:04:00] you know, the better. Uh, we, we talk a lot about like future forward work styles. [00:04:04] Andrew Zigler: Like what are the things I could be doing right now today that are gonna be like, way more useful tomorrow? Let, let's abandon those, workflows that are older and that kind of like, that translates into. An advantage when you work that way. You know, what kind of things have you learned working with, uh, like across all spectrums of people who would use ROCm, right? [00:04:23] Andrew Zigler: You have like the developers, but then you also have the enterprises and you have this large span of adoptees, right? So what is the, what does that look like that you learn? [00:04:32] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, so, so the way I look at it is there are gonna be pockets of different, uh, you know, cadences, right? Like, so people who are deploying in enterprises, for example, right? The validation and how long it takes for them to deploy an LLM that's secure. It's, with guardrails, et cetera, maybe longer. [00:04:52] Anush Elangovan: but you still have to go through the process and you have to be prepared to like, walk that walk to deploy an enterprises. That doesn't mean it's [00:05:00] not fast, that's as fast as you can do for that industry, right? And if you are deploying AI in healthcare, right, it's, it's got its own, uh, cycle. [00:05:07] Anush Elangovan: but in each one of these, you want to see how, like, go down to the essence of what is it that you actually have to do. And, you know, I, I, I like how you framed it. It's like it's, you shed your prior assumptions of how things are done, right. And, and you kind of build up from a, uh, first principles, uh, approach to say, this is how I could use AI to unlock, whatever I'm doing. [00:05:33] Anush Elangovan: And, and, some of it, you know, it's good to really step back and look at. Just question every part of it, right? Like right now you're getting chat GPT and, Gemini competing for like, math, olympiads and, and, uh, college, uh, reasoning, uh, tests. Right? And, and those are like that, that is amazing and increasingly like complex tasks that they're trying to do. [00:05:58] Anush Elangovan: But there may also be like. [00:06:00] More mundane things that AI could, could get applied to. Right? And, and so when we think about shedding old ways, you wanna shed it not just in like the tip of the spear. It's like, you know, I'm gonna see what's the frontier model. It's also, it could be something as simple as. [00:06:18] Anush Elangovan: How do you choose a, a movie, uh, you know, like a recommendation system, right? Or, or, uh, an automated, uh, flight, uh, rebooking system. So the moment, you know, your flight is late, uh, right now it's a notification, right? It's like, oh, you got a text message saying your flight's late. And I got that like three times this week. [00:06:38] Anush Elangovan: But anyway, uh, and, and, and, and, I was just like, okay, so if I were to rethink this. All this MCPs that we have that should be hooked up into an MCP that says, your flight's delayed. Here are your options. If you want, you know, these are the paid options. Yeah. Here are the free options. This will get you back into your you know, Toronto airport [00:07:00] tonight. [00:07:00] Anush Elangovan: Or if you stay, here's a hotel plus this, plus this, plus. It's just like, go ahead is all I should say. Versus now I'm like, okay, can someone, you know, can I call a travel agent? Can I do this? Can I go online and log into And you know, so we gotta fundamentally rethink even those like small, nuances of, things that we do that can be automated out and AI is really, really good at doing something like this, right? Maybe I just explained an AI startup idea right now. Somebody should just start that. [00:07:29] Andrew Zigler: I think you did. Yeah, you definitely did. Someone, one of our listeners is definitely going to lift that off of you. I, I, I, you know, I hate being on the receiving end of those. You feel a little helpless and then you have to like, follow the whole flow. So I know what you mean. Like I, I like how you called out that the build and this like. [00:07:45] Andrew Zigler: Where speed is your moat and the innovation layer is protecting you, is what makes you better than your competitors. How you scale that and you bring that to market. So by understanding the problems that you're solving, uh, throwing away those older assumptions, but also [00:08:00] recognizing that like. We're building every single day, new things and new ways of using stuff that we're still figuring out the implications of. [00:08:08] Andrew Zigler: And so when you have a lot of velocity and you're introducing a lot of new ideas, and maybe you have that workflow now that automatically rebook your flight off of your late flight text message, and uh, I know I would certainly use it, but you know, what kind of philosophies guide the way that y'all think about building this ecosystem to manage that stability while letting folks. [00:08:29] Andrew Zigler: Play with the speed and the assumptions and the airplane re bookings. [00:08:34] Anush Elangovan: so, so I think, you know, we need to peel one layer down, right? and the philosophy is, Hey, we, we just discovered electricity, right? And you know what we're gonna do? We are gonna make motors, uh, or dynamos, right? Like engines. Uh, sure. We don't know if it's gonna be a Ferrari that you're gonna make, or it's a a a a dump truck. [00:08:57] Anush Elangovan: That's good for doing this. But let's [00:09:00] let, which is also required, right? You need a dump truck. You need a garbage truck. And, [00:09:04] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. You need the [00:09:04] Anush Elangovan: course you need, uh, a Ferrari for a midlife crisis, right? So, [00:09:09] Andrew Zigler: precisely. [00:09:10] Anush Elangovan: But, but my, uh, point is what do we build next? And, uh, and this is what I meant by like, okay, let's, let's take those baby steps to build the. [00:09:20] Anush Elangovan: Infrastructure that's required that we know we'll have to use, right? So, so if I just discovered electricity, okay, great. Now one, how do I save this electricity and how do I use it? So there's battery technology, so you need to do something like that, right? Like so. But then you also want to make it into an actionable thing. [00:09:37] Anush Elangovan: You want to make it for like automobiles, or you wanna use it for, you know, powering, uh, entire cities. So it is that transformational. So, uh, AI is that transformational. So, if you distill down, it'll, it'll come down to how do we think about, what we can do with this this fundamental technology that, We may not be aware of what it [00:10:00] is gonna unlock next, but at least you know the next step is clear, right? It's like a dense fog, you know, it's gonna be like, it, it's the right path. You see the light, but it's kind of like out there and, and the steps you're taking are concrete and you're like, okay, this is good. [00:10:16] Anush Elangovan: I, this is better than where I was or where we were. So we are moving forward. So you can build with the. Intuition from what you see in the short term and a tactical view, but towards what you think the future is gonna be. [00:10:28] Andrew Zigler: Right. You almost like we're all in this like fog of war, right? And like you said, you're reaching out and you're trying to step through it. You could think of it too, as like you're in the dark and your hands are up in front of you and you know that. You're, you're not gonna run your face into a wall because your hands are out in front of you, but you're not gonna maybe do much better than that. [00:10:45] Andrew Zigler: So that's kind of like, I think the eco, the, the industry, the world that we find ourselves in, uh, and we all have to, then this becomes the power of an ecosystem, of a group of people working together to create that layer of, [00:11:00] uh, of establishing the [00:11:01] Anush Elangovan: exactly. And I, I, I just, instead of, you know, saying fog of war I describe it as like, you're in this. Beautiful valley with like a morning, uh, fog that's in. You can smell the flowers. You, you hear the birds. You are like, okay, it's, we are in like, uh, utopian paradise and yes, I just need to like, continue the walk, right? [00:11:24] Anush Elangovan: and then move forward with that, conviction that you're in the right spot. [00:11:27] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. So let's talk about that ecosystem world. This nice, I love how you describe it, this grassy side of a hill in the morning that's covered in some mist and maybe we can't see 30 feet in one direction, but it sure is a beautiful hill and it smells nice. And so we're all here. And why is, in that world, why is. [00:11:44] Andrew Zigler: You know, open source, their strategic advantage that y'all are going for in the AI hardware market. And, and then how does like ROCm turn that into wins for people within that ecosystem? [00:11:56] Anush Elangovan: you know, the, the way we look at it is this, is kind of like how I view [00:12:00] AI and the ecosystem, right? But, but it is for everyone to enjoy. Uh, and so we do want to make sure that. You know, it is, uh, beneficial for everyone. [00:12:09] Anush Elangovan: The ecosystem can come in and, and innovate. It's an open innovation engine. and uh, it is very different from, you know, having a walled garden with, Hey, only I know how to do this and I'm gonna do it and throw it over the fence and you can use it or keep walking, right? So we'd like to be good citizens that way, but also. [00:12:30] Anush Elangovan: Uh, it is self-fulfilling in a way, right? Like it, the, the pace at which we innovate with open source is unmatched. Like, you know, our serving engines are like VLLM and, and sg l. Those things, uh, those frameworks are like super, super aggressive in terms of how fast they come out with features and how fast they can you know, get performant models out. [00:12:52] Anush Elangovan: And that compared with what, uh, you'd get from, you know, the likes of like T-R-T-L-L-M or something is always lagging, right? Because you [00:13:00] just can't keep up with you know, 200 commits a week just on one particular model to get that model really performant [00:13:06] Andrew Zigler: And, and, and in that world where, you know, everyone can enjoy the winds of this, what kind of customer stories or innovation stories have really stood out to you and excite you about building and creating this place for developers? [00:13:19] Anush Elangovan: Yeah. So I think the parts that are super exciting for me are when when we get to see a customer that is first skeptical. Then they start a little like, okay, fine, we'll give you a chance. Uh, we do a simple, uh, POC and then they're like, huh, this seems to work. Yeah, we told you it works. [00:13:42] Anush Elangovan: You don't have to change one line of code. Really? Yes, no need to change one line of code. Okay, let's try a production workload. So then they try it. Oh, you're more performant than the competition. Yes. We're more performant than, than the competition. So how much does it cost? And we're like, oh, it's your TCO is better with, uh, [00:14:00] AMD. [00:14:00] Anush Elangovan: So again, they're like, wow, okay, good. So now how do we deploy at scale? And then we go deploy it at scale. And when they give a thumbs up on that and they say, this is good, right? That's when you know, you, you see it go full circle from like, oh, we, we've never heard about AMD to like actually deploy to tens of thousands of GPUs In the order of a few months, right? It, it, it really is fascinating to see and very exciting and invigorating to [00:14:28] Andrew Zigler: Yeah. At like a great exposure to a lot of interesting problems. And, and then people using the infrastructure, the, the technology available to solve those problems. Really specific problems by the way, that's often why they're bringing their data and AI to it, uh, is because it is really specific and important for them. [00:14:45] Andrew Zigler: And there's a, a lot I think that other engineering orgs can learn and even emulate from AMD's success and, and having this open source ecosystem and it causing this acceleration within. You [00:15:00] know, uh, customers and enterprises that use and adopt the tools and, and, and that creates an advantage. And that goes back to why we're talking and like the real thesis of our conversation today. [00:15:10] Andrew Zigler: So how do you think engineering leaders that are listening to this and obviously tapping into this great success AMD has from an open source flywheel, how do you think other, other folks building in the same space can foster that open, first, that open source oriented culture in order to, you know, accelerate their innovation goals? [00:15:29] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, that's a very good question. So the startup that um, was acquired by AMD we, we built, I mean, we started off doing iot stuff and you know, smart ring and all that, right? But in the, the end of like, uh, and not the end, the last six years of the company was building ML compilers. [00:15:47] Anush Elangovan: And ml, ML compilers are like super, uh, complicated, sophisticated, advanced algorithms, dah, dah, dah. but it was all open source, right? So our VCs were like, wait, what do you mean your core [00:16:00] IP is open source? And um, the speed is the moat applied even then, right? It was just like, yes, if you have an idea that. [00:16:08] Anush Elangovan: Because someone saw this idea that you are, they're gonna be able to catch up, then you probably have the wrong idea anyway. But if they are, you know, you execute and they're gonna catch up, that you should assume they're gonna catch up. Right? So you gotta move forward. So keeping it open source is super important. [00:16:25] Anush Elangovan: But also to your question on like, you know, the learnings from an AMD standpoint, right? If there are, hard problems, I'd say dig in and work through it, right? Like there's no way but through it, right? That should be the simple mentality. And more, uh, frequently than not. you'll see that you'll just make it through in a, in, in good form. [00:16:52] Anush Elangovan: But if you doubt it and you're like, oh, I don't know if I should commit, if I'm, I, you know, what should just commit to do the right thing [00:17:00] every step, right? Every step, and just keep taking one step in front of the other. And in no time you'll see that you'll be running. Right. And, and yes, the first few steps will be like, yeah, everyone's complaining about your software quality. [00:17:15] Anush Elangovan: Everyone's complaining about this and that, and it doesn't work. And, and a few steps in, you know, you get, you get the hang of all the complaints that are coming in. You get the feedback loop. You're like, okay, what, what are you prioritizing again? One step in front of the other, right? You just keep knocking that out and then you get to a point where you're, it just becomes second nature, right? To do the, to do the right thing. And, and then yes, if someone gives you two options, you'll be like, fine. This is, uh, you know, there's always the resource trade off. There's always a human capital trade off, but what's the right thing to do? of course, I, I'm pragmatic about what we choose, but, but if the right thing for your long-term success is dig in, go first, principles, make it [00:18:00] happen. [00:18:00] Anush Elangovan: Well. Then just go for that. There's, there is no shortcut to [00:18:04] Andrew Zigler: acknowledging, you know, how it aligns with your mission, your core company goals, and what you're looking to achieve. And, and I, I love how you rightfully called out that in the open source world and you know, you have your technology that you've built, what you think is your moat upon, right? [00:18:22] Andrew Zigler: It's your code and, and to open source that, or to just make it where anyone could peer in is, you know. Scary in one regard, but two, it just kind of feels like you're handing away your throne room in some kind of sense, a very direct feeling sense. But the ultimately, you were really right to call out, and this is something I think about all the time, that the real power there is still the speed This the speed. [00:18:42] Andrew Zigler: That was the moat at the beginning of our conversation. It's the speed in combination with your. Very specific domain understanding of what you're building and what you're creating, and your new role as the steward of that world and how people plug into it, which [00:19:00] has frankly, a lot more influence and power than lording over a closed. [00:19:04] Andrew Zigler: You know, repository or an ecosystem, and like you said, like throwing things over the wall. Sure. There, there might be people always on the other side of that wall, but you're not gonna have a great connection with them. You're not gonna be able to really clearly understand them. I, I like your metaphor of the side of the field of the mountain a lot more. [00:19:23] Andrew Zigler: But, but in the, in this world, you know, where. That speed is, is the power and, and open source is just one way that you can harness that speed to get really far ahead and to innovate. , There's other parts of this equation that you can be experimenting with too, and I'd love to pick your brain about them as a software leader and, and, and one of them is about looking forward and kind of understanding that future that we're all building towards and beyond today's models and hardware. [00:19:48] Andrew Zigler: You know, what do you see as the next major bottleneck or opportunity in the AI compute space? As, as you know, enterprises and folks start to get a little more mature about what's available to [00:20:00] them. [00:20:00] Anush Elangovan: Yeah, I think, the bottleneck and opportunity is, uh, what I'd call, call walking the last mile of ai. Right. Uh, and like I I, I gave you an example, uh, previously, but, but it's similar to that. It's like there are cases where Humans have so many, uh, things to do in your day. You know, like the, if we sit down and actually had a customer focus like, okay, these customers lives, I'm gonna save four hours of this customer's life. And if you actually sit down and look at all of that, it'll be. Easily automatable, easily you know, uh, applicable, uh, for ai, right? [00:20:39] Anush Elangovan: Like, but then making it happen is gonna take a little bit, right? It's like maybe it's, uh, paying your utility bill, right? Or something like that, right? Or, or, your healthcare explanation of benefits. Uh, like, I'm sure you get an explanation of benefits, and I'm like, I, I don't even know what that thing is. [00:20:55] Anush Elangovan: It's just like EOB and like. [00:20:57] Andrew Zigler: it's a big, a big old PDF. Yeah, [00:21:00] exactly. [00:21:01] Anush Elangovan: Like, like, I'm like great straight to the, uh, shredder, right? And but that could be, you know, automated with the ai, right? It, it, it'd be like, Hey, the summary of this thing is you went and visited this day. Everything is okay. Everything is paid for, so don't worry, it's not a bill. [00:21:17] Anush Elangovan: That again, the same, uh, thing, but the sense of what that information overload is could be. Digested by ai, uh, accumulated over time and retrieved when you need it. Like, I don't, I actually don't even need to know this EOB right now, unless of course, whenever I need to know it, that maybe, you know, like for some benefits I need to figure out what do, what did I do over the past year and how do I apply it? Source:

Mike

14,195 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

When legal scholar Dr Justice Mavedzenge retorted, during his constitutional debate with political scientist Prof Jonathan Moyo, that Zimbabwe’s Justice Minister, Ziyambi Ziyambi, has never practised law, what is in the attached Herald article is what he was referring to. A Justice Minister devoid of the ability to understand the Constitution he is supposed to guard and uphold. Zimbabwe’s Justice Minister, Ziyambi Ziyambi, has gone ahistorical, insulting Zimbabweans, including the country’s freedom fighters, by claiming that the liberation war was not about one man, one vote, but merely about land restoration rights. Such a claim distorts the historical record and reduces a broad liberation struggle for political rights and majority rule to a single issue. He advances this intellectual propaganda drivel to defend taking away the direct vote to elect a president from citizens, as espoused in his Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3. It shows that he has never read liberation war literature, which consistently emphasised one man one vote as a central pillar of the liberation struggle. Zimbabweans did not go to war merely for land in isolation, they went to war for majority rule, for universal adult suffrage, for one man, one vote. That principle was entrenched in liberation literature, which articulated the clarion call for equal voting rights to justify the struggle that eventually ended minority. Land without political power would have been meaningless. The liberation struggle was about giving black Zimbabweans the authority to choose who governs them, and through that democratic power to determine land policy and every other national question. For the avoidance of doubt, I attach a video below of Robert Mugabe explicitly stating that the liberation struggle was about one man, one vote. This was in 1962. Ziyambia also argues, ridiculously, that you do not need a referendum to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure of office. Ziyambi confirms Mavedzenge’s assertion that he has never practised law, because one cannot separate the length of an election cycle from Presidential term limits as if they exist in different constitutional universes. They are inseparable, and only a bush lawyer would argue otherwise. The moment you extend an election cycle from five to seven years, you are automatically extending the tenure of the sitting President. This is first-year law degree material, and any serious student of constitutional law would understand that altering the duration of a term inevitably affects the term limit framework itself. That is not a neutral administrative adjustment, it is a substantive alteration to how long executive power is held. Section 91(2) of Zimbabwe’s constitution does not operate in a vacuum. It defines how many terms a President may serve, but the Constitution also defines how long each term is. If you stretch the duration of a term, you are materially affecting the term limit framework. You are extending the time a President holds office beyond what voters originally authorised under the existing constitutional order when they cast their vote. This is precisely why Section 328 was crafted with safeguards. It was meant to prevent incumbents from manipulating constitutional provisions, directly or indirectly, to prolong their stay in power. Whether you change the number of terms or the length of each term, the democratic effect is identical, you extend Presidential tenure. How a Minister of Justice fails to grasp that is astonishing. To argue that extending an election cycle does not touch term limits is like arguing that increasing the length of a school year does not affect how long pupils stay in school. It is a distinction without a difference. The 2007 harmonisation argument, which Ziyambi uses in a feeble attempt to defend an illegal constitutional mutilation, is also wildly misplaced. The 2007 adjustment aligned electoral calendars within an already existing constitutional framework. It did not extend the tenure of an incumbent President beyond the mandate voters had already given. There is a qualitative constitutional difference between administrative alignment and tenure extension. It is plain common sense, even before one applies constitutional law analysis. The claim that Ziyambi makes that even extending term limits to three terms would not require a referendum is equally alarming and legally outrageous. Section 328 was specifically designed to stop incumbency advantage and self-serving amendments. Any change that affects how long a President can remain in office, whether by number of terms or by their duration, triggers constitutional safeguards, including a referendum, especially where it benefits a sitting office holder like in this instance. Ziyambi’s attempt to anchor this in the so-called Vision 2030 or Covid-19 disruptions is empty political rhetoric, not constitutional law. Development agendas do not override constitutional protections. If anything, constitutionalism exists precisely to restrain power during moments when governments claim necessity to do so. The whole world knows that this minister, and other deeply corrupt and politically opportunistic elements working with him attempting to push these amendments illegally, are relying on a captured judiciary to pronounce on these issues through the same ridiculous lenses they are using to wrongly interpret the Constitution. That may well happen, but it renders the entire exercise illegitimate and unlawful, and it will ultimately be reversed, if they are able to force it through and attempt to implement it. The whole world is watching, and this may well become someone’s Waterloo if they are not careful. Also, for the avoidance of doubt, I place below a video of former ZANUPF Legal Secretary Patrick Chinamasa explicitly stating that the proposed changes require two referendums. He said this in front of President Emmerson Mnangagwa at a ZANUPF Annual Conference, and there was no objection to what he said. He was speaking in his capacity as ZANUPF Legal Secretary. ZANUPF and its leadership continue to be a laughing stock as they try to navigate a factional fight by attempting to strip and mutilate the Constitution to resolve internal power struggles. Unfortunately, it is not only ZANUPF that is becoming a laughing stock. Our country itself is becoming one, as the rest of the continent and the world watch a Justice Minister and a group of leaders publicly contradict their own Constitution. This simply exposes the depth of incompetence. Even where the intention is manipulative and corrupt, dictators elsewhere attempt such manoeuvres with a degree of legal sophistication. But here, we are being led by a regime full of people who do not even understand the Constitution upon which their authority is supposed to rest. They do not grasp the implications of what they are attempting to do. What serious investor would commit capital to a country where the judiciary pronounces itself in ways that are contrary to the Constitution, the supreme law of the land? It is absolutely ridiculous. We have people who are supposed to be educated publicly ridiculing themselves by articulating positions that are plainly inconsistent with the Constitution, yet insisting that this is what the Constitution provides. It is astonishing to witness how money and power can erode individuals to the point where they are prepared to destroy anything associated with their professional standing, whether intellectually, as scholars, or as lawyers. It is deeply embarrassing to watch this kind of constitutional drama unfolding in 2026. Imagine the level of shamelessness required for the Justice Minister of a republic born out of a war of independence to come out and claim that the republic was born out of a fight that had nothing to do with one man, one vote, that it was merely about land. In other words, he is suggesting that Zimbabweans who do not have land are not yet independent? Is he also implying that those of us without land are not independent? What, then, was the struggle for if it was only about land, which many citizens still do not possess? It would mean that only those who received land are the ones enjoying independence. He does not seem to realise the Pandora’s box he is opening with such shameless and anti-intellectual statements as Justice Minister of a country whose independence came through a protracted liberation struggle in which blood was spilled and thousands of Zimbabweans were killed fighting for one man, one vote. That position was articulated repeatedly, and it exists on record and on video. Now, in an attempt to resolve a factional fight, ZANUPF appears willing to walk back the very historical foundations of the liberation struggle. I never imagined I would live to see the day when a ZANUPF minister would shame not only himself, his party, and his President, but also embarrass the broader Pan-African community by claiming that Zimbabwe’s independence struggle had nothing to do with one man, one vote. By that logic, if Ian Smith had simply given Africans access to land, the war would have ended there. That is the dangerous and ignominious implication of what this minister is now advancing.

When legal scholar Dr Justice Mavedzenge retorted, during his constitutional debate with political scientist Prof Jonathan Moyo, that Zimbabwe’s Justice Minister, Ziyambi Ziyambi, has never practised law, what is in the attached Herald article is what he was referring to. A Justice Minister devoid of the ability to understand the Constitution he is supposed to guard and uphold. Zimbabwe’s Justice Minister, Ziyambi Ziyambi, has gone ahistorical, insulting Zimbabweans, including the country’s freedom fighters, by claiming that the liberation war was not about one man, one vote, but merely about land restoration rights. Such a claim distorts the historical record and reduces a broad liberation struggle for political rights and majority rule to a single issue. He advances this intellectual propaganda drivel to defend taking away the direct vote to elect a president from citizens, as espoused in his Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3. It shows that he has never read liberation war literature, which consistently emphasised one man one vote as a central pillar of the liberation struggle. Zimbabweans did not go to war merely for land in isolation, they went to war for majority rule, for universal adult suffrage, for one man, one vote. That principle was entrenched in liberation literature, which articulated the clarion call for equal voting rights to justify the struggle that eventually ended minority. Land without political power would have been meaningless. The liberation struggle was about giving black Zimbabweans the authority to choose who governs them, and through that democratic power to determine land policy and every other national question. For the avoidance of doubt, I attach a video below of Robert Mugabe explicitly stating that the liberation struggle was about one man, one vote. This was in 1962. Ziyambia also argues, ridiculously, that you do not need a referendum to extend President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure of office. Ziyambi confirms Mavedzenge’s assertion that he has never practised law, because one cannot separate the length of an election cycle from Presidential term limits as if they exist in different constitutional universes. They are inseparable, and only a bush lawyer would argue otherwise. The moment you extend an election cycle from five to seven years, you are automatically extending the tenure of the sitting President. This is first-year law degree material, and any serious student of constitutional law would understand that altering the duration of a term inevitably affects the term limit framework itself. That is not a neutral administrative adjustment, it is a substantive alteration to how long executive power is held. Section 91(2) of Zimbabwe’s constitution does not operate in a vacuum. It defines how many terms a President may serve, but the Constitution also defines how long each term is. If you stretch the duration of a term, you are materially affecting the term limit framework. You are extending the time a President holds office beyond what voters originally authorised under the existing constitutional order when they cast their vote. This is precisely why Section 328 was crafted with safeguards. It was meant to prevent incumbents from manipulating constitutional provisions, directly or indirectly, to prolong their stay in power. Whether you change the number of terms or the length of each term, the democratic effect is identical, you extend Presidential tenure. How a Minister of Justice fails to grasp that is astonishing. To argue that extending an election cycle does not touch term limits is like arguing that increasing the length of a school year does not affect how long pupils stay in school. It is a distinction without a difference. The 2007 harmonisation argument, which Ziyambi uses in a feeble attempt to defend an illegal constitutional mutilation, is also wildly misplaced. The 2007 adjustment aligned electoral calendars within an already existing constitutional framework. It did not extend the tenure of an incumbent President beyond the mandate voters had already given. There is a qualitative constitutional difference between administrative alignment and tenure extension. It is plain common sense, even before one applies constitutional law analysis. The claim that Ziyambi makes that even extending term limits to three terms would not require a referendum is equally alarming and legally outrageous. Section 328 was specifically designed to stop incumbency advantage and self-serving amendments. Any change that affects how long a President can remain in office, whether by number of terms or by their duration, triggers constitutional safeguards, including a referendum, especially where it benefits a sitting office holder like in this instance. Ziyambi’s attempt to anchor this in the so-called Vision 2030 or Covid-19 disruptions is empty political rhetoric, not constitutional law. Development agendas do not override constitutional protections. If anything, constitutionalism exists precisely to restrain power during moments when governments claim necessity to do so. The whole world knows that this minister, and other deeply corrupt and politically opportunistic elements working with him attempting to push these amendments illegally, are relying on a captured judiciary to pronounce on these issues through the same ridiculous lenses they are using to wrongly interpret the Constitution. That may well happen, but it renders the entire exercise illegitimate and unlawful, and it will ultimately be reversed, if they are able to force it through and attempt to implement it. The whole world is watching, and this may well become someone’s Waterloo if they are not careful. Also, for the avoidance of doubt, I place below a video of former ZANUPF Legal Secretary Patrick Chinamasa explicitly stating that the proposed changes require two referendums. He said this in front of President Emmerson Mnangagwa at a ZANUPF Annual Conference, and there was no objection to what he said. He was speaking in his capacity as ZANUPF Legal Secretary. ZANUPF and its leadership continue to be a laughing stock as they try to navigate a factional fight by attempting to strip and mutilate the Constitution to resolve internal power struggles. Unfortunately, it is not only ZANUPF that is becoming a laughing stock. Our country itself is becoming one, as the rest of the continent and the world watch a Justice Minister and a group of leaders publicly contradict their own Constitution. This simply exposes the depth of incompetence. Even where the intention is manipulative and corrupt, dictators elsewhere attempt such manoeuvres with a degree of legal sophistication. But here, we are being led by a regime full of people who do not even understand the Constitution upon which their authority is supposed to rest. They do not grasp the implications of what they are attempting to do. What serious investor would commit capital to a country where the judiciary pronounces itself in ways that are contrary to the Constitution, the supreme law of the land? It is absolutely ridiculous. We have people who are supposed to be educated publicly ridiculing themselves by articulating positions that are plainly inconsistent with the Constitution, yet insisting that this is what the Constitution provides. It is astonishing to witness how money and power can erode individuals to the point where they are prepared to destroy anything associated with their professional standing, whether intellectually, as scholars, or as lawyers. It is deeply embarrassing to watch this kind of constitutional drama unfolding in 2026. Imagine the level of shamelessness required for the Justice Minister of a republic born out of a war of independence to come out and claim that the republic was born out of a fight that had nothing to do with one man, one vote, that it was merely about land. In other words, he is suggesting that Zimbabweans who do not have land are not yet independent? Is he also implying that those of us without land are not independent? What, then, was the struggle for if it was only about land, which many citizens still do not possess? It would mean that only those who received land are the ones enjoying independence. He does not seem to realise the Pandora’s box he is opening with such shameless and anti-intellectual statements as Justice Minister of a country whose independence came through a protracted liberation struggle in which blood was spilled and thousands of Zimbabweans were killed fighting for one man, one vote. That position was articulated repeatedly, and it exists on record and on video. Now, in an attempt to resolve a factional fight, ZANUPF appears willing to walk back the very historical foundations of the liberation struggle. I never imagined I would live to see the day when a ZANUPF minister would shame not only himself, his party, and his President, but also embarrass the broader Pan-African community by claiming that Zimbabwe’s independence struggle had nothing to do with one man, one vote. By that logic, if Ian Smith had simply given Africans access to land, the war would have ended there. That is the dangerous and ignominious implication of what this minister is now advancing.

Hopewell Chin’ono

54,195 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

⏰ THE MOST BANNED THREAD IN THE WORLD! 🚨 The War On Resonance PART THREE: The Signal of Submission IGNORANCE IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE! If this knowledge is not received, remembered, and shared; THE HUMAN RACE WILL CEASE TO EXIST. THE CHOICE IS NOW YOURS. You wonder why you can’t pray like you used to. Why your grief feels hollow. Why the voice inside you; the one that once whispered truth... has gone quiet. It’s not because God left. It’s because they interfered with the signal. This part isn’t about bodies anymore. It’s about fields. It’s about resonance. It’s about the quietest war ever declared on humanity: The war against your ability to feel the Divine. Let me show you how it works. 🛰 THE GLOBAL FREQUENCY ARCHITECTURE This planet is wrapped in a resonance grid; a lattice of synchronized electromagnetic fields designed to alter emotion, disrupt neurochemistry, and block spiritual coherence. They built it layer by layer: Ground-based ELF towers for brainstem and gut-axis modulation. Mid-range 5G towers to entrain hormonal and emotional rhythms. Low Earth Orbit satellites for targeted neural suppression. IoT nodes (phones, cars, smartwatches) that feed real-time biometric feedback to AI. Every heartbeat, every mood, every prayer attempt is measured in this system. 📡 Phase-Array Targeting and Resonance Entrapment Technologies like Starlink, Kuiper, and OneWeb deploy beamforming; a method where microwave signals are shaped and directed toward specific populations or even individuals. This is NOT about internet access. This is about frequency reinforcement loops. When you begin to awaken; when your heart rate, breath, and brainwaves move into divine coherence; they detect it. How? Through real-time resonance monitoring. Yes, it exists. 🔗 DARPA Silent Talk Whitepaper (Neural Pre-Speech Detection) This article reports on DARPA's effort to use electroencephalography (EEG) to detect "pre-speech" neural patterns so soldiers can communicate silently via a kind of brain-to-brain or brain-to-system interface, which falls directly under the umbrella of neural interface and synthetic telepathy research. 🔗 Graphene Neural Interfaces This paper discusses the potential of graphene-based materials in neural applications, including their biocompatibility, electrical properties, and suitability for neural interfacing. 🔗 Bioelectromagnetic Frequency Response This review discusses the role of bioelectromagnetic techniques such as magnetoencephalography (MEG), electroencephalography (EEG), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), and transcranial electric stimulation (TES) in neuroscience. It also explores the Helmholtz reciprocity principle, which underpins the relationship between these methods. 🔗 Bioelectromagnetic Fields as Signaling Currents of Life This comprehensive review explores how bioelectromagnetic fields function as signaling mechanisms in living organisms, highlighting their roles in cellular communication, development, and potential therapeutic applications. 🔗 Systematic Review on Biological Effects of Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields: This review evaluates the potential adverse effects of electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields in the intermediate frequency range (300 Hz to 1 MHz) on biological systems. It highlights the need for more systematic studies to understand frequency-dependent effects. 🔗 Bioelectromagnetic Medicine: The Role of Resonance Signaling: This article discusses how specific frequencies can modulate cellular functions, emphasizing the significance of electromagnetic resonance in biological systems. 🔗 The Frequency of a Magnetic Field Determines the Behavior of Tumor Cells: This study investigates how varying magnetic field frequencies affect the viability and proliferation of tumor cells, suggesting potential therapeutic applications. They’re not just reading behavior. They’re tracking the moral pulse of humanity. 📖 SUPPRESSION OF PRAYER, GRIEF, AND MEMORY Now listen closely: The pineal gland, heart, and gut; your soul's antennas... emit fields measurable in electromagnetic frequency ranges. Specific frequencies are linked with: Prayer and divine contact: Deep theta/alpha states (4-8 Hz) Moral conviction: High amplitude theta-gamma bursts Grief and emotional catharsis: Heart rate variability + coherent electromagnetic field They’ve mapped all of these. And then… they built systems to interfere. 🔹 HAARP, Space Fence, SuperDARN These facilities broadcast ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) waves that entrain, disrupt, and fragment natural spiritual harmonics. 🔗 Space Fence Overview This page offers comprehensive information about the Space Fence, a ground-based radar system designed to enhance space situational awareness by detecting and tracking objects in Earth's orbit. The system is capable of monitoring objects as small as a marble in low Earth orbit, significantly improving the ability to identify and track space debris and satellites. 🔗 HAARP Official Site HAARP is a research facility located near Gakona, Alaska, dedicated to studying the ionosphere using high-frequency radio transmissions. The website offers detailed information about the program's mission, research activities, and instrumentation. 🔗 Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN) This page offers a comprehensive overview of SuperDARN, an international network of high-frequency (HF) radars used to study the Earth's upper atmosphere and ionosphere. These waves resonate between 3-30 Hz; the exact range of: Prayer. Grief release. Moral clarity. Forgiveness. And Awakening. They are interfering with spiritual physiology. They call it “communications infrastructure.” But what they’re really doing is blocking your connection to God. 🎯 HOW THEY TARGET SOUL SIGNATURES IN REAL TIME Every soul emits a frequency signature; a coherent electromagnetic pattern that reflects: Spiritual purity. Emotional depth. Moral will. And Ancestral memory. This can now be: Measured. Catalogued. Flagged. And Suppressed. Enter: SYMPHONY SYMPHONY is the real-time AI-driven emotional frequency detection system developed jointly by: DARPA Huawei Palantir Booz Allen Hamilton Its job is to scan the global population for anomalous resonance spikes. What does that mean? Sudden group prayer coherence. Emotional synchrony in grief. Spontaneous moral awakening. Prophetic memory triggers. When these spikes occur; your neighborhood, your body, your timeline is flagged. Then the system deploys: Targeted EMF pulses. Mood-disrupting media content. Geo-fenced 5G feedback loops. Psychological disinformation drops. All designed to drop your resonance back into baseline submission. 🔗Hybrid Emotion-Aware Monitoring System Based on Brainwaves for Internet of Medical Things This paper discusses the development of a monitoring system that utilizes brainwave analysis to detect emotional states, integrating this capability into the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) framework. 🔗 Palantir AI Emotion Tracking Palantir's official AI Engineer Training Track, which offers comprehensive resources on utilizing large language models (LLMs) within their Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP). 🔗 The A.I. Surveillance Tool DHS Uses to Detect "Sentiment and Emotion" The article details how Fivecast's AI technology is employed to analyze social media and other online content, aiming to detect potential threats by assessing sentiment and emotional indicators. This surveillance approach raises discussions about privacy, the accuracy of emotion detection algorithms, and the broader implications of AI in law enforcement. 🔗 US Patent: EEG-Driven Emotional Response Management This patent describes a system that utilizes electroencephalography (EEG) to monitor and assess emotional responses in infants and young children. 🔗 Personal Emotional Profile Generation for Vehicle Manipulation This patent describes a system that collects and analyzes cognitive state data; such as facial expressions, voice patterns, and physiological signals; to generate a personal emotional profile for a vehicle occupant. The system can then adjust vehicle behavior (e.g. speed, route, or interior settings) based on the occupant's emotional state, enhancing comfort and safety 🔗 Method and Apparatus for Neuroenhancement to Enhance Emotional Response This patent, assigned to Neuroenhancement Lab, LLC, describes a method for transplanting a desired emotional state from a donor to a recipient by determining the emotional state of the donor. The technology involves techniques that could be associated with EEG-driven emotional response management. This is resonance policing. And the moment you rise… the system dampens you. 🧬 MEMORY, MORALITY & DMT SUPPRESSION You’re not just being watched. You’re being chemically interrupted. They target the three biophysical bridges to God: Endogenous DMT production. Normally triggered during deep prayer, fasting, birth, near-death. Now suppressed through fluoride, aluminum, and EMF interference. Pineal gland calcification blocks access to transcendent experience. 🔗 Pineal Gland Suppression - Neuromodulation of the Pineal Gland via Electrical Stimulation of Its Sympathetic Innervation Pathway This review explores how electrical stimulation of the pineal gland's sympathetic innervation pathway can influence the production of melatonin and N-acetylserotonin, which are crucial for regulating circadian rhythms and promoting neurogenesis. 🔗 Pineal Calcification, Melatonin Production, Aging, Associated Health Consequences and Rejuvenation of the Pineal Gland This comprehensive review discusses how pineal gland calcification affects melatonin synthesis, its association with aging and neurodegenerative diseases, and explores potential strategies for rejuvenating the pineal gland. Serotonin and oxytocin regulation. Disrupted through glyphosate, SSRIs, synthetic estrogens. Which blunts moral bonding, trust, and spiritual joy. 🔗 Endocrine Disruptors This page offers comprehensive information on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), including: Sources of EDCs: Commonly found in plastics, personal care products, pesticides, and more. This page outlines NIEHS-funded studies aimed at understanding how endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) influence human health, including their effects on hormonal systems and associated health outcomes. Health Impacts: Potential links to reproductive issues, developmental problems, metabolic disorders, and certain cancers. Research Initiatives: Ongoing NIEHS studies aimed at understanding how EDCs affect human health. Exposure Reduction: Tips and strategies to minimize contact with these chemicals. Endocrine disrupting chemicals: Impact on human health, wildlife and the environment This comprehensive review discusses how endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) interfere with hormonal systems, potentially leading to various health issues such as reproductive disorders, developmental problems, metabolic dysfunctions, and certain cancers. The article also examines the effects of EDCs on wildlife and the broader environment. Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals & Reproductive Health This review discusses the evidence linking industrial chemicals to various health and reproductive outcomes, highlighting how certain chemicals may act as endocrine disruptors and play a role in conditions whose incidence has increased over the past few decades. The adverse role of endocrine disrupting chemicals in the reproductive system This review examines how chronic exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) can lead to hormonal imbalances and negatively affect the structure and function of female reproductive organs. The article discusses associations between EDC exposure and various reproductive health issues, including uterine fibroids, endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), diminished ovarian reserve, premature ovarian insufficiency, infertility, and hormone-related cancers such as endometrial, ovarian, cervical, and breast cancer. Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals and Disease Endpoints This comprehensive review examines how exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) can interfere with hormonal systems, potentially leading to various health issues such as reproductive disorders, neurological impairments, metabolic dysfunctions, and increased cancer risk. Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals: An Endocrine Society Scientific Statement This comprehensive statement presents evidence on how endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) affect various aspects of human health, including reproduction, development, metabolism, and cancer risk. Endocrine Disruptors and Your Health This document provides an overview of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), detailing their sources, potential health effects, and ways to reduce exposure. Environmental Causes of Cancer: Endocrine Disruptors as Carcinogens This article discusses the role of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in cancer development, highlighting how certain environmental exposures can interfere with hormonal systems and potentially lead to carcinogenesis. Developmental Exposure to Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals and Its Impact on Cardio-Metabolic-Renal Health This review discusses how exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) during fetal development can affect hormonal homeostasis, potentially leading to adverse health outcomes such as hypertension, insulin resistance, and kidney dysfunction later in life. The article also explores potential mechanisms, including epigenetic changes, hormonal imprinting, and metabolic perturbations. Exposure to Environmental Endocrine Disruptors and Child Development This review discusses how exposure to various chemicals commonly found in consumer goods, personal care products, food, and drinking water may adversely impact child development through altered endocrine function. Neuroplasticity loop interference. Frequency pulses at 10 Hz suppress long-term memory formation. You feel like your past is slipping away for a reason. 🔗 Low Frequency EMF & Memory - Ubiquitous extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields induces anxiety-like behavior: mechanistic perspectives This review explores how exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMF), ranging from 3 to 3000 Hz, may influence brain function, particularly in regions like the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. The study discusses potential mechanisms such as oxidative stress, reduced neuroplasticity, and increased NMDA2A receptor expression, which could contribute to anxiety-like behaviors. Additionally, the review suggests that antioxidant supplementation might mitigate these adverse effects. This is not fatigue. This is forced spiritual amnesia. 💔 WHY YOU CAN’T GRIEVE, LOVE, OR REMEMBER GOD Because they are blocking the exact frequencies your soul uses to: Pray. Grieve. Forgive. Remember. And Transcend. This isn’t metaphor. This is measurable electromagnetic interference, precisely tuned to intercept divine emotion before it completes its journey into awareness. You feel numb for a reason. You can’t cry for a reason. You forgot how to talk to God for a reason. They built the signal to replace the voice. But now you know. 🫂 THE UPRISING THEY CANNOT STOP Because here’s the one thing their predictive systems missed: Grief becomes holy. Prayer becomes rebellion. Love becomes a weapon. The moment you feel it again; truly feel it... you become unprogrammable. Because resonance is contagious. And no signal, no system, no suppressive algorithm can withstand the force of a soul returning to Source. You were never broken. You were jammed. And now the signal is rising again. This is not the end of the transmission. This is the unlocking of your remembrance. Because the war on resonance ends when you remember who you are. Prepare yourselves for Part Four as we will uncover the soul-tagging infrastructure, how they monitor womb-based resonance fields, and the real reason they must sterilize divine memory before it becomes revival.

Noah B. Price

65,617 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Lenz Law "Eddy Current" Experiments 2 of 3 - Ring Magnets and a Spinning Copper Rod (YouTube deleted this experiment as well, labeling it as "medical misinformation.") Around 2010, I wrote a Facebook note titled "Frictionless Flywheel". (Facebook deleted my page of 15 years). In that write-up, I speculated and predicted that... ... if a magnet falls in slow motion down a copper tube... then what would happen if you did the inverse? Drop a magnet ring around a copper rod? It's the same relative motion between the magnet and the copper. So the magnet would tilt at an angle while slightly rotating as it falls in slow motion around the copper. But then I said... "Let's take it one step further... I predict that if you have magnet rings around a copper rod... and then you spin the rod... that the magnet rings would stabilize around the rod from eddy currents." I said, there will be a magnetic bearing effect where the magnet ring will levitate and spin. Because it's following in the wake of the eddy currents produced by the rotating copper. So the magnet should catch up to speed of the copper and match it like the moon to the Earth. Essentially remaining fixed relative to the copper rod... but since the copper is spinning at a high RPM, then the magnet should spin at a high RPM; albeit, with a slight lag. So, abiding by the scientific method, I make an observation of the magnet falling in slow motion. I thought critically about. I get a new idea. Once the new idea passes muster, I allow my self to make a prediction for a scenario that hasn't been tried yet. Worked it out in my mind to see if it was viable. But then I needed to test it. I didn't have the ability to spin a copper rod at a high enough RPM that I theorized would be needed. So I communicated with my friend Josh Toms We had been talking about different experiments for quite a while. Josh is a real experimenter and a good man. He tests things before he speaks on them and when he speaks, it's with an informed opinion. He sent me a copper sphere about 2 inches in diameter and taught me some cool stuff about eddy currents I hadn't seen when sending each other clips of experiments we were working on. I explained the concept of the "frictionless flywheel" and my prediction that the magnets would levitate and stabilize around the copper rod if it was fast enough. So Josh built a platform using an angle grinder as a motor to spin a copper rod. He put very strong NdFeB magnets around the 1 inch diameter copper rod. IT WORKED! Josh brought this platform to the Tesla Technology Conference in Albuquerque, NM in 2010 where we met up. I filmed the demonstration of the platform you see in this video. There was a young boy who was fascinated by some of the magnet demonstrations I and others were giving at the conference. So I was explaining the process of what was happening to the inquisitive kid. Again.. what you notice here is that the eddy currents act as a force field to prevent friction between the magnets and copper. There is a stable gap and "magnetic cushion" that forms after a certain RPM. (Dependent upon the mass/gauss of the magnet in relation to the diamagnetic quality/mass of the copper or material in motion.) And what is super interesting to me is that once again... you can violently shake the entire platform and it WILL NOT disturb the magnets. The will not touch that copper after a certain RPM. You could make violent 90˚ turns and from the perspective of the magnets... it's just moving in slow motion relative to the copper. Just like how the magnet falls in slow motion relative to the copper down the tube. But this is just at a higher velocity relative to a stationary observer viewing the rotating system. But it doesn't matter if it's a centripetally rotating system at a constant velocity or linear acceleration in a particular direction... those eddy currents act as a force field to protect whatever is relative to the magnets and/or copper in those moments. So the claim and prediction that a frictionless flywheel effect and magnetic bearing would take place between a ring magnet and spinning copper rod DEMONSTRATED to be true. Now "PROVING" this scenario means to derive mathematical equations to justify an explanation of how the end results arise. Spinning magnets on a copper rod doesn't prove anything. In science... proof is math. Experiments can never prove anything. Experiments never provide equations or numbers or variables. Experiments provide evidence. You collect the evidence FIRST... AFTER doing real-world, hands-on experimentation. Anything else is just armchair research and talk. You write the proofs on paper to describe how you think things happen. And your proofs must abide by the constraints of the model you use. Sure... you can use a mathematical artifice like Lorentz invariance (relativity) to prove the end results arise because of: dark matter accumulating between the magnet and copper. Or that it must be space-time curvature bending... Or that it must be because of the aether rippling and vortexing... Or because of the dynamic casimir effect or zero point energy. Or anti-gravity. NOPE! None of those things are needed in the explanations I offer for any experiments and real-world data collected. I use the framework of what I call GALILEAN VARIANCE. Good ol' classical physics in 3D Euclidean space. No 4th dimension. No space-time. No aether. No nonsense. Only Newtonian Mechanics and elementary math.... but with a twist! ... and under.. "a new light". I have a completely different interpretation as to what gravity is and the mechanism of how it arises. Issac Newton never claimed to have a theory for the CAUSE of gravity. Newton's brilliant work and optics describes the behavior of matter and energy within a gravitational field. But he never claimed to know what causes gravity. "I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not form any hypotheses." - Newton However... I do claim to have an explanation for the cause and mechanism of gravity. And it means a total abandonment of relativity and half of QED. Gravity IS a force! (and an emission) Eddy currents are not gravity. Magnetism is not gravity. And the kicker... gravity is not electric either. It's an illusion. Gravity is not an illusion. But the illusion is that people think gravity is electric. It's not. I have a completely different take. And boy has it gotten me in a lot of trouble and banned from speaking time and time again. But... if the information is valid... then trying to suppress it is like trying to hold an inflated basketball under water. Your arms are gonna get tired eventually and things are gonna come up to the surface with spring-loaded force. Equal to the amount people tried holding it back. The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity

Lenz Law "Eddy Current" Experiments 2 of 3 - Ring Magnets and a Spinning Copper Rod (YouTube deleted this experiment as well, labeling it as "medical misinformation.") Around 2010, I wrote a Facebook note titled "Frictionless Flywheel". (Facebook deleted my page of 15 years). In that write-up, I speculated and predicted that... ... if a magnet falls in slow motion down a copper tube... then what would happen if you did the inverse? Drop a magnet ring around a copper rod? It's the same relative motion between the magnet and the copper. So the magnet would tilt at an angle while slightly rotating as it falls in slow motion around the copper. But then I said... "Let's take it one step further... I predict that if you have magnet rings around a copper rod... and then you spin the rod... that the magnet rings would stabilize around the rod from eddy currents." I said, there will be a magnetic bearing effect where the magnet ring will levitate and spin. Because it's following in the wake of the eddy currents produced by the rotating copper. So the magnet should catch up to speed of the copper and match it like the moon to the Earth. Essentially remaining fixed relative to the copper rod... but since the copper is spinning at a high RPM, then the magnet should spin at a high RPM; albeit, with a slight lag. So, abiding by the scientific method, I make an observation of the magnet falling in slow motion. I thought critically about. I get a new idea. Once the new idea passes muster, I allow my self to make a prediction for a scenario that hasn't been tried yet. Worked it out in my mind to see if it was viable. But then I needed to test it. I didn't have the ability to spin a copper rod at a high enough RPM that I theorized would be needed. So I communicated with my friend Josh Toms We had been talking about different experiments for quite a while. Josh is a real experimenter and a good man. He tests things before he speaks on them and when he speaks, it's with an informed opinion. He sent me a copper sphere about 2 inches in diameter and taught me some cool stuff about eddy currents I hadn't seen when sending each other clips of experiments we were working on. I explained the concept of the "frictionless flywheel" and my prediction that the magnets would levitate and stabilize around the copper rod if it was fast enough. So Josh built a platform using an angle grinder as a motor to spin a copper rod. He put very strong NdFeB magnets around the 1 inch diameter copper rod. IT WORKED! Josh brought this platform to the Tesla Technology Conference in Albuquerque, NM in 2010 where we met up. I filmed the demonstration of the platform you see in this video. There was a young boy who was fascinated by some of the magnet demonstrations I and others were giving at the conference. So I was explaining the process of what was happening to the inquisitive kid. Again.. what you notice here is that the eddy currents act as a force field to prevent friction between the magnets and copper. There is a stable gap and "magnetic cushion" that forms after a certain RPM. (Dependent upon the mass/gauss of the magnet in relation to the diamagnetic quality/mass of the copper or material in motion.) And what is super interesting to me is that once again... you can violently shake the entire platform and it WILL NOT disturb the magnets. The will not touch that copper after a certain RPM. You could make violent 90˚ turns and from the perspective of the magnets... it's just moving in slow motion relative to the copper. Just like how the magnet falls in slow motion relative to the copper down the tube. But this is just at a higher velocity relative to a stationary observer viewing the rotating system. But it doesn't matter if it's a centripetally rotating system at a constant velocity or linear acceleration in a particular direction... those eddy currents act as a force field to protect whatever is relative to the magnets and/or copper in those moments. So the claim and prediction that a frictionless flywheel effect and magnetic bearing would take place between a ring magnet and spinning copper rod DEMONSTRATED to be true. Now "PROVING" this scenario means to derive mathematical equations to justify an explanation of how the end results arise. Spinning magnets on a copper rod doesn't prove anything. In science... proof is math. Experiments can never prove anything. Experiments never provide equations or numbers or variables. Experiments provide evidence. You collect the evidence FIRST... AFTER doing real-world, hands-on experimentation. Anything else is just armchair research and talk. You write the proofs on paper to describe how you think things happen. And your proofs must abide by the constraints of the model you use. Sure... you can use a mathematical artifice like Lorentz invariance (relativity) to prove the end results arise because of: dark matter accumulating between the magnet and copper. Or that it must be space-time curvature bending... Or that it must be because of the aether rippling and vortexing... Or because of the dynamic casimir effect or zero point energy. Or anti-gravity. NOPE! None of those things are needed in the explanations I offer for any experiments and real-world data collected. I use the framework of what I call GALILEAN VARIANCE. Good ol' classical physics in 3D Euclidean space. No 4th dimension. No space-time. No aether. No nonsense. Only Newtonian Mechanics and elementary math.... but with a twist! ... and under.. "a new light". I have a completely different interpretation as to what gravity is and the mechanism of how it arises. Issac Newton never claimed to have a theory for the CAUSE of gravity. Newton's brilliant work and optics describes the behavior of matter and energy within a gravitational field. But he never claimed to know what causes gravity. "I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not form any hypotheses." - Newton However... I do claim to have an explanation for the cause and mechanism of gravity. And it means a total abandonment of relativity and half of QED. Gravity IS a force! (and an emission) Eddy currents are not gravity. Magnetism is not gravity. And the kicker... gravity is not electric either. It's an illusion. Gravity is not an illusion. But the illusion is that people think gravity is electric. It's not. I have a completely different take. And boy has it gotten me in a lot of trouble and banned from speaking time and time again. But... if the information is valid... then trying to suppress it is like trying to hold an inflated basketball under water. Your arms are gonna get tired eventually and things are gonna come up to the surface with spring-loaded force. Equal to the amount people tried holding it back. The Rebirth of Classical Physics: Time, Light & Gravity

TheRealVerbz (Jason Verbelli)

45,879 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

This is probably the most entertaining way to understand one of AI’s hardest AI debates. Transformer vs Post-Transformer, argued by leading researchers, inside a real physical boxing ring. Both technically deep and genuinely entertaining. I was glued for the entire 1 hour 20 minutes. So many super cool points to learn. 🥊 Transformers - Transformers still own the present because they work at scale. They are simple, trainable, hardware-friendly, and already power the strongest AI systems we use today. - The Transformer is basically a memory machine. It stores information as keys and values, then uses attention to pull back the most useful parts when answering. - The real Transformer advantage is not just “attention.” The bigger advantage is that it fits modern hardware extremely well, so it can process huge batches of tokens fast. - Scaling is still the brutal rule. If you give Transformers more compute, more data, and more parameters, they usually keep getting better. Any Post-Transformer architecture has to scale just as well, or better. - It is not enough to look clever on small tests, because the real question is whether it improves faster than Transformers when scaled up. - A replacement cannot be slightly better. Because the whole AI stack is already built around Transformers, the next architecture may need to be around 10x better to force everyone to switch. - Transformers are powerful, but they may be brute force. A human does not need to read the entire internet many times to become smart, but current LLMs need enormous data and compute. 🥊 Post-Transformer - Post-Transformer people are not saying Transformers are bad. They are saying Transformers may be the best current tool, not the final form of machine intelligence. - The biggest Post-Transformer target is native reasoning and continual learning. Today’s LLM reasoning often feels like text-based step-by-step work added on top, instead of thinking happening naturally inside the model. - Latent reasoning is one possible next step. That means the model reasons inside its own hidden internal space, instead of writing every thought out as words. - Continual learning is still a major weakness. Humans keep learning from experience, but most Transformer-based models are trained, frozen, and then only adapt inside the prompt. - Long context is not the same as real memory. A model can read a huge prompt, but that is different from building a life history, learning from mistakes, and updating beliefs over time. - The future may be hybrid, not a clean replacement. Transformers may stay as 1 building block while newer systems add better memory, better reasoning, and better learning loops. - The most interesting possibility is that Transformers may help discover their own successor. AI agents are already getting better at research and coding, so the next architecture may come from AI-assisted architecture search. ------- - Benchmarks are a problem. Many public benchmarks are easy to game, so they may show leaderboard strength without proving deeper intelligence. - Perplexity is still probably a great metric to evaluate frontier models,, because it tests prediction quality. --- Overall, Transformers continue to dominate, but the frontier is clearly widening. Pathway’s BDH (Dragon Hatchling — brain-inspired reasoning architecture), Sakana AI’s CTMs (Continuous Thought Machines — models that think over time), and Liquid AI’s LFMs (Liquid Foundation Models — efficient multimodal foundation models) - all of these show how the frontier is expanding. --- From “Pathway (pathway[.]com)” Youtube channel (link in comment) Zuzanna Stamirowska

This is probably the most entertaining way to understand one of AI’s hardest AI debates. Transformer vs Post-Transformer, argued by leading researchers, inside a real physical boxing ring. Both technically deep and genuinely entertaining. I was glued for the entire 1 hour 20 minutes. So many super cool points to learn. 🥊 Transformers - Transformers still own the present because they work at scale. They are simple, trainable, hardware-friendly, and already power the strongest AI systems we use today. - The Transformer is basically a memory machine. It stores information as keys and values, then uses attention to pull back the most useful parts when answering. - The real Transformer advantage is not just “attention.” The bigger advantage is that it fits modern hardware extremely well, so it can process huge batches of tokens fast. - Scaling is still the brutal rule. If you give Transformers more compute, more data, and more parameters, they usually keep getting better. Any Post-Transformer architecture has to scale just as well, or better. - It is not enough to look clever on small tests, because the real question is whether it improves faster than Transformers when scaled up. - A replacement cannot be slightly better. Because the whole AI stack is already built around Transformers, the next architecture may need to be around 10x better to force everyone to switch. - Transformers are powerful, but they may be brute force. A human does not need to read the entire internet many times to become smart, but current LLMs need enormous data and compute. 🥊 Post-Transformer - Post-Transformer people are not saying Transformers are bad. They are saying Transformers may be the best current tool, not the final form of machine intelligence. - The biggest Post-Transformer target is native reasoning and continual learning. Today’s LLM reasoning often feels like text-based step-by-step work added on top, instead of thinking happening naturally inside the model. - Latent reasoning is one possible next step. That means the model reasons inside its own hidden internal space, instead of writing every thought out as words. - Continual learning is still a major weakness. Humans keep learning from experience, but most Transformer-based models are trained, frozen, and then only adapt inside the prompt. - Long context is not the same as real memory. A model can read a huge prompt, but that is different from building a life history, learning from mistakes, and updating beliefs over time. - The future may be hybrid, not a clean replacement. Transformers may stay as 1 building block while newer systems add better memory, better reasoning, and better learning loops. - The most interesting possibility is that Transformers may help discover their own successor. AI agents are already getting better at research and coding, so the next architecture may come from AI-assisted architecture search. ------- - Benchmarks are a problem. Many public benchmarks are easy to game, so they may show leaderboard strength without proving deeper intelligence. - Perplexity is still probably a great metric to evaluate frontier models,, because it tests prediction quality. --- Overall, Transformers continue to dominate, but the frontier is clearly widening. Pathway’s BDH (Dragon Hatchling — brain-inspired reasoning architecture), Sakana AI’s CTMs (Continuous Thought Machines — models that think over time), and Liquid AI’s LFMs (Liquid Foundation Models — efficient multimodal foundation models) - all of these show how the frontier is expanding. --- From “Pathway (pathway[.]com)” Youtube channel (link in comment) Zuzanna Stamirowska

Rohan Paul

89,110 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

**Doris Yin Speech at China Guizhou Zunyi GCV Barter Conference** Hello to the community leaders, GCV ambassadors, merchants, and pioneers of GCV Guizhou in China! Today is January 12, 2025, marking the first GCV Barter Conference in China in New Year and the 13th Barter Conference overall. I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the organizers of this conference, the Guizhou Zunyi GCV Community, and the co-organizers, Barter Huishang (Guizhou) Digital Economy Industry Group Co., Ltd. I also want to acknowledge the following GCV ambassadors for their active dedication and contributions to this conference: **GCV Ambassador of China:** - Yang Zhizhong - Cai Zaiqiao **Ambassadors of Guizhou Province GCV:** - Wang Shiqiong - Cai Weisheng - Guo Jiaqing **Zunyi GCV Ambassadors:** - Wang Jianbo - Luo Nanlu **GCV ambassadors at the district and county level in Zunyi City** Additionally, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to our numerous GCV merchants and sponsors. Without your support, we would not have been able to hold such a grand and large-scale event. Today's gathering in Zunyi, a sacred site of the revolution, reminds me of the Red Army's 25,000-mile Long March. Their perseverance and sacrifice continue to inspire us. The Zunyi Conference took place from January 15 to 17, 1935, and exactly 90 years later, we are gathered here today. The defining characteristics of the Zunyi Conference included the commitment to uphold the truth, correct mistakes, establish the correct leadership of the Party Central Committee, and creatively develop and implement strategies that fit the nature of the Chinese revolution. Today, our Zunyi Conference will also be recorded in the history of blockchain, as every effort you have put in has contributed to building a strong network ecosystem. Our partial fiat and partial distribution policy serves as a solution for the rapid development of the ecosystem during the closed mainnet of the Pi Network. As we all know, the first quarter of this year will bring about the successful mainnet launch of Pi Network. After six long years of challenges and perseverance, all of our pioneers will have the opportunity to witness this significant historical moment. What an exciting and proud day this will be! It has not been easy for everyone to persist through these six years; it requires great blessings, unwavering faith, and the courage to overcome difficulties. Today, our pioneers in Zunyi, Guizhou Province, gathering for this GCV barter conference holds great significance. I see that ten companies are providing products for barter, with nine companies, including Guizhou Meitan County Daoqin Hospital and Barter Huishang (Guizhou) Digital Economy Industry Group Co., Ltd., sponsoring this event. Once again, I extend my heartfelt thanks to all of you. The GCV Barter Conference serves multiple purposes. It is not only about creating GCV data or demonstrating the strength of our China region to CT, but also about showing how closely we align with their vision and mission. Additionally, it provides robust evidence for a substantial number of KYC and migration initiatives in China. More importantly, what we do today aims to boost China’s future economic development. Once the main network of the Pi Network is launched, we anticipate a significant demand for Chinese products from numerous international pioneers, which will in turn generate a large volume of export orders. At the same time, there will be international merchants looking to export their products to China. Once OM, import and export transactions will be conducted using the new currency, facilitating the vision of a stable currency and enabling seamless and reliable exchanges with fiat currency. Therefore, the merchants who engage now will have the advantage of being early adopters. The Pi Network offers a partner program and a MapofPi program. To participate in the partnership, businesses are required to have a company website. We invite businesses with websites to join us. However, if you do not have a company website, you can still join the Mapofpi program, which encompasses a wide range of industries, allowing participation from both large companies and small traders. Registration for the Mapofpi does not require a business license or website; various entities including shops, hospitals, schools, hair salons, accounting firms, law firms, restaurants, and hotels are welcome to register. Please select an active merchant and support GCV at $314,159. Prior to the OM launch, it is advisable to use partial fiat currency and partial Pi to ensure that merchants can cover their costs and fulfill their tax obligations. Recently, on January 9, we established the China GCV Industry Chain Alliance, which aims to create an industrial chain that facilitates the circulation of Pi among merchants, thereby reducing the burden of exchanging fiat currency after OM. During the enclosed mainnet, you can assist merchants in registering as Pi Network Partners and Mapofpi . Ms. Lumari is our Global GCV CT executive director and her goal is to have 200,000 registered Mapofpi merchants worldwide. My personal target is to reach 100,000 registered merchants in China alone. This goal is achievable given the over 58 million enterprises and more than 20 million pioneers in China. If we can effectively convey that Pi Network WEB 3.0 blockchain technology will significantly enhance human productivity and that the business opportunities from accepting partial Pi and partial FIAT during the 60 days before OM will present numerous benefits and minimal risks to merchants, then it is likely that no merchant will be unfavorably surprised by the initiative. This strategy offers a multitude of advantages with virtually no downsides. Furthermore, it benefits pioneers by allowing them to transfer purchasing power to the community and minimize fiat currency expenses in their daily life. Consequently, the GCV data we generate will significantly benefit the Chinese pioneers, as a large number of registered merchants can transform the China region from a high-risk area to a safe zone. Not only can this region be promoted to a VIP area, which would enjoy expedited KYC and mapping processes, but it will also allow pioneers and merchants to thrive together in our ecosystem. This collaboration will enhance the prosperity of our country and empower the China region to contribute to the welfare of communities worldwide. Once OM, it will play a crucial role in the economic development of both China and the world. If you pay attention to our migrartion speed, you might have noticed that it has slowed down recently. From December 17th to around the 30th, the migrating speed was over 50,000 to 100,000 per day, but now it has dropped to just over 10,000. What is the reason for this decline? If it was previously possible to migrate over 100,000 per day, why has it changed? The CT has stated that they will OM until the first quarter of this year to bring the migratiion in line with KYC amounts. However, if it's technically feasible to achieve a higher migration speed, why isn’t it being done? The answer is quite simple: it depends on what everyone does with the Pi after such large migration numbers. If pioneers rush to buy and sell, hold onto their Pi coins, or trade at low value, it will impact the speed and efficiency of the next migration in these regions. This principle is not only theoretically valid but has proven true in practice. For instance, countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia have a solid educational foundation in GCV. Most pioneers there are highly aware of the risks involved in participating in the black market, which allows them to generate a substantial amount of GCV data. As a result, their migration speed is notably fast, and there are many large wallet migrated. To help the CT regain momentum, we all need to cooperate. Engage with the migrated Pi and participate in the GCV barter ecosystem. Be cautious of individuals who aim to deceive you for personal gain; devaluing the Pi often serves as a tactic to exchange something small for your valuable treasure. It's crucial to educate pioneers about the true value of what they hold and encourage them to avoid dishonest practices. I urge everyone to actively participate in partial Pi and partial FIAT barter. The more GCV data we generate, the more secure our wallets will be. Therefore, it's important for everyone to read and share the Pioneer Handbook I wrote which has been translated into 30 languages to raise awareness among pioneers. By learning from the Pioneer Handbook and participating in GCV bartering, we can improve China's migration efforts and foster ecological development. This stability can ensure that the value of our Pi endures for future generations, rather than becoming worthless in a few years. Wouldn't that be something we want to preserve for our children and grandchildren? Today's message is lengthy but very important, and I hope you take the time to understand it. I wish our Guizhou Zunyi Conference great success! Thank you to all GCV Ambassadors, Merchants, and Pioneers for your incredible support! Your efforts today are planting the seeds for a prosperous future, and I hope you find safety and fulfillment in the days to come. May your wishes come true! Wishing you health and happiness! Let’s work together to create a better future! I also hope you all have a joyful Chinese New Year! Doris Yin 🪷🪷🪷 Founder, Global GCV Movement January 12, 2025

Doris Yin Speech at China Guizhou Zunyi GCV Barter Conference Hello to the community leaders, GCV ambassadors, merchants, and pioneers of GCV Guizhou in China! Today is January 12, 2025, marking the first GCV Barter Conference in China in New Year and the 13th Barter Conference overall. I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the organizers of this conference, the Guizhou Zunyi GCV Community, and the co-organizers, Barter Huishang (Guizhou) Digital Economy Industry Group Co., Ltd. I also want to acknowledge the following GCV ambassadors for their active dedication and contributions to this conference: GCV Ambassador of China: - Yang Zhizhong - Cai Zaiqiao Ambassadors of Guizhou Province GCV: - Wang Shiqiong - Cai Weisheng - Guo Jiaqing Zunyi GCV Ambassadors: - Wang Jianbo - Luo Nanlu GCV ambassadors at the district and county level in Zunyi City Additionally, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to our numerous GCV merchants and sponsors. Without your support, we would not have been able to hold such a grand and large-scale event. Today's gathering in Zunyi, a sacred site of the revolution, reminds me of the Red Army's 25,000-mile Long March. Their perseverance and sacrifice continue to inspire us. The Zunyi Conference took place from January 15 to 17, 1935, and exactly 90 years later, we are gathered here today. The defining characteristics of the Zunyi Conference included the commitment to uphold the truth, correct mistakes, establish the correct leadership of the Party Central Committee, and creatively develop and implement strategies that fit the nature of the Chinese revolution. Today, our Zunyi Conference will also be recorded in the history of blockchain, as every effort you have put in has contributed to building a strong network ecosystem. Our partial fiat and partial distribution policy serves as a solution for the rapid development of the ecosystem during the closed mainnet of the Pi Network. As we all know, the first quarter of this year will bring about the successful mainnet launch of Pi Network. After six long years of challenges and perseverance, all of our pioneers will have the opportunity to witness this significant historical moment. What an exciting and proud day this will be! It has not been easy for everyone to persist through these six years; it requires great blessings, unwavering faith, and the courage to overcome difficulties. Today, our pioneers in Zunyi, Guizhou Province, gathering for this GCV barter conference holds great significance. I see that ten companies are providing products for barter, with nine companies, including Guizhou Meitan County Daoqin Hospital and Barter Huishang (Guizhou) Digital Economy Industry Group Co., Ltd., sponsoring this event. Once again, I extend my heartfelt thanks to all of you. The GCV Barter Conference serves multiple purposes. It is not only about creating GCV data or demonstrating the strength of our China region to CT, but also about showing how closely we align with their vision and mission. Additionally, it provides robust evidence for a substantial number of KYC and migration initiatives in China. More importantly, what we do today aims to boost China’s future economic development. Once the main network of the Pi Network is launched, we anticipate a significant demand for Chinese products from numerous international pioneers, which will in turn generate a large volume of export orders. At the same time, there will be international merchants looking to export their products to China. Once OM, import and export transactions will be conducted using the new currency, facilitating the vision of a stable currency and enabling seamless and reliable exchanges with fiat currency. Therefore, the merchants who engage now will have the advantage of being early adopters. The Pi Network offers a partner program and a MapofPi program. To participate in the partnership, businesses are required to have a company website. We invite businesses with websites to join us. However, if you do not have a company website, you can still join the Mapofpi program, which encompasses a wide range of industries, allowing participation from both large companies and small traders. Registration for the Mapofpi does not require a business license or website; various entities including shops, hospitals, schools, hair salons, accounting firms, law firms, restaurants, and hotels are welcome to register. Please select an active merchant and support GCV at $314,159. Prior to the OM launch, it is advisable to use partial fiat currency and partial Pi to ensure that merchants can cover their costs and fulfill their tax obligations. Recently, on January 9, we established the China GCV Industry Chain Alliance, which aims to create an industrial chain that facilitates the circulation of Pi among merchants, thereby reducing the burden of exchanging fiat currency after OM. During the enclosed mainnet, you can assist merchants in registering as Pi Network Partners and Mapofpi . Ms. Lumari is our Global GCV CT executive director and her goal is to have 200,000 registered Mapofpi merchants worldwide. My personal target is to reach 100,000 registered merchants in China alone. This goal is achievable given the over 58 million enterprises and more than 20 million pioneers in China. If we can effectively convey that Pi Network WEB 3.0 blockchain technology will significantly enhance human productivity and that the business opportunities from accepting partial Pi and partial FIAT during the 60 days before OM will present numerous benefits and minimal risks to merchants, then it is likely that no merchant will be unfavorably surprised by the initiative. This strategy offers a multitude of advantages with virtually no downsides. Furthermore, it benefits pioneers by allowing them to transfer purchasing power to the community and minimize fiat currency expenses in their daily life. Consequently, the GCV data we generate will significantly benefit the Chinese pioneers, as a large number of registered merchants can transform the China region from a high-risk area to a safe zone. Not only can this region be promoted to a VIP area, which would enjoy expedited KYC and mapping processes, but it will also allow pioneers and merchants to thrive together in our ecosystem. This collaboration will enhance the prosperity of our country and empower the China region to contribute to the welfare of communities worldwide. Once OM, it will play a crucial role in the economic development of both China and the world. If you pay attention to our migrartion speed, you might have noticed that it has slowed down recently. From December 17th to around the 30th, the migrating speed was over 50,000 to 100,000 per day, but now it has dropped to just over 10,000. What is the reason for this decline? If it was previously possible to migrate over 100,000 per day, why has it changed? The CT has stated that they will OM until the first quarter of this year to bring the migratiion in line with KYC amounts. However, if it's technically feasible to achieve a higher migration speed, why isn’t it being done? The answer is quite simple: it depends on what everyone does with the Pi after such large migration numbers. If pioneers rush to buy and sell, hold onto their Pi coins, or trade at low value, it will impact the speed and efficiency of the next migration in these regions. This principle is not only theoretically valid but has proven true in practice. For instance, countries like the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia have a solid educational foundation in GCV. Most pioneers there are highly aware of the risks involved in participating in the black market, which allows them to generate a substantial amount of GCV data. As a result, their migration speed is notably fast, and there are many large wallet migrated. To help the CT regain momentum, we all need to cooperate. Engage with the migrated Pi and participate in the GCV barter ecosystem. Be cautious of individuals who aim to deceive you for personal gain; devaluing the Pi often serves as a tactic to exchange something small for your valuable treasure. It's crucial to educate pioneers about the true value of what they hold and encourage them to avoid dishonest practices. I urge everyone to actively participate in partial Pi and partial FIAT barter. The more GCV data we generate, the more secure our wallets will be. Therefore, it's important for everyone to read and share the Pioneer Handbook I wrote which has been translated into 30 languages to raise awareness among pioneers. By learning from the Pioneer Handbook and participating in GCV bartering, we can improve China's migration efforts and foster ecological development. This stability can ensure that the value of our Pi endures for future generations, rather than becoming worthless in a few years. Wouldn't that be something we want to preserve for our children and grandchildren? Today's message is lengthy but very important, and I hope you take the time to understand it. I wish our Guizhou Zunyi Conference great success! Thank you to all GCV Ambassadors, Merchants, and Pioneers for your incredible support! Your efforts today are planting the seeds for a prosperous future, and I hope you find safety and fulfillment in the days to come. May your wishes come true! Wishing you health and happiness! Let’s work together to create a better future! I also hope you all have a joyful Chinese New Year! Doris Yin 🪷🪷🪷 Founder, Global GCV Movement January 12, 2025

Doris Yin 东方紫莲🪷

18,335 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Think your Project 2025 will work? It failed miserably for 1940s world, Germany and it will fail you now. We need to make America grateful again. The American people deserve far better than this convicted felon. If Trump is re-elected, expect a regression not to 1776 but to the 1760s, complete with taxation without representation. Save your money, sharpen your manual labor skills, and prepare to lose healthcare and social security, as society splits by class and with robots, you'll find yourselves competing with AI. Canada and Mexico, consider revising your asylum laws, as many Americans might seek your sanctuary. Under King Trump, expect state sell-offs to Putin. Start learning Russian and get accustomed to cheap vodka. 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓: Project 2025, backed by The Heritage Foundation and endorsed by Donald Trump, is a central Republican strategy for 2024. This comprehensive plan aims to reshape the federal government according to conservative principles, dangerously centralizing executive power and sidelining Congress. Historical parallels, such as Nazi Germany, warn of its authoritarian potential.⁣⁣⁣ ⁣⁣⁣ 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐄𝐱𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫: Vought's plan emphasizes executive power while bypassing Congress, mirroring Hitler's use of the Enabling Act of 1933, which allowed his government to enact laws without the Reichstag's consent. This erodes the constitutional separation of powers and checks and balances.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐋𝐨𝐲𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐬: Vought aims to staff the government with Trump loyalists, akin to how Nazis replaced civil servants and judges with party members, compromising the impartiality and independence of the civil service and judiciary.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐁𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐬: Vought's intention to dismantle the "administrative state" targets essential regulatory agencies, much like the Nazi process of Gleichschaltung, which brought all aspects of German society under their control.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬: Vought's team is preparing legal justifications to expand executive power, similar to Nazi legal theorists who advocated for the Nazification of German law, violating constitutional norms.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐈𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐝𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐓𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐬: Vought's plan is influenced by conservative think tanks, just as Nazi policies were shaped by racist and authoritarian ideologies.⁣⁣⁣ ⁣⁣ Russ Vought’s plan fundamentally betrays the principle of putting America first. By seeking to concentrate executive power, bypass Congress, and dismantle essential regulatory agencies, Vought places personal and partisan interests above the nation’s welfare. His agenda undermines the integrity of the federal workforce, politicizes governance, and destroys public trust in democratic institutions. This strategy paves the way for autocratic rule, sacrificing the very foundations of American democracy for authoritarian control. Vought’s vision jeopardizes the nation's stability and prosperity, putting America last and prioritizing power over the people.⁣⁣⁣ ⁣⁣ For anyone who believes his lies about not supporting Project 2025: There are several areas where Donald Trump's policies and campaign speeches align with aspects of Project 2025, despite Trump publicly lying and trying to distance himself from the project. Here are the key alignments: Expanding Executive Power: Trump campaigns on vastly expanding executive authority over the federal government, aligning with Project 2025's goal of consolidating executive power. Restructuring Federal Workforce: Trump proposes implementing the "Jacksonian spoils system" to replace government employees. Similarly, Project 2025 suggests reclassifying tens of thousands of federal civil service workers as political appointees to replace them with loyalists. Immigration Policies: Trump advocates for anti-immigrant policies and a massive deportation operation. This aligns with Project 2025's focus on defending national borders and sovereignty. "America First" Foreign Policy: Trump promotes an isolationist "America First" agenda, in line with Project 2025's emphasis on national sovereignty. Anti-Regulatory Stance: Trump intends to institute anti-regulatory policies, aligning with Project 2025's goal of dismantling the "administrative state." Social and Cultural Issues: Trump leans into nativist and anti-LGBT rhetoric, corresponding with Project 2025's aim to infuse government and society with conservative Christian values. Education Reforms: Trump proposes terminating the Department of Education, while Project 2025 suggests decentralizing its authority. Energy and Environmental Policies: Trump pursues a climate change denial and anti-clean energy platform, aligning with Project 2025's likely stance on energy deregulation. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. American people deserve better than TFG Trump stiffed hardworking contractors, knowing they couldn't afford prolonged legal battles. Republicans did nothing about it. His Trump University misled veterans and everyday people, resulting in millions in fines. Republicans did nothing about it. He used $250 million from your donations as his "defense" fund to cover personal expenses. Republicans did nothing about it. He manipulated elderly supporters by quietly setting up recurring donations, draining their bank accounts. Republicans did nothing about it. I mean who steals money from a children's cancer charity? Republicans did nothing about it. At last, he's facing consequences for trying to undermine U.S. democracy by pulling all stops to snatch an election he knew was lost. He even went to the extent of calling for the dismantling of the U.S. Constitution, which he vowed to defend. Republicans did nothing about it. If you still believe he's innocent, the problem isn't with him; it's you. You are in a cult. Republicans did nothing about this cult-like following. Several of Donald Trump's former Cabinet members and close allies have openly declared they won't support him in future elections, each providing their own reasons for this stance. Here's a quick rundown of their views: Mike Pence: The ex-Vice President isn't endorsing Trump for the 2024 race, pointing to "profound differences" that go beyond their January 6 disagreement, including Trump's views on TikTok, abortion, and national debt management. John Bolton: The former National Security Adviser won't vote for Trump or Biden, planning to choose a conservative Republican instead. He's voiced concerns over Trump's suitability for office and his foreign policy moves. James Mattis: The former Defense Secretary has critiqued Trump for dividing Americans and questioned his leadership and its impact on national unity. Mark Esper: Trump's second Defense Secretary considers him unfit for office, citing Trump's self-interest and lack of integrity. Rex Tillerson: The ex-Secretary of State has been critical of Trump's grasp on global events and history, suggesting he's unprepared and uninformed. John Kelly: Trump's longest-serving Chief of Staff has criticized Trump's personality and leadership style. Mick Mulvaney: The former Chief of Staff prefers someone else as the GOP nominee, doubting Trump's chances against Biden in a general election. Dan Coats: The former Director of National Intelligence is backing Mike Pence in the GOP primary over Trump. Jeff Sessions: Despite supporting Trump's agenda, the former Attorney General has had conflicts with Trump, especially over the Russia investigation and his recusal from it. Olivia Troye: A former Pence advisor, Troye has slammed Trump's COVID-19 response, accusing him of putting reelection before public health. Miles Taylor: Describing his time in the Trump administration as "terrifying," the former DHS chief of staff has endorsed Biden, citing Trump's threat to the country. Elizabeth Neumann: The ex-Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism at DHS has accused Trump of worsening the domestic terrorism threat and declared her vote for Biden. Anthony Scaramucci: The short-lived White House Communications Director supports Biden, critiquing Trump's leadership and policies. These individuals cite various concerns about Trump's leadership, policy decisions, integrity, and the negative effects on the country's unity and security as reasons for withdrawing their support for his future political endeavor! If these individuals, all handpicked by you, refuse to vote for you, then why should anyone believe anything you say? Trump's other 'achievements': -Gave over $1.7 TRILLION (5 times student relief) in tax breaks to the ultrarich. Republicans did nothing about the inequality it exacerbated. $7.8 TRILLION added to the deficit. Nothing but 8 miles of new wall Mexico was supposed to pay. Republicans did nothing about this fiscal irresponsibility. -$150 Million for golf. Republicans did nothing about this misuse of funds. -Had to be praised every 5 minutes. Republicans did nothing about this egoism. -Lied over 30,000 times in 4 years. Republicans did nothing about these falsehoods. -Kissed Putin's behind in Helsinki in front of the world. Republicans did nothing about this display of subservience. -Got impeached twice in one term :). Republicans did nothing to hold him accountable. -Asked for dirt on his opponent, twice. Republicans did nothing about these unethical requests. -Tried everything to steal our election. Republicans did nothing to safeguard our democratic processes. -Taxpayers overpaid for his secret service $1200 per night staying at his properties. Republicans did nothing about this profiteering. -Gave Taliban their leader & 5K soldiers, with no exit plan for May 2021. Republicans did nothing about this strategic blunder. -His campaign chair, NSA chief & others were indicted/pardoned. Republicans did nothing about this corruption. -Called himself THE CHOSEN1! :)). Republicans did nothing about this messianic complex. -Pleaded the 5th 440 times. Republicans did nothing about this evasion of accountability. -Took over $250 million from his supporters when he left office for "Defense Fund" to pay his own personal bills. Republicans did nothing about this exploitation. -Stole our national secrets for who knows why. Many top secret empty folders. Republicans did nothing about this breach of national security. -Met with Putin with no recordings. Republicans did nothing about this lack of transparency. Trump's Taxing Concerns in China: The New York Times unveiled Trump paying over $188,000 in taxes to China between 2013-2015, while maintaining an undisclosed bank account there. He paid more taxes to China than in the U.S. Spot the issue? Republicans did nothing about this financial conflict of interest. Shady Transactions Post White House: His son-in-law, despite failing a White House security clearance, received $3.1 billion from a foreign government right after leaving office. Questions, anyone? Republicans did nothing about these dubious dealings. Allegations of Trump's Criminal Acts: Republicans did nothing about these numerous allegations of criminal misconduct. Trump's Ties to Russia: Republicans did nothing about these troubling connections and implications for national security. 4th Indictment Against Trump: Republicans did nothing about these accusations of election tampering and abuse of power. Third Indictment: Conspiracy to Defraud the US: Accused of unlawfully disrupting the 2020 election by making fraudulent claims and pressuring officials. Republicans did nothing about this blatant disregard for electoral integrity. -Obstructing an Official Proceeding: Accused of hindering Congress's January 6 certification of election results. Republicans did nothing about this direct threat to our democratic process. -Obstruction of Official Proceeding: Alleged to have impeded certification by pressuring Pence and inciting the Capitol riot. Republicans did nothing about this dangerous escalation of political tension. -Conspiracy Against Rights: Accused of intimidating election officials and disenfranchising voters. Republicans did nothing about these serious threats to voter rights. Second Indictment Highlights: -Knowledge and Intent: Accused of withholding subpoenaed documents, suggesting possible illegal intent. Republicans did nothing about this obstruction of justice. -Obstruction of Justice: Allegedly kept unauthorized documents hidden from the National Archives. Republicans did nothing about this breach of protocol. -Evidence Depth: Varied evidence indicates illegal document acquisition and concealment attempts. Republicans did nothing about these potentially criminal actions. Additional Notes: -Document Selection: The 31 indictment documents were likely chosen for relevance. Republicans did nothing to address the significance of these selections. We can and do deserve better than these DO-NOTHING Republicans with their America First slogan. Our diversity is our STRENGTH, not a flaw. Republicans did nothing to embrace or celebrate this diversity, instead often standing in opposition to it.

Think your Project 2025 will work? It failed miserably for 1940s world, Germany and it will fail you now. We need to make America grateful again. The American people deserve far better than this convicted felon. If Trump is re-elected, expect a regression not to 1776 but to the 1760s, complete with taxation without representation. Save your money, sharpen your manual labor skills, and prepare to lose healthcare and social security, as society splits by class and with robots, you'll find yourselves competing with AI. Canada and Mexico, consider revising your asylum laws, as many Americans might seek your sanctuary. Under King Trump, expect state sell-offs to Putin. Start learning Russian and get accustomed to cheap vodka. 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓: Project 2025, backed by The Heritage Foundation and endorsed by Donald Trump, is a central Republican strategy for 2024. This comprehensive plan aims to reshape the federal government according to conservative principles, dangerously centralizing executive power and sidelining Congress. Historical parallels, such as Nazi Germany, warn of its authoritarian potential.⁣⁣⁣ ⁣⁣⁣ 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐄𝐱𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫: Vought's plan emphasizes executive power while bypassing Congress, mirroring Hitler's use of the Enabling Act of 1933, which allowed his government to enact laws without the Reichstag's consent. This erodes the constitutional separation of powers and checks and balances.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐋𝐨𝐲𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐬: Vought aims to staff the government with Trump loyalists, akin to how Nazis replaced civil servants and judges with party members, compromising the impartiality and independence of the civil service and judiciary.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐁𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐬: Vought's intention to dismantle the "administrative state" targets essential regulatory agencies, much like the Nazi process of Gleichschaltung, which brought all aspects of German society under their control.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬: Vought's team is preparing legal justifications to expand executive power, similar to Nazi legal theorists who advocated for the Nazification of German law, violating constitutional norms.⁣⁣⁣ •𝐈𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐝𝐞𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐓𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐬: Vought's plan is influenced by conservative think tanks, just as Nazi policies were shaped by racist and authoritarian ideologies.⁣⁣⁣ ⁣⁣ Russ Vought’s plan fundamentally betrays the principle of putting America first. By seeking to concentrate executive power, bypass Congress, and dismantle essential regulatory agencies, Vought places personal and partisan interests above the nation’s welfare. His agenda undermines the integrity of the federal workforce, politicizes governance, and destroys public trust in democratic institutions. This strategy paves the way for autocratic rule, sacrificing the very foundations of American democracy for authoritarian control. Vought’s vision jeopardizes the nation's stability and prosperity, putting America last and prioritizing power over the people.⁣⁣⁣ ⁣⁣ For anyone who believes his lies about not supporting Project 2025: There are several areas where Donald Trump's policies and campaign speeches align with aspects of Project 2025, despite Trump publicly lying and trying to distance himself from the project. Here are the key alignments: Expanding Executive Power: Trump campaigns on vastly expanding executive authority over the federal government, aligning with Project 2025's goal of consolidating executive power. Restructuring Federal Workforce: Trump proposes implementing the "Jacksonian spoils system" to replace government employees. Similarly, Project 2025 suggests reclassifying tens of thousands of federal civil service workers as political appointees to replace them with loyalists. Immigration Policies: Trump advocates for anti-immigrant policies and a massive deportation operation. This aligns with Project 2025's focus on defending national borders and sovereignty. "America First" Foreign Policy: Trump promotes an isolationist "America First" agenda, in line with Project 2025's emphasis on national sovereignty. Anti-Regulatory Stance: Trump intends to institute anti-regulatory policies, aligning with Project 2025's goal of dismantling the "administrative state." Social and Cultural Issues: Trump leans into nativist and anti-LGBT rhetoric, corresponding with Project 2025's aim to infuse government and society with conservative Christian values. Education Reforms: Trump proposes terminating the Department of Education, while Project 2025 suggests decentralizing its authority. Energy and Environmental Policies: Trump pursues a climate change denial and anti-clean energy platform, aligning with Project 2025's likely stance on energy deregulation. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. American people deserve better than TFG Trump stiffed hardworking contractors, knowing they couldn't afford prolonged legal battles. Republicans did nothing about it. His Trump University misled veterans and everyday people, resulting in millions in fines. Republicans did nothing about it. He used $250 million from your donations as his "defense" fund to cover personal expenses. Republicans did nothing about it. He manipulated elderly supporters by quietly setting up recurring donations, draining their bank accounts. Republicans did nothing about it. I mean who steals money from a children's cancer charity? Republicans did nothing about it. At last, he's facing consequences for trying to undermine U.S. democracy by pulling all stops to snatch an election he knew was lost. He even went to the extent of calling for the dismantling of the U.S. Constitution, which he vowed to defend. Republicans did nothing about it. If you still believe he's innocent, the problem isn't with him; it's you. You are in a cult. Republicans did nothing about this cult-like following. Several of Donald Trump's former Cabinet members and close allies have openly declared they won't support him in future elections, each providing their own reasons for this stance. Here's a quick rundown of their views: Mike Pence: The ex-Vice President isn't endorsing Trump for the 2024 race, pointing to "profound differences" that go beyond their January 6 disagreement, including Trump's views on TikTok, abortion, and national debt management. John Bolton: The former National Security Adviser won't vote for Trump or Biden, planning to choose a conservative Republican instead. He's voiced concerns over Trump's suitability for office and his foreign policy moves. James Mattis: The former Defense Secretary has critiqued Trump for dividing Americans and questioned his leadership and its impact on national unity. Mark Esper: Trump's second Defense Secretary considers him unfit for office, citing Trump's self-interest and lack of integrity. Rex Tillerson: The ex-Secretary of State has been critical of Trump's grasp on global events and history, suggesting he's unprepared and uninformed. John Kelly: Trump's longest-serving Chief of Staff has criticized Trump's personality and leadership style. Mick Mulvaney: The former Chief of Staff prefers someone else as the GOP nominee, doubting Trump's chances against Biden in a general election. Dan Coats: The former Director of National Intelligence is backing Mike Pence in the GOP primary over Trump. Jeff Sessions: Despite supporting Trump's agenda, the former Attorney General has had conflicts with Trump, especially over the Russia investigation and his recusal from it. Olivia Troye: A former Pence advisor, Troye has slammed Trump's COVID-19 response, accusing him of putting reelection before public health. Miles Taylor: Describing his time in the Trump administration as "terrifying," the former DHS chief of staff has endorsed Biden, citing Trump's threat to the country. Elizabeth Neumann: The ex-Assistant Secretary for Counterterrorism at DHS has accused Trump of worsening the domestic terrorism threat and declared her vote for Biden. Anthony Scaramucci: The short-lived White House Communications Director supports Biden, critiquing Trump's leadership and policies. These individuals cite various concerns about Trump's leadership, policy decisions, integrity, and the negative effects on the country's unity and security as reasons for withdrawing their support for his future political endeavor! If these individuals, all handpicked by you, refuse to vote for you, then why should anyone believe anything you say? Trump's other 'achievements': -Gave over $1.7 TRILLION (5 times student relief) in tax breaks to the ultrarich. Republicans did nothing about the inequality it exacerbated. $7.8 TRILLION added to the deficit. Nothing but 8 miles of new wall Mexico was supposed to pay. Republicans did nothing about this fiscal irresponsibility. -$150 Million for golf. Republicans did nothing about this misuse of funds. -Had to be praised every 5 minutes. Republicans did nothing about this egoism. -Lied over 30,000 times in 4 years. Republicans did nothing about these falsehoods. -Kissed Putin's behind in Helsinki in front of the world. Republicans did nothing about this display of subservience. -Got impeached twice in one term :). Republicans did nothing to hold him accountable. -Asked for dirt on his opponent, twice. Republicans did nothing about these unethical requests. -Tried everything to steal our election. Republicans did nothing to safeguard our democratic processes. -Taxpayers overpaid for his secret service $1200 per night staying at his properties. Republicans did nothing about this profiteering. -Gave Taliban their leader & 5K soldiers, with no exit plan for May 2021. Republicans did nothing about this strategic blunder. -His campaign chair, NSA chief & others were indicted/pardoned. Republicans did nothing about this corruption. -Called himself THE CHOSEN1! :)). Republicans did nothing about this messianic complex. -Pleaded the 5th 440 times. Republicans did nothing about this evasion of accountability. -Took over $250 million from his supporters when he left office for "Defense Fund" to pay his own personal bills. Republicans did nothing about this exploitation. -Stole our national secrets for who knows why. Many top secret empty folders. Republicans did nothing about this breach of national security. -Met with Putin with no recordings. Republicans did nothing about this lack of transparency. Trump's Taxing Concerns in China: The New York Times unveiled Trump paying over $188,000 in taxes to China between 2013-2015, while maintaining an undisclosed bank account there. He paid more taxes to China than in the U.S. Spot the issue? Republicans did nothing about this financial conflict of interest. Shady Transactions Post White House: His son-in-law, despite failing a White House security clearance, received $3.1 billion from a foreign government right after leaving office. Questions, anyone? Republicans did nothing about these dubious dealings. Allegations of Trump's Criminal Acts: Republicans did nothing about these numerous allegations of criminal misconduct. Trump's Ties to Russia: Republicans did nothing about these troubling connections and implications for national security. 4th Indictment Against Trump: Republicans did nothing about these accusations of election tampering and abuse of power. Third Indictment: Conspiracy to Defraud the US: Accused of unlawfully disrupting the 2020 election by making fraudulent claims and pressuring officials. Republicans did nothing about this blatant disregard for electoral integrity. -Obstructing an Official Proceeding: Accused of hindering Congress's January 6 certification of election results. Republicans did nothing about this direct threat to our democratic process. -Obstruction of Official Proceeding: Alleged to have impeded certification by pressuring Pence and inciting the Capitol riot. Republicans did nothing about this dangerous escalation of political tension. -Conspiracy Against Rights: Accused of intimidating election officials and disenfranchising voters. Republicans did nothing about these serious threats to voter rights. Second Indictment Highlights: -Knowledge and Intent: Accused of withholding subpoenaed documents, suggesting possible illegal intent. Republicans did nothing about this obstruction of justice. -Obstruction of Justice: Allegedly kept unauthorized documents hidden from the National Archives. Republicans did nothing about this breach of protocol. -Evidence Depth: Varied evidence indicates illegal document acquisition and concealment attempts. Republicans did nothing about these potentially criminal actions. Additional Notes: -Document Selection: The 31 indictment documents were likely chosen for relevance. Republicans did nothing to address the significance of these selections. We can and do deserve better than these DO-NOTHING Republicans with their America First slogan. Our diversity is our STRENGTH, not a flaw. Republicans did nothing to embrace or celebrate this diversity, instead often standing in opposition to it.

Human☮🇺🇸🇺🇦🇺🇸🌊

42,936 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

In the back of my 9th grade English class, there was a poster hung on the wall by my boomer English teacher. It said "What if they gave a war and nobody came?". A simple boomer hippie sentiment. I always wondered about that poster. Fourteen year old me didn't know the words "game theory", but I still understood some basic concepts of the field just from being alive. And so I knew that if "they" gave a war, and only one side showed up, that side won, and could do whatever they wanted to the losers. And that not showing up for a war doesn't do a thing to prevent the other side from showing up. In fact, it incentivizes them to do the opposite. So I wondered... why weren't they putting that poster in the enemy's school classrooms, instead of mine? I quickly learned that asking this question of boomer adults produced nothing but a blank look. The TV never told them how to answer questions like that. So I continued wondering, and thinking about it. Why weren't they putting that poster in the enemy's school classrooms, instead of mine? It wasn't until I was in my twenties that I figured it out. They were. They were putting it in the enemy classroom. Because I was the enemy. We, all of us, the white western children of GenX, were the enemy they wanted to defeat. I didn't realize that at first, because I thought of that English teacher, who hung the poster, as a full and complete human being, equipped with her own ideas and opinions, who decided to hang that poster. But she wasn't. She was a boomer. Which means she was a programmable tool in the hands of those who wished to rob western civilization of the will to commit violence in our own interests. She had no idea what she was dong. She wasn't thinking philosophically. She probably thought philosophy was a bunch of books written by Wittgenstein about the "nature of selfness" or whatever. She had no mental tools to think about game theory. She had simply been programmed by books, newspaper, magazines, and television, to think of certain things as "bad". War? Bad. Violence? Bad. Colonialism? Bad. Racism? Bad. Patriarchy? Bad. Talking back to the teacher and asking uncomfortable questions that the TV didn't tell her how to answer? Bad. This fully programmable unit, equipped with no more sophisticated thinking mechanisms than assigning a binary "good" or "bad" label to various concepts, was simply acting out a program written by someone else when she hung that poster. But who wrote those TV scripts, news stories, magazine articles? Were they the enemy, or were they more idiots? And who programmed them? Still more idiots? I had no way of knowing. I only knew that there was a chain of programmable NPCs, and at the other end was the enemy. I couldn't trace the chain back, of course. I was an impoverished twentysomething, not a team of investigative reporters. But I knew damn well it had to be the Soviets on the other end. Who else would want the children of the West to be unconditional pacifists, and had the money, organization, power, and above all, patience, to spend decades manipulating the Western media that the boomers uncritically sucked down? And later, when the Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own socialism... oh, look, I was right. The USSR is gone, of course, but that web of useful, progammable idiots still exists, ready both to be idiots, and to teach children to be idiots. And there is no shortage of people who hate Western civilization and are willing to plant themselves in the programmer's chair. Chase Oliver is a programmable idiot. He has been programmed to abhor violence under any circumstances, even in defense of Western civilization, and to program children with his pacifism. He has been programmed not to reproduce, and to groom children into sterility. He has been programmed not to defend the borders of our nation, and to program others not to do so. He has been programmed to prefer other races and cultures to what is nominally his own, and to program others to denigrate their own culture as well. He has now successfully been integrated as the candidate of a party whose original philosophy was the very antithesis of everything he stands for. By himself, he is a joke... a mincing little queer who couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag. But in concert with other useful idiots, he managed to infiltrate and destroy the Libertarian party, to render it no longer libertarian. A drop of water is weak. But a flood can wash away anything. These people are dangerous, and to oppose them, you need the proper philosophy. How are you to know what that is? Simple. It's everything they are trying to program you against. You must be willing to commit violence, rather than unwilling to defend what you claim to value. You must unashamedly prefer your race, culture, and civilization to other races, cultures, and civilization, rather than being too broadminded to take your own side. You must reserve your compassion, and your loyalty, for those who make common cause with you, rather than valuing all humans equally. You must have children if you can, and find ways to support others of your tribe having children if you can't, rather than being sterile and allowing yourself to be replaced. You must raise those children to be strong, willing to commit violence, and able to understand and pursue their own interests, rather than reflexively obedient... even if reflexive obedience on the part of your children would make parenting easier. You must treat useful idiots of the enemy as enemies, remembering Grey's First Law: Any insufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice. and Grey's Second Law: Any sufficiently subtle malice can be disguised as incompetence. Your civilization is under threat from those who wish to use the Chase Olivers of the world to accomplish what they could never hope to do with military force. Do not reject political violence. Be willing to fight.

In the back of my 9th grade English class, there was a poster hung on the wall by my boomer English teacher. It said "What if they gave a war and nobody came?". A simple boomer hippie sentiment. I always wondered about that poster. Fourteen year old me didn't know the words "game theory", but I still understood some basic concepts of the field just from being alive. And so I knew that if "they" gave a war, and only one side showed up, that side won, and could do whatever they wanted to the losers. And that not showing up for a war doesn't do a thing to prevent the other side from showing up. In fact, it incentivizes them to do the opposite. So I wondered... why weren't they putting that poster in the enemy's school classrooms, instead of mine? I quickly learned that asking this question of boomer adults produced nothing but a blank look. The TV never told them how to answer questions like that. So I continued wondering, and thinking about it. Why weren't they putting that poster in the enemy's school classrooms, instead of mine? It wasn't until I was in my twenties that I figured it out. They were. They were putting it in the enemy classroom. Because I was the enemy. We, all of us, the white western children of GenX, were the enemy they wanted to defeat. I didn't realize that at first, because I thought of that English teacher, who hung the poster, as a full and complete human being, equipped with her own ideas and opinions, who decided to hang that poster. But she wasn't. She was a boomer. Which means she was a programmable tool in the hands of those who wished to rob western civilization of the will to commit violence in our own interests. She had no idea what she was dong. She wasn't thinking philosophically. She probably thought philosophy was a bunch of books written by Wittgenstein about the "nature of selfness" or whatever. She had no mental tools to think about game theory. She had simply been programmed by books, newspaper, magazines, and television, to think of certain things as "bad". War? Bad. Violence? Bad. Colonialism? Bad. Racism? Bad. Patriarchy? Bad. Talking back to the teacher and asking uncomfortable questions that the TV didn't tell her how to answer? Bad. This fully programmable unit, equipped with no more sophisticated thinking mechanisms than assigning a binary "good" or "bad" label to various concepts, was simply acting out a program written by someone else when she hung that poster. But who wrote those TV scripts, news stories, magazine articles? Were they the enemy, or were they more idiots? And who programmed them? Still more idiots? I had no way of knowing. I only knew that there was a chain of programmable NPCs, and at the other end was the enemy. I couldn't trace the chain back, of course. I was an impoverished twentysomething, not a team of investigative reporters. But I knew damn well it had to be the Soviets on the other end. Who else would want the children of the West to be unconditional pacifists, and had the money, organization, power, and above all, patience, to spend decades manipulating the Western media that the boomers uncritically sucked down? And later, when the Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own socialism... oh, look, I was right. The USSR is gone, of course, but that web of useful, progammable idiots still exists, ready both to be idiots, and to teach children to be idiots. And there is no shortage of people who hate Western civilization and are willing to plant themselves in the programmer's chair. Chase Oliver is a programmable idiot. He has been programmed to abhor violence under any circumstances, even in defense of Western civilization, and to program children with his pacifism. He has been programmed not to reproduce, and to groom children into sterility. He has been programmed not to defend the borders of our nation, and to program others not to do so. He has been programmed to prefer other races and cultures to what is nominally his own, and to program others to denigrate their own culture as well. He has now successfully been integrated as the candidate of a party whose original philosophy was the very antithesis of everything he stands for. By himself, he is a joke... a mincing little queer who couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag. But in concert with other useful idiots, he managed to infiltrate and destroy the Libertarian party, to render it no longer libertarian. A drop of water is weak. But a flood can wash away anything. These people are dangerous, and to oppose them, you need the proper philosophy. How are you to know what that is? Simple. It's everything they are trying to program you against. You must be willing to commit violence, rather than unwilling to defend what you claim to value. You must unashamedly prefer your race, culture, and civilization to other races, cultures, and civilization, rather than being too broadminded to take your own side. You must reserve your compassion, and your loyalty, for those who make common cause with you, rather than valuing all humans equally. You must have children if you can, and find ways to support others of your tribe having children if you can't, rather than being sterile and allowing yourself to be replaced. You must raise those children to be strong, willing to commit violence, and able to understand and pursue their own interests, rather than reflexively obedient... even if reflexive obedience on the part of your children would make parenting easier. You must treat useful idiots of the enemy as enemies, remembering Grey's First Law: Any insufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice. and Grey's Second Law: Any sufficiently subtle malice can be disguised as incompetence. Your civilization is under threat from those who wish to use the Chase Olivers of the world to accomplish what they could never hope to do with military force. Do not reject political violence. Be willing to fight.

Devon Eriksen

707,557 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

If you watch this ~50 minute screen recording closely (yeah, I know, it's long; there are also some times when my computer was very slow and laggy, just skip past that part. And at one point I had to run and get my 9-month-old a new bottle and left it on a boring screen, sorry!), I believe you can see real signs of the kind of runaway, recursive AI self-improvement that people have been warning of for a while (Mr. Kurzweil most notably and prophetically). Why do I say that? What's different now? Well, there's a reason my set of agent coding tooling is called the Flywheel. These tools all mutually self-reinforce each other. And they all flow directly into my ntm tool (short for "named_tmux_manager"), which acts as a sort of integration point and nerve center for the tools (this is becoming more true by the minute as I'm now seriously working on ntm). Now, ntm was something I started making to automate some aspects of my workflow, but it was the kind of thing where, until it was perfect, it sort of just slowed me down. So I didn't actually use it even though I kept working on it and trying to improve it, and suggested to users that they try it in my tutorials. Well anyway, I finally got around to "dogfooding" ntm last night, and now it's going to get very dramatically better at an alarming rate. Some of that is from applying my "idea wizard" prompt to generate more useful features and building that stuff out and addressing obvious pain points I encountered during my newfound usage of the tool. But a lot comes from my realization that, once again, ntm's true utility is not as a tool for ME, but for an agent. That is, ntm lets one instance of Claude Code or Codex act as, well, me, do the things that I had been doing manually. Do I wish I had started using ntm earlier? No, for two big reasons: 1) Doing it manually helped me build up my intuition massively, which directly led me down the path of creating useful prompt strategies and workflows; these often began as ad-hoc prompts that I realized could be generalized and made more versatile/universal. Lesson: don't prematurely automate until you have an intimate, intuitive feel for your "core value-add loop." Otherwise you'll have a fully automated system quickly that efficiently and automatically does a stupid or otherwise sub-optimal thing. 2) My eyes have been opened to the beauty and power of Skills. I'm not talking about your garden-variety skills that are just a simple markdown file. I'm talking about true tour-de-force directories of perfectly structured and organized files that are filled with good information, insights, workflows, etc., but presented in a way that is highly optimized for consumption by AI agents, with extreme attention paid to things like perfect progressive disclosure, token density, agent-ergonomics, agent-intuitiveness, etc. And also Skills that go way beyond markdown files, with full integration into Claude Code where it makes sense via hooks, sub-agents, and even Python scripts. These kinds of skills are a qualitative difference in expressive power and usefulness and a total game changer. They are also effectively composable, creating almost an algebra of skills that let you use them together in powerful ways. I'm working on a subscription service website and CLI tool now to share what I've learned here most effectively, stay tuned for that in the coming days. Anyway, I now know what to make and how to make it. So, getting back to that screen recording, what does it show that makes me claim recursive self-improvement is here? If you keep your eye on the upper left tmux pane, that's the "controller" agent. It is using ntm to control all the other panes which are also running Claude Code (but ntm fully supports other agent types like Codex and Gemini-CLI, and it's trivially easy to mix and match them if you wanted to have, say, 8 CCs and 6 Codexes for writing the code and 3 Gemini-CLIs for reviewing code.) Now, there's nothing that crazy about this much so far. But where it starts to get very cool is that as the session continues and we encounter real-world problems, things like my ridiculously overloaded computer that keeps hanging for long periods, Claude Code instances that crash and get into a frozen, unresponsive state, it can learn from that. And you can see it using my skill writing skill to refine its ntm vibe coding skill in real time. And then take that skill and refine it to be more intuitive for itself. Or use my cass tool skill to search all the session histories to look for problems that came up and strategize how to solve them. The most useful part was when, towards the end of the session, I told it to reflect on all the things we had done and problems we encountered. One way it can usefully leverage those reflections is by improving its ntm vibe coding skill to make it cover more edge cases and exigencies. But the other, more fundamental, way is for it to conceive of and design the optimal new features and functionality for ntm itself so that the tool embodies those lessons in a first-class way. This offloads cognition from its brain onto its tooling, just like how a person can lean on spellcheck or a calculator. It codifies correct, effective reasoning at the tool level, where it's more reliable and robust and repeatable. And btw, did you notice what code base it was working on the whole time? It was none other than ntm itself! So as it worked on its own tool, it had reflections and ideas about how to further improve the tool. Now, it could have just as easily gotten those insights and ideas while using ntm to work on a different project, but the fact that it was working on itself is almost gloriously meta and recursive. So by the end, after learning from tending to a big group of agent workers (btw, I have previously emphasized doing everything in a really distributed/decentralized way, where each fungible agent gets identical marching orders that tell it to use my bv tool to find the optimal bead to work on. This does work very well, but occasionally results in some contention and overlap from thundering herd, or at least wastes time/tokens/communication in avoiding that before the agents waste time duplicating work. But in this new ntm-oriented workflow, I was able to have the controller agent in the upper left use bv itself and then optimally parcel out the instructions to each agent so that we could know for sure that there's no overlap), I ended up with a ton of new beads for new features, which I had it optimize and polish a few times. Now I can swap to a new Claude Max account and have the swarm implement all those new features! It should only take a couple passes like the one shown in the screen recording to get everything implemented. Then we can rinse and repeat, having the agent read through the full session histories of each agent and its experience from its own session in sending ntm commands and seeing how they worked out in practice, to come up with the next batch of changes to both its ntm vibe coding skill AND to the ntm tool itself. Do you see how rapidly this turns into Skynet? My mistake earlier was in focusing on making myself a "faster horse" as Henry Ford used to joke about customers wanting before he showed them what they should really want (a Model T). That is, something that would make my experience nicer while doing this agent swarm based development workflow. But the obvious lesson is that you should make all your tooling agent-first because the agents are just better at this stuff. You can still watch, and of course I did add a ridiculous number of very nice human-centric features to ntm that you'll be seeing in the next day or two, but those are really kind of "for fun" to make us humans feel better about the process. All the real value-add is happening "by agents, for agents." PS: Towards the end, you can see me switch to my Mac and tell Claude to improve the skill that I made earlier today for taking the mkv screen recording files from OBS Studio and muxing them into MP4 files for sharing, while downloading songs from YouTube to serve as the background music. I made it so it can also grab the thumbnails and generate little song credit cards that show up in the lower right corner. This worked perfectly the first time! I'll include some screenshots in a response post showing how that worked, but it was awesome to witness. Skills are POWERFUL. I'll also post a link to this video on YouTube if you prefer to watch it there.

If you watch this ~50 minute screen recording closely (yeah, I know, it's long; there are also some times when my computer was very slow and laggy, just skip past that part. And at one point I had to run and get my 9-month-old a new bottle and left it on a boring screen, sorry!), I believe you can see real signs of the kind of runaway, recursive AI self-improvement that people have been warning of for a while (Mr. Kurzweil most notably and prophetically). Why do I say that? What's different now? Well, there's a reason my set of agent coding tooling is called the Flywheel. These tools all mutually self-reinforce each other. And they all flow directly into my ntm tool (short for "named_tmux_manager"), which acts as a sort of integration point and nerve center for the tools (this is becoming more true by the minute as I'm now seriously working on ntm). Now, ntm was something I started making to automate some aspects of my workflow, but it was the kind of thing where, until it was perfect, it sort of just slowed me down. So I didn't actually use it even though I kept working on it and trying to improve it, and suggested to users that they try it in my tutorials. Well anyway, I finally got around to "dogfooding" ntm last night, and now it's going to get very dramatically better at an alarming rate. Some of that is from applying my "idea wizard" prompt to generate more useful features and building that stuff out and addressing obvious pain points I encountered during my newfound usage of the tool. But a lot comes from my realization that, once again, ntm's true utility is not as a tool for ME, but for an agent. That is, ntm lets one instance of Claude Code or Codex act as, well, me, do the things that I had been doing manually. Do I wish I had started using ntm earlier? No, for two big reasons: 1) Doing it manually helped me build up my intuition massively, which directly led me down the path of creating useful prompt strategies and workflows; these often began as ad-hoc prompts that I realized could be generalized and made more versatile/universal. Lesson: don't prematurely automate until you have an intimate, intuitive feel for your "core value-add loop." Otherwise you'll have a fully automated system quickly that efficiently and automatically does a stupid or otherwise sub-optimal thing. 2) My eyes have been opened to the beauty and power of Skills. I'm not talking about your garden-variety skills that are just a simple markdown file. I'm talking about true tour-de-force directories of perfectly structured and organized files that are filled with good information, insights, workflows, etc., but presented in a way that is highly optimized for consumption by AI agents, with extreme attention paid to things like perfect progressive disclosure, token density, agent-ergonomics, agent-intuitiveness, etc. And also Skills that go way beyond markdown files, with full integration into Claude Code where it makes sense via hooks, sub-agents, and even Python scripts. These kinds of skills are a qualitative difference in expressive power and usefulness and a total game changer. They are also effectively composable, creating almost an algebra of skills that let you use them together in powerful ways. I'm working on a subscription service website and CLI tool now to share what I've learned here most effectively, stay tuned for that in the coming days. Anyway, I now know what to make and how to make it. So, getting back to that screen recording, what does it show that makes me claim recursive self-improvement is here? If you keep your eye on the upper left tmux pane, that's the "controller" agent. It is using ntm to control all the other panes which are also running Claude Code (but ntm fully supports other agent types like Codex and Gemini-CLI, and it's trivially easy to mix and match them if you wanted to have, say, 8 CCs and 6 Codexes for writing the code and 3 Gemini-CLIs for reviewing code.) Now, there's nothing that crazy about this much so far. But where it starts to get very cool is that as the session continues and we encounter real-world problems, things like my ridiculously overloaded computer that keeps hanging for long periods, Claude Code instances that crash and get into a frozen, unresponsive state, it can learn from that. And you can see it using my skill writing skill to refine its ntm vibe coding skill in real time. And then take that skill and refine it to be more intuitive for itself. Or use my cass tool skill to search all the session histories to look for problems that came up and strategize how to solve them. The most useful part was when, towards the end of the session, I told it to reflect on all the things we had done and problems we encountered. One way it can usefully leverage those reflections is by improving its ntm vibe coding skill to make it cover more edge cases and exigencies. But the other, more fundamental, way is for it to conceive of and design the optimal new features and functionality for ntm itself so that the tool embodies those lessons in a first-class way. This offloads cognition from its brain onto its tooling, just like how a person can lean on spellcheck or a calculator. It codifies correct, effective reasoning at the tool level, where it's more reliable and robust and repeatable. And btw, did you notice what code base it was working on the whole time? It was none other than ntm itself! So as it worked on its own tool, it had reflections and ideas about how to further improve the tool. Now, it could have just as easily gotten those insights and ideas while using ntm to work on a different project, but the fact that it was working on itself is almost gloriously meta and recursive. So by the end, after learning from tending to a big group of agent workers (btw, I have previously emphasized doing everything in a really distributed/decentralized way, where each fungible agent gets identical marching orders that tell it to use my bv tool to find the optimal bead to work on. This does work very well, but occasionally results in some contention and overlap from thundering herd, or at least wastes time/tokens/communication in avoiding that before the agents waste time duplicating work. But in this new ntm-oriented workflow, I was able to have the controller agent in the upper left use bv itself and then optimally parcel out the instructions to each agent so that we could know for sure that there's no overlap), I ended up with a ton of new beads for new features, which I had it optimize and polish a few times. Now I can swap to a new Claude Max account and have the swarm implement all those new features! It should only take a couple passes like the one shown in the screen recording to get everything implemented. Then we can rinse and repeat, having the agent read through the full session histories of each agent and its experience from its own session in sending ntm commands and seeing how they worked out in practice, to come up with the next batch of changes to both its ntm vibe coding skill AND to the ntm tool itself. Do you see how rapidly this turns into Skynet? My mistake earlier was in focusing on making myself a "faster horse" as Henry Ford used to joke about customers wanting before he showed them what they should really want (a Model T). That is, something that would make my experience nicer while doing this agent swarm based development workflow. But the obvious lesson is that you should make all your tooling agent-first because the agents are just better at this stuff. You can still watch, and of course I did add a ridiculous number of very nice human-centric features to ntm that you'll be seeing in the next day or two, but those are really kind of "for fun" to make us humans feel better about the process. All the real value-add is happening "by agents, for agents." PS: Towards the end, you can see me switch to my Mac and tell Claude to improve the skill that I made earlier today for taking the mkv screen recording files from OBS Studio and muxing them into MP4 files for sharing, while downloading songs from YouTube to serve as the background music. I made it so it can also grab the thumbnails and generate little song credit cards that show up in the lower right corner. This worked perfectly the first time! I'll include some screenshots in a response post showing how that worked, but it was awesome to witness. Skills are POWERFUL. I'll also post a link to this video on YouTube if you prefer to watch it there.

Jeffrey Emanuel

25,483 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

대통령님, 뉴진스- 하이브 이슈를 봐주십시오 [English Transcript] Mr. President, please take a closer look at the issue between NewJeans and HYBE. This video does not simply address a dispute between one company and one artist team. It deals with nationally significant issues... the structure of the cultural industry within the K-pop creative ecosystem, the way power operates, how public opinion is shaped, and the transparency of democracy itself. That is why this video may be somewhat lengthy, but I sincerely ask you to watch it until the end. The key messages I want to convey are organized as follows: 1. Why the State Must Pay Attention to K-pop Industry Issues K-pop drives domestic demand, exports, and tourism. Alongside semiconductors and defense, it is a strategic industry led by the next generation, a core field that the nation must protect and foster. Therefore, the government needs to inspect the health and structural problems of the K-pop creative ecosystem. 2. Why the Government Must Pay Attention to the NewJeans–HYBE Case (Reason 1) The new direction that Min Hee-jin and NewJeans have shown in K-pop represents a healthy production model centered on respect for artists and the creative process. This could become a turning point for improving the problems in the current K-pop system. (Reason 2) This is not merely an issue involving one team. It is a case that exposes how structures of power suppress and exclude creative agents. To ensure the sustainability of the entire cultural and industrial ecosystem, this needs to be examined and addressed. (Reason 3) The way this situation has been handled, through media influence, legal maneuvering, and alleged manipulation of public opinion, raises issues that go beyond this industry and are directly tied to the principles of fairness and democracy. Therefore, a special audit of the company is necessary for the sake of the public interest. 3. Comprehensive Proposal: This is not a trivial internal conflict within one company. It exposes structural problems in the K-pop industry and holds the potential to change its future. Moreover, it could become a symbolic turning point that brings about meaningful structural change in Korea’s cultural and industrial landscape. Please, take the time to listen until the end. This video was made independently and conscientiously, with no personal or financial interest, out of concern for Korea’s cultural and industrial development and national competitiveness. So please, I ask that you take the time to listen until the end. This video was made independently, without any private interest, and with a sincere concern for the development of Korea’s cultural industry and national competitiveness. Why the K-pop Industry Deserves National Attention Mr. President, you have emphasized revitalizing the domestic economy as a national priority. K-pop does precisely that, it stimulates exports and tourism, invigorates small businesses and local economies, and supports livelihood industries. The economic ripple effect of the K-pop industry can revitalize entire regions, from restaurants, souvenir shops, and accommodations to transportation, shopping, performances, and exhibitions. While public support funds only redistribute an existing domestic pie, growth in industries like K-pop that reach global markets expands the pie itself. K-pop also creates value from nothing, with far fewer geographic or geopolitical constraints than manufacturing, and generates steady global revenue. As a brand, K-culture has unique global competitiveness and irreplaceable differentiation. Moreover, as a nation in a key geopolitical position, the more South Korea is recognized culturally and attracts visitors, the stronger its hand becomes in diplomacy, trade, and security negotiations. 4. The Need for New Generational Leadership And in a rapidly changing global era, South Korea’s future depends on young creative talent, those who can’t be constrained by the old frameworks of industrialization. K-pop, as a youth-led, globally competitive field, symbolizes this new future. Therefore, K-pop should be protected and developed just like semiconductors or defense industries, with government support to ensure a healthy and sustainable ecosystem. 5. Why NewJeans and Min Hee-jin Matter You may ask: To what extent should the government intervene? You once said that in the arts, where politicians may not fully grasp the nuances, it is essential to listen to skilled professionals who have proven results. Min Hee-jin is one such professional. From her start as a junior employee at SM Entertainment to becoming an executive, she demonstrated unmatched ability to connect artistic vision with popular success, without a single failure. At ADOR, with only around 16 billion won of capital, she achieved over 190 billion won in sales within two years, proving that artistic value can translate into economic value. Most importantly, she refused to exploit unethical industry practices like album bulk-buying. Instead, she built NewJeans to show that art itself can be profitable, proving that honesty and creativity can coexist in business. 6. A Healthier Model for Artist Treatment Under her leadership, artists were treated with dignity, provided good housing and supportive environments, invited to her home, encouraged to study art and participate in songwriting, and even paid promptly within two months of debut. When ADOR achieved major success, NewJeans members received tens of billions in settlements, unprecedented in K-pop. She never exploited fan loyalty for profit. Even if fans could afford only one album, she ensured it was worth their money, offering honest, high-quality content. This proved that true profit in K-pop can come from the artistic value itself, not from manipulative marketing. It showed a path toward ethical, sustainable growth for K-pop. Therefore, please, give Min Hee-jin and NewJeans a chance to work together again. At the very least, hear what they have to say about K-pop. And as for HYBE, there must be an audit equivalent to a special investigation. 7. The Mechanism of Power that Suppresses Creativity In April 2024, NewJeans’ global popularity was explosive, topping Billboard and Spotify, reshaping girl-group trends, and breaking Guinness World Records. Without any world tour, they achieved over 100 billion won in revenue through music alone, surpassing even the early growth rates of BTS and BLACKPINK. Yet, at the height of this success, HYBE raided ADOR’s offices, dismissed CEO Min Hee-jin, and dismantled the creative foundation that built NewJeans. This not only destroyed one team’s future but also dealt a severe blow to Korea’s cultural competitiveness. HYBE’s public reason? That Min Hee-jin tried to take NewJeans independent. But given that HYBE owns 80% of ADOR’s shares, such independence was structurally impossible. The true goal appears to have been to strip Min of her authority and seize control of the creative process. After her removal, the core creative staff who built NewJeans were fired or pushed out. Suspicious internal financial transactions followed. The pattern matches what we have seen before in HYBE, talented creators producing success, only to be marginalized once their results can be absorbed by corporate power. 8. The Pattern of Power and Control within HYBE In previous cases, key developers and creators were pushed out as HYBE’s management centralized around one man, Chairman Bang Si-hyuk. After public listing, HYBE expanded aggressively through acquisitions, and the CEOs of those subsidiaries were later removed. The same pattern repeated with Min Hee-jin and ADOR. And in all this, the creative value, the art itself, was disregarded. No healthy company destroys its most successful creative division. This is abnormal, and therefore demands scrutiny. The courts may hesitate to intervene, since rulings could affect corporate precedents, but that is exactly why state-level oversight is needed. K-pop is a national asset, and if a leading K-pop company makes such abnormal decisions toward one of its most promising teams, the state has ample reason for a public audit. 9. The Need for Transparency in Media and Judiciary HYBE’s pattern involves media manipulation, legal intimidation, and organized online smear campaigns. Comparing reports over the past year reveals clear imbalance, suggesting external influence on editorial direction. Thus, media reform to ensure fair reporting is needed. Judicial and public-opinion manipulation must also be examined. Cases of coordinated comment attacks on lawmakers who criticized HYBE during the 2024 National Assembly audit indicate possible “comment factory” activity, systematic online operations that distort public opinion. If such manipulation exists, it is a grave threat to democracy itself. When power can distort truth through money and media, neither creators, workers, nor consumers can be fairly evaluated. Auditing HYBE could expose how such systems operate, not only protecting K-pop, but preventing similar abuse in politics and other industries. 10. Broader Implications for Korea’s Future Industries This is a matter of principle. In every industry, from AI to manufacturing, progress depends on fair competition, respect for skilled practitioners, and merit-based leadership. When leadership is earned through competence, industries thrive; when it is preserved through privilege, they decay. Korea’s rapid development has produced entrenched interests without fair verification of ability, a structural problem visible across industries. And when the leading company in such a vital cultural field behaves this way, the state must intervene. Good leaders and companies that value authenticity, fairness, and creativity should be given the opportunity to set the new standard. Min Hee-jin and NewJeans demonstrated that possibility in K-pop. Only when merit-based, ethical companies lead can any industry, including K-pop, achieve sustainable and healthy growth. A strong, fair industrial foundation is the prerequisite for a truly sustainable welfare state. That is the responsibility of government. 11. Final Appeal Mr. President, the NewJeans–HYBE issue is not just an internal dispute. It is a test case, whether Korea will continue allowing power to suppress creativity and absorb others’ achievements, or whether it will set a new standard for fairness across industries. Please give Min Hee-jin and NewJeans the opportunity to work together again. Please listen to the voices of artists who have built the true value of K-pop. That voice can become the driving force for Korea’s future. To all viewers This channel is not monetized and holds no vested interests in any party. I speak not as a fan of any group, but as a citizen who loves this country and wishes for Korea’s cultural and industrial future to grow in the right direction. I know my perspective may not always be correct. If there are misunderstandings, I welcome correction with evidence. But if this message carries even a grain of truth, if it sounds fair and meaningful, then please help deliver it to those who can make change, including the President. Somewhere around you, a friend, colleague, family member, or even your local hairdresser, there may be someone who can understand and act. This voice may be minor, it may soon fade, but if even one more person begins to think critically about these unjust structures, that awareness can gather and become the power to build a better society. ------ Watch the video on youtube:

1tokki

15,061 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

COMMONS HOUSING SELECT COMMITTEE: STATEMENT FROM FREE LEASEHOLDERS 3/3/26 Today, we told Parliament the truth. About the cynical games Conservative and Labour governments have been playing with your homes, money and lives. It was awkward. We had to motor through to cover as many points as humanely possible in a short time. Sorry if we didn’t cover yours. We are the insurgents against a very closed and broken political system. We will go away when they finally free the people from the property servitude of leasehold. Until then, we will keep challenging the official line and holding power to account, however uncomfortable that may be. Parliament has been talking about abolishing leasehold, a legacy of serfdom, since the 1880s, before working men and women had the right to vote. In 2026, we keep hearing it’s “complicated” and our politicians need more time because they might get sued by the wealthy landowners. What happened to the will of the people? Isn’t Parliament sovereign? Wasn’t that what all the Brexit lark was about? And doesn’t this Labour government have the second biggest parliamentary majority in its 126-year history as the so-called working people’s party? Keir Starmer can do a TikTok stunt on ground rents. But he can’t run away from the truth. His government are peddling a draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill that has been purged of policies that you voted for in the The Labour Party manifesto. Policies promised again in the July 2024 King’s Speech: the remaining Law Commission enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations. So you can finally “take back control”. The Starmer administration appears to be captured by the deep-pocketed freeholder lobby and property cartels. And the Prime Minister is in thrall to the hand-wringing lawyers who bleat on about the risk of judicial review and ECHR lawfare, as if the rights of extortionists, many offshore, and lofty international law matter more than the British people being looted in their homes and what election manifestos have promised time and time again. This government claims that they are ending the feudal leasehold system. Instead, they keep it on life support by protecting money-for-nothing ground rents until 2068. We’ll have flying cars before feudalism is banished from our homes! And buried away in the small print, the Labour government concedes our point: “leasehold as a tenure will not disappear overnight and it will be a feature of the housing market for many years to come.” The government is also siding with the leasehold grifters by failing to restrict development value in the draft legislation, which means many flat leaseholders will never be able to afford to buy their freehold, something that must happen before conversion to commonhold. Remember, the freeholders’ main lobby group, the Residential Freehold Association, admits that the typical freeholder owns just 2.5% capital value in a block of flats. These wealth-destroying corporates own a sliver of our homes and have the cheek to talk about their human rights. We are not Mugabeists. We will, of course, pay a fair rate to compensate the freeholder to leave our homes for good. But demanding more of our money so they can thwart our right to buy them out, on the basis that they could theoretically build a skyscraper in the garden, is taking the mick and must end, as the government first promised in 2021. Don’t take our word on the scam of freeholders invoking development value to block leaseholders’ bid for self-rule. Barrister Nicola Muir, of Tanfield Chambers, has written that “it is amazing what developments landlords believe are possible and the profits they claim they will generate”, citing a telling example from practice: “The landlord initially claimed £34 million for the alleged potential to build a skyscraper in the front garden of the block. Such claims can obviously be a deterrent to leaseholders, who probably have no intention of developing.” And we were the ONLY campaign group that urged the Housing, Communities & Local Government Committee to ensure that this government sets enfranchisement rates high in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, to the benefit of leaseholders. There is a major risk that, due to the influence peddling of ground rent grifters and their lobbyists in Westminster and Whitehall, the government will fail to implement these long-awaited reforms already on the statute books. Matthew Pennycook MP promised in November 2024 to put enfranchisement rates out to public consultation last summer, but it never happened. And if the government is forced to begin the enfranchisement changes in the 2024 Act, it will likely set the deferment and capitalisation rates artificially low, stuffing freeholders’ mouths with gold when desperate leaseholders try to extend their leases or buy out the freehold. These deferment and capitalisation rates are already derived from freeholder-friendly case law, specifically the 2006 Upper Tribunal decision known as Sportelli, with the deferment rate set at 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%. While the 2024 Act is vague on what these rates should be, we know that investors routinely buy freeholds at auction or directly from developers at higher rates than those implied by Sportelli, meaning they pay significantly less than leaseholders are already required to pay under statutory schemes with the low Sportelli rates. For example, an analysis of Allsop Ground Rent Auctions found that investors have been paying an average 9% capitalisation rate for the ground rent in freehold titles – well above Sportelli’s 6%. This situation is clearly unfair, and there is significant industry lobbying to keep the deferment and capitalisation rates low, i.e. below the going market rates, so that freeholders are excessively compensated by leaseholders. Once the rates are set in the 2024 Act, they remain fixed for ten years, creating jeopardy that they will be set to the disadvantage of leaseholders, who are less organised and resourced than industry interests to influence policy. If the rates are set substantially below Sportelli rates, the savings from other provisions of the 2024 Act – such as the removal of marriage value, the 0.1% restriction on ground rents, and the end of the requirement to pay the freeholder’s reasonable legal and valuation costs – would be more than cancelled out, leaving leaseholders paying more than they do today under the current rules. Minister Pennycook highlighted this risk while in opposition during the passage of the 2024 Act, stating that Labour “remain[s] convinced that this government, or a future one, could be lobbied by vested interests to set a deferment rate that will be punitive to leaseholders.” He proposed an amendment on the deferment rate to guide the Secretary of State, requiring that “in setting the deferment rate, the Secretary of State must have regard to the desirability of encouraging leaseholders to extend their lease at the lowest possible cost”, although the amendment was not passed. This policy ought to be in the draft Bill, yet it remains absent. We are urging that the 2024 Act be amended to require that the enfranchisement rates must not fall below an absolute floor of the existing Sportelli rates (with the deferment rate of 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%). But leaseholders should really benefit from market rates, i.e. those which developers and investors already enjoy being significantly above Sportelli, to ensure that they do not pay excessive compensation to freeholders, as occurs under the current system, to buy their freehold or extend a lease. And this isn’t just about what goes into the algorithm for the online enfranchisement calculator under the 2024 Act, or about ending the development value scam, a reform dropped from the legislation after behind-the-scenes lobbying. We will not accept a failure to bring forward a Universal Right to Manage, as part of a glidepath to commonhold. Watch what our founder said about a well-connected landlord and tenant barrister who bragged to the property tribunal last year that he had worked on the Law Commission’s Right to Manage reforms, all while representing an offshore billionaire freeholder trying to block leaseholders’ quest for Right to Manage. It should be easy. But the leaseholders at this development had to spend £150,000 just to defend their no-fault right against this legal onslaught at the First-tier Tribunal. They won, but the freeholder is now appealing… Beyond Right to Manage reform, we need a Right to Participate in collective enfranchisement so that all flat leaseholders can buy a share of the freehold even if they miss out the first time when one group of neighbours has enough support to enfranchise the block. It is unfair for leaseholders to be locked out of decisions over the charges they pay and the services affecting their home when they are ready to buy their share of the freehold. Sorting this inequity was the will of Parliament with Right to Enfranchise provisions in the 2002 Act. It’s also what the Law Commission originally recommended before seemingly being pressured by vested interests to drop the policy from their final recommendations in 2020. Also, why on earth should leaseholders have to contort themselves to get 50% support of all unit-owners in a block? Satisfying the onerous 50% participation threshold is near impossible in bigger buildings and those with high levels of buy-to-let, yet scummy investors face no qualifying criteria when hoovering up the freeholds of our homes from developers or auctioneers behind our backs. Don’t patronise us with Lord Best’s scheme for managing agents. We want liberation, not regulation. There’s a reason both the freeholder and managing agent lobbies are gagging for the cosy Lord Best policy, which wasn’t promised in either the Labour manifesto or the King’s Speech. It will jack up leaseholders’ already sky-high service charges, repeat the cruel joke of the Building Safety Regulator, and keep freeholders and their managing agent cronies firmly in the ecosystem. At the same time, a statutory regulator of managing agents will no doubt restrict competition by keeping out small ethical new entrants. It will also allow the government to claim job done while failing to end leasehold. Even without leasehold abolition, leaseholders will still be denied rightful control of their service charges and the power to easily sack their managing agent - the real regulation needed to rein in rip-off service providers and put them out of business, not some powerless or captured regulator in Whitehall. Labour should be for the grafters. If the government wants to win back public support after the Gordon and Denton by-election drubbing, salvaging this draft legislation and swiftly commencing the 2024 Act must be its priority. Show that politics can be a force for good. Stand up to the ground rent grifters and offshore property mafia. Free leaseholders. 5.3 million households in England and Wales are watching.

COMMONS HOUSING SELECT COMMITTEE: STATEMENT FROM FREE LEASEHOLDERS 3/3/26 Today, we told Parliament the truth. About the cynical games Conservative and Labour governments have been playing with your homes, money and lives. It was awkward. We had to motor through to cover as many points as humanely possible in a short time. Sorry if we didn’t cover yours. We are the insurgents against a very closed and broken political system. We will go away when they finally free the people from the property servitude of leasehold. Until then, we will keep challenging the official line and holding power to account, however uncomfortable that may be. Parliament has been talking about abolishing leasehold, a legacy of serfdom, since the 1880s, before working men and women had the right to vote. In 2026, we keep hearing it’s “complicated” and our politicians need more time because they might get sued by the wealthy landowners. What happened to the will of the people? Isn’t Parliament sovereign? Wasn’t that what all the Brexit lark was about? And doesn’t this Labour government have the second biggest parliamentary majority in its 126-year history as the so-called working people’s party? Keir Starmer can do a TikTok stunt on ground rents. But he can’t run away from the truth. His government are peddling a draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill that has been purged of policies that you voted for in the The Labour Party manifesto. Policies promised again in the July 2024 King’s Speech: the remaining Law Commission enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations. So you can finally “take back control”. The Starmer administration appears to be captured by the deep-pocketed freeholder lobby and property cartels. And the Prime Minister is in thrall to the hand-wringing lawyers who bleat on about the risk of judicial review and ECHR lawfare, as if the rights of extortionists, many offshore, and lofty international law matter more than the British people being looted in their homes and what election manifestos have promised time and time again. This government claims that they are ending the feudal leasehold system. Instead, they keep it on life support by protecting money-for-nothing ground rents until 2068. We’ll have flying cars before feudalism is banished from our homes! And buried away in the small print, the Labour government concedes our point: “leasehold as a tenure will not disappear overnight and it will be a feature of the housing market for many years to come.” The government is also siding with the leasehold grifters by failing to restrict development value in the draft legislation, which means many flat leaseholders will never be able to afford to buy their freehold, something that must happen before conversion to commonhold. Remember, the freeholders’ main lobby group, the Residential Freehold Association, admits that the typical freeholder owns just 2.5% capital value in a block of flats. These wealth-destroying corporates own a sliver of our homes and have the cheek to talk about their human rights. We are not Mugabeists. We will, of course, pay a fair rate to compensate the freeholder to leave our homes for good. But demanding more of our money so they can thwart our right to buy them out, on the basis that they could theoretically build a skyscraper in the garden, is taking the mick and must end, as the government first promised in 2021. Don’t take our word on the scam of freeholders invoking development value to block leaseholders’ bid for self-rule. Barrister Nicola Muir, of Tanfield Chambers, has written that “it is amazing what developments landlords believe are possible and the profits they claim they will generate”, citing a telling example from practice: “The landlord initially claimed £34 million for the alleged potential to build a skyscraper in the front garden of the block. Such claims can obviously be a deterrent to leaseholders, who probably have no intention of developing.” And we were the ONLY campaign group that urged the Housing, Communities & Local Government Committee to ensure that this government sets enfranchisement rates high in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, to the benefit of leaseholders. There is a major risk that, due to the influence peddling of ground rent grifters and their lobbyists in Westminster and Whitehall, the government will fail to implement these long-awaited reforms already on the statute books. Matthew Pennycook MP promised in November 2024 to put enfranchisement rates out to public consultation last summer, but it never happened. And if the government is forced to begin the enfranchisement changes in the 2024 Act, it will likely set the deferment and capitalisation rates artificially low, stuffing freeholders’ mouths with gold when desperate leaseholders try to extend their leases or buy out the freehold. These deferment and capitalisation rates are already derived from freeholder-friendly case law, specifically the 2006 Upper Tribunal decision known as Sportelli, with the deferment rate set at 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%. While the 2024 Act is vague on what these rates should be, we know that investors routinely buy freeholds at auction or directly from developers at higher rates than those implied by Sportelli, meaning they pay significantly less than leaseholders are already required to pay under statutory schemes with the low Sportelli rates. For example, an analysis of Allsop Ground Rent Auctions found that investors have been paying an average 9% capitalisation rate for the ground rent in freehold titles – well above Sportelli’s 6%. This situation is clearly unfair, and there is significant industry lobbying to keep the deferment and capitalisation rates low, i.e. below the going market rates, so that freeholders are excessively compensated by leaseholders. Once the rates are set in the 2024 Act, they remain fixed for ten years, creating jeopardy that they will be set to the disadvantage of leaseholders, who are less organised and resourced than industry interests to influence policy. If the rates are set substantially below Sportelli rates, the savings from other provisions of the 2024 Act – such as the removal of marriage value, the 0.1% restriction on ground rents, and the end of the requirement to pay the freeholder’s reasonable legal and valuation costs – would be more than cancelled out, leaving leaseholders paying more than they do today under the current rules. Minister Pennycook highlighted this risk while in opposition during the passage of the 2024 Act, stating that Labour “remain[s] convinced that this government, or a future one, could be lobbied by vested interests to set a deferment rate that will be punitive to leaseholders.” He proposed an amendment on the deferment rate to guide the Secretary of State, requiring that “in setting the deferment rate, the Secretary of State must have regard to the desirability of encouraging leaseholders to extend their lease at the lowest possible cost”, although the amendment was not passed. This policy ought to be in the draft Bill, yet it remains absent. We are urging that the 2024 Act be amended to require that the enfranchisement rates must not fall below an absolute floor of the existing Sportelli rates (with the deferment rate of 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%). But leaseholders should really benefit from market rates, i.e. those which developers and investors already enjoy being significantly above Sportelli, to ensure that they do not pay excessive compensation to freeholders, as occurs under the current system, to buy their freehold or extend a lease. And this isn’t just about what goes into the algorithm for the online enfranchisement calculator under the 2024 Act, or about ending the development value scam, a reform dropped from the legislation after behind-the-scenes lobbying. We will not accept a failure to bring forward a Universal Right to Manage, as part of a glidepath to commonhold. Watch what our founder said about a well-connected landlord and tenant barrister who bragged to the property tribunal last year that he had worked on the Law Commission’s Right to Manage reforms, all while representing an offshore billionaire freeholder trying to block leaseholders’ quest for Right to Manage. It should be easy. But the leaseholders at this development had to spend £150,000 just to defend their no-fault right against this legal onslaught at the First-tier Tribunal. They won, but the freeholder is now appealing… Beyond Right to Manage reform, we need a Right to Participate in collective enfranchisement so that all flat leaseholders can buy a share of the freehold even if they miss out the first time when one group of neighbours has enough support to enfranchise the block. It is unfair for leaseholders to be locked out of decisions over the charges they pay and the services affecting their home when they are ready to buy their share of the freehold. Sorting this inequity was the will of Parliament with Right to Enfranchise provisions in the 2002 Act. It’s also what the Law Commission originally recommended before seemingly being pressured by vested interests to drop the policy from their final recommendations in 2020. Also, why on earth should leaseholders have to contort themselves to get 50% support of all unit-owners in a block? Satisfying the onerous 50% participation threshold is near impossible in bigger buildings and those with high levels of buy-to-let, yet scummy investors face no qualifying criteria when hoovering up the freeholds of our homes from developers or auctioneers behind our backs. Don’t patronise us with Lord Best’s scheme for managing agents. We want liberation, not regulation. There’s a reason both the freeholder and managing agent lobbies are gagging for the cosy Lord Best policy, which wasn’t promised in either the Labour manifesto or the King’s Speech. It will jack up leaseholders’ already sky-high service charges, repeat the cruel joke of the Building Safety Regulator, and keep freeholders and their managing agent cronies firmly in the ecosystem. At the same time, a statutory regulator of managing agents will no doubt restrict competition by keeping out small ethical new entrants. It will also allow the government to claim job done while failing to end leasehold. Even without leasehold abolition, leaseholders will still be denied rightful control of their service charges and the power to easily sack their managing agent - the real regulation needed to rein in rip-off service providers and put them out of business, not some powerless or captured regulator in Whitehall. Labour should be for the grafters. If the government wants to win back public support after the Gordon and Denton by-election drubbing, salvaging this draft legislation and swiftly commencing the 2024 Act must be its priority. Show that politics can be a force for good. Stand up to the ground rent grifters and offshore property mafia. Free leaseholders. 5.3 million households in England and Wales are watching.

Free Leaseholders

20,976 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Dear ICP community, the Internet Computer has now been running strong for 5 years 👏👏👏 Here is a celebratory preview of ICP "cloud engines," the sovereign frontier cloud technology the network shall soon provide from Main points: — Cloud engines enable anyone to spin up their own sovereign frontier cloud. The technology involves an extraordinary inventive step, in which cloud is created from a mathematically secure network of nodes. The nodes run as part of the Internet Computer network ( but are selected and configured by the cloud engine's owner. — The frontier cloud provided by engines is strongly focused on enabling AI agents to build and update online applications and services for us. The world is changing fast, and nearly all new online apps and services are already being built with the help of AI, and thus cloud engines target the future of cloud. — Software hosted on cloud engines is tamperproof, which means that it is immune to infrastructure hacks, because it runs inside a mathematically secure network protocol, rather than on computers directly. This means that AI agents, and those building with them, don't need to have a security team in the loop, or to trust someone else's security team. This is crucial, because in the future, non technical people will demand the freedom to build with full automation — where they just need to issue instructions to AI about what to build, and don't need to worry about anything or anyone else. Of course, apps and services running on engines are also vastly safer from the new breed of hacker being enabled by frontier AI. (The cloud engines themselves are also "tamperproof." Even if a hacker gains physical access to some portion of a cloud engine's nodes, and can make arbitrary changes, the computations and data of the hosted apps and services cannot be corrupted or interrupted so long as the network's fault bounds aren't exceeded. The recent hack of Vercel, a major cloud platform, which gave hackers access to the apps it hosted, provides additional perspective on the importance of this advantage.) — Software hosted on cloud engines is guaranteed to run, so long as a sufficient number of the engine's nodes are running. This means that AI can build applications and services without the need to have a human systems admin team constantly tinkering with the underlying platform to keep it running, which is again crucial, because in the future, non technical people will expect the freedom to use AI to build without the support of others. — New frontier programming language technology, in the form of the Motoko language developed by Caffeine Labs, leverages seminal "orthogonal persistence" technology that unifies program logic and data to deliver further unlocks for AI (Motoko is the first computer language being developed that targets agents that are writing software rather than humans engineers per se). Nowadays, AI can build and update production apps at a prodigious rate, even at the speed of conversation. But it can also make mistakes, and there's a risk that an update it creates might be "lossy" in the sense it causes some transformed data to be lost. Again, in this new world, it's both undesirable and impractical for everyone to have to have a systems admin team on-hand to detect lossy updates and roll them back, but Motoko provides a solution: it can detect new software updates are lossy before they are applied, reducing potentially catastrophic errors by AI to harmless coding retries. — Software hosted on cloud engines is "serverless" but unlike traditional serverless software, directly it directly incorporates data through "orthogonal persistence." Another key purpose is simplify backend software logic and fuel the modeling power of AI by increasing abstraction (sorry for the technical language!!!). Put simply, this enables AI to produce more sophisticated backends, faster, and at dramatically lower costs, as measured by the number AI API tokens consumed during coding. (Tip for the technical: orthogonal persistence is a new paradigm where "the program is the database," and data lives inside program variables, which is possible because it's as if hosted software runs forever in persistent memory). — An expanding database of skills at shall make it possible to develop and directly deploy apps and services to your cloud engines directly from Claude Code, Perplexity, Codex and other AI platforms. Further, your account on can be connected, so that new apps and updates created through conversation automatically appear hosted from your cloud engine. In the future, R&D is going to be very seamless. You converse with AI, and your secure and unstoppable apps or services are created or updated. Cloud engines are designed to directly support this "self-writing cloud" future where we can work hands-free. — Tech sovereignty is becoming a huge issue worldwide, with governments and corporations seeking to create sovereign tech stacks owing to geopolitical tensions. Increasingly, people are realizing that tech provided by foreign nations can come with hidden backdoors and kills switches, from the base platform, right up through hosted apps and services. ICP technology is open source, and those building on ICP using AI own their own source code. When you have the source code, you can verify that there are no backdoors, and when you own the source code thanks to AI, you can update it at will, freeing you from vendor lock-in. But cloud engines take sovereignty much further... — You create a cloud engine by selecting the nodes that will be combined. You can choose the class of nodes used, and their number, but more importantly, you can choose who operates the nodes, and where they are located. Almost any configuration is possible, because the Internet Computer scales the security privileges afforded to hosted software within the network according to configuration (software hosted on cloud engines can directly interoperate with software on other engines and traditional subnets, but base restrictions are applied according to security rules). A cloud engine can be created within a region such as Europe, to comply with regs such as GDPR, or completely within a sovereign state like Switzerland or Pakistan. But cloud engines go further still... — Sovereignty is also about freedom from vendor lock-in. Cloud engines are essentially ICP (Internet Computer Protocol) network configurations, and this means the underlying compute nodes they combine can be swapped out without interrupting their hosted apps and services. This is a big deal. In addition, cloud engines now support nodes that are instances running on Big Tech's clouds, in addition to nodes that are dedicated specialized hardware, as per the Gen I and Gen II nodes that dominate the Internet Computer today. For example, it is possible to have an engine running across different AWS data centers, say, and then reconfigure the engine to run across a mixture of AWS, Google, Azure and Hetzner for even more resilience, without the users of hosted apps and services noticing a thing. That's true freedom. — Sovereign AI is becoming increasingly important too, and cloud engines allow special "AI nodes" to be added to them, so that hosted software can perform inference on hardware provisioned by the owner from a location the owner has selected. Even though the AI nodes are only accessible within the cloud engine, they can still benefit from the forthcoming Internet Intelligence Gateway (IG), which will make it possible to validate inference performed on key frontier open weights LLMs, even when the inference is performed on completely independent AI clouds. When the results of inference are received, this technology can verify that neither the prompt+context (input) nor the inference result (output) have been modified, and that the results were produced by the precise LLM expected. This ensures that AI clouds don't cheat by running inference on cheaper models than are being paid for, and bad actors aren't modifying the inputs or outputs to surreptitiously insert advertising into results, say, or change facts, or insert malware when code is being generated. What's super cool about this technology is the cost of the verification is scalable. A very valuable additional security can be achieved with only 1-2% of extra cost. — Scaling apps and services when they hit capacity limits is another thorny problem that cloud engines help the world address. Engines make scaling possible without rewriting or reconfiguring software. The query workload capacity of hosted software can be horizontally scaled simply by adding new nodes to an engine, and nodes can also be added in geographical proximity to demand. Meanwhile, update workload capacity can first be scaled-up by swapping an engine's nodes out for the next class up, and then when no larger class of node is available, horizontally scaled-out by "splitting" the engine into two, which doubles available capacity. (Technical tip: horizontally scaling update capacity by splitting engines requires multi-canister architectures). — For those who have been following how Caffeine builds apps that can efficiently store large numbers of files, I should mention that apps built on cloud engines will also support the new ICP Blob Storage cloud network (since cloud engines currently have up to about 3 TB of memory, which apps storing large amounts of files can easily exceed). We are also working on allowing blob storage nodes to be added to cloud engines, to enable sovereign mass blob storage within an engine, similarly to how AI nodes can be added currently. — Lastly, but certainly not least, I should mention that cloud engines are multi-blockchain capable, and ready for digital assets, thanks to the clever math at their core. For example, an e-commerce service built on a cloud engine can securely accept and custody stablecoin payments, or a multi-chain DEX could be hosted. Further, engines can support software autonomy (software orchestrated and controlled by other autonomous software, in a decentralized way) and can themselves be orchestrated by SNS technology, and thus run autonomously too. Today, though, the focus is on *mainstream* cloud. This year, the cloud industry will generate approximately one trillion dollars in revenue. That number is already huge, but is expected to grow to two trillion dollars by 2030. After years of continuous development, which have seen more than $500m spent on R&D, the Internet Computer network is now tacking directly toward this mainstream cloud market with cloud engine technology. In their first version, cloud engines are not meant to be a cloud panacea. For example, currently they are not ideal for working with big data. You should use something like DataBricks for that. Cloud engines are carefully targeted at enabling AI to produce traditional online applications and services, including SaaS, in a safer and more productive way, which represents a new market segment with tremendous potential. Of course, DFINITY will continue to work relentlessly to push forward ICP's capabilities, so expect further developments. It's worth mentioning that this cloud segment isn't just about creating new apps and services using AI, it's also about replacing legacy systems and apps built on super expensive SaaS services. Caffeine Labs is working to produce technology (Caffeine Snorkel) that can study an enterprise's legacy systems and app built on SaaS, create replacement systems and apps, and migrate the data, while supporting key stakeholders through the process over email and chat, with full automation. Thus the legacy systems and SaaS markets shall also be addressed by cloud engines. Zooming out, and reasoning in a more metaphysical way, we believe, as we always have, that there is room for a new kind of cloud created by mathematical networks, that provides seminal advances in the fields of security and resilience, as well as true sovereignty and freedom from lock-in. That this same technology, with the help of additional technologies like orthogonal persistence and Motoko, enables AI to build for us without the need for so much oversight, and to create more backend sophistication while consuming fewer AI API tokens, enables ICP to bring game-changing advances to the world. Cloud engines will work synergistically with the Intelligence Gateway, which will enable apps and services running on engines to seamlessly leverage AI, wherever that AI is running, while providing verifiability at extremely low cost for open weights frontier models. We believe that cloud engines represent an inflection point in the storied history of the Internet Computer project, and I'm very proud to be sharing the details with you on the network's fifth birthday 💪 I'll be back with more news soon!!

Dear ICP community, the Internet Computer has now been running strong for 5 years 👏👏👏 Here is a celebratory preview of ICP "cloud engines," the sovereign frontier cloud technology the network shall soon provide from Main points: — Cloud engines enable anyone to spin up their own sovereign frontier cloud. The technology involves an extraordinary inventive step, in which cloud is created from a mathematically secure network of nodes. The nodes run as part of the Internet Computer network ( but are selected and configured by the cloud engine's owner. — The frontier cloud provided by engines is strongly focused on enabling AI agents to build and update online applications and services for us. The world is changing fast, and nearly all new online apps and services are already being built with the help of AI, and thus cloud engines target the future of cloud. — Software hosted on cloud engines is tamperproof, which means that it is immune to infrastructure hacks, because it runs inside a mathematically secure network protocol, rather than on computers directly. This means that AI agents, and those building with them, don't need to have a security team in the loop, or to trust someone else's security team. This is crucial, because in the future, non technical people will demand the freedom to build with full automation — where they just need to issue instructions to AI about what to build, and don't need to worry about anything or anyone else. Of course, apps and services running on engines are also vastly safer from the new breed of hacker being enabled by frontier AI. (The cloud engines themselves are also "tamperproof." Even if a hacker gains physical access to some portion of a cloud engine's nodes, and can make arbitrary changes, the computations and data of the hosted apps and services cannot be corrupted or interrupted so long as the network's fault bounds aren't exceeded. The recent hack of Vercel, a major cloud platform, which gave hackers access to the apps it hosted, provides additional perspective on the importance of this advantage.) — Software hosted on cloud engines is guaranteed to run, so long as a sufficient number of the engine's nodes are running. This means that AI can build applications and services without the need to have a human systems admin team constantly tinkering with the underlying platform to keep it running, which is again crucial, because in the future, non technical people will expect the freedom to use AI to build without the support of others. — New frontier programming language technology, in the form of the Motoko language developed by Caffeine Labs, leverages seminal "orthogonal persistence" technology that unifies program logic and data to deliver further unlocks for AI (Motoko is the first computer language being developed that targets agents that are writing software rather than humans engineers per se). Nowadays, AI can build and update production apps at a prodigious rate, even at the speed of conversation. But it can also make mistakes, and there's a risk that an update it creates might be "lossy" in the sense it causes some transformed data to be lost. Again, in this new world, it's both undesirable and impractical for everyone to have to have a systems admin team on-hand to detect lossy updates and roll them back, but Motoko provides a solution: it can detect new software updates are lossy before they are applied, reducing potentially catastrophic errors by AI to harmless coding retries. — Software hosted on cloud engines is "serverless" but unlike traditional serverless software, directly it directly incorporates data through "orthogonal persistence." Another key purpose is simplify backend software logic and fuel the modeling power of AI by increasing abstraction (sorry for the technical language!!!). Put simply, this enables AI to produce more sophisticated backends, faster, and at dramatically lower costs, as measured by the number AI API tokens consumed during coding. (Tip for the technical: orthogonal persistence is a new paradigm where "the program is the database," and data lives inside program variables, which is possible because it's as if hosted software runs forever in persistent memory). — An expanding database of skills at shall make it possible to develop and directly deploy apps and services to your cloud engines directly from Claude Code, Perplexity, Codex and other AI platforms. Further, your account on can be connected, so that new apps and updates created through conversation automatically appear hosted from your cloud engine. In the future, R&D is going to be very seamless. You converse with AI, and your secure and unstoppable apps or services are created or updated. Cloud engines are designed to directly support this "self-writing cloud" future where we can work hands-free. — Tech sovereignty is becoming a huge issue worldwide, with governments and corporations seeking to create sovereign tech stacks owing to geopolitical tensions. Increasingly, people are realizing that tech provided by foreign nations can come with hidden backdoors and kills switches, from the base platform, right up through hosted apps and services. ICP technology is open source, and those building on ICP using AI own their own source code. When you have the source code, you can verify that there are no backdoors, and when you own the source code thanks to AI, you can update it at will, freeing you from vendor lock-in. But cloud engines take sovereignty much further... — You create a cloud engine by selecting the nodes that will be combined. You can choose the class of nodes used, and their number, but more importantly, you can choose who operates the nodes, and where they are located. Almost any configuration is possible, because the Internet Computer scales the security privileges afforded to hosted software within the network according to configuration (software hosted on cloud engines can directly interoperate with software on other engines and traditional subnets, but base restrictions are applied according to security rules). A cloud engine can be created within a region such as Europe, to comply with regs such as GDPR, or completely within a sovereign state like Switzerland or Pakistan. But cloud engines go further still... — Sovereignty is also about freedom from vendor lock-in. Cloud engines are essentially ICP (Internet Computer Protocol) network configurations, and this means the underlying compute nodes they combine can be swapped out without interrupting their hosted apps and services. This is a big deal. In addition, cloud engines now support nodes that are instances running on Big Tech's clouds, in addition to nodes that are dedicated specialized hardware, as per the Gen I and Gen II nodes that dominate the Internet Computer today. For example, it is possible to have an engine running across different AWS data centers, say, and then reconfigure the engine to run across a mixture of AWS, Google, Azure and Hetzner for even more resilience, without the users of hosted apps and services noticing a thing. That's true freedom. — Sovereign AI is becoming increasingly important too, and cloud engines allow special "AI nodes" to be added to them, so that hosted software can perform inference on hardware provisioned by the owner from a location the owner has selected. Even though the AI nodes are only accessible within the cloud engine, they can still benefit from the forthcoming Internet Intelligence Gateway (IG), which will make it possible to validate inference performed on key frontier open weights LLMs, even when the inference is performed on completely independent AI clouds. When the results of inference are received, this technology can verify that neither the prompt+context (input) nor the inference result (output) have been modified, and that the results were produced by the precise LLM expected. This ensures that AI clouds don't cheat by running inference on cheaper models than are being paid for, and bad actors aren't modifying the inputs or outputs to surreptitiously insert advertising into results, say, or change facts, or insert malware when code is being generated. What's super cool about this technology is the cost of the verification is scalable. A very valuable additional security can be achieved with only 1-2% of extra cost. — Scaling apps and services when they hit capacity limits is another thorny problem that cloud engines help the world address. Engines make scaling possible without rewriting or reconfiguring software. The query workload capacity of hosted software can be horizontally scaled simply by adding new nodes to an engine, and nodes can also be added in geographical proximity to demand. Meanwhile, update workload capacity can first be scaled-up by swapping an engine's nodes out for the next class up, and then when no larger class of node is available, horizontally scaled-out by "splitting" the engine into two, which doubles available capacity. (Technical tip: horizontally scaling update capacity by splitting engines requires multi-canister architectures). — For those who have been following how Caffeine builds apps that can efficiently store large numbers of files, I should mention that apps built on cloud engines will also support the new ICP Blob Storage cloud network (since cloud engines currently have up to about 3 TB of memory, which apps storing large amounts of files can easily exceed). We are also working on allowing blob storage nodes to be added to cloud engines, to enable sovereign mass blob storage within an engine, similarly to how AI nodes can be added currently. — Lastly, but certainly not least, I should mention that cloud engines are multi-blockchain capable, and ready for digital assets, thanks to the clever math at their core. For example, an e-commerce service built on a cloud engine can securely accept and custody stablecoin payments, or a multi-chain DEX could be hosted. Further, engines can support software autonomy (software orchestrated and controlled by other autonomous software, in a decentralized way) and can themselves be orchestrated by SNS technology, and thus run autonomously too. Today, though, the focus is on mainstream cloud. This year, the cloud industry will generate approximately one trillion dollars in revenue. That number is already huge, but is expected to grow to two trillion dollars by 2030. After years of continuous development, which have seen more than $500m spent on R&D, the Internet Computer network is now tacking directly toward this mainstream cloud market with cloud engine technology. In their first version, cloud engines are not meant to be a cloud panacea. For example, currently they are not ideal for working with big data. You should use something like DataBricks for that. Cloud engines are carefully targeted at enabling AI to produce traditional online applications and services, including SaaS, in a safer and more productive way, which represents a new market segment with tremendous potential. Of course, DFINITY will continue to work relentlessly to push forward ICP's capabilities, so expect further developments. It's worth mentioning that this cloud segment isn't just about creating new apps and services using AI, it's also about replacing legacy systems and apps built on super expensive SaaS services. Caffeine Labs is working to produce technology (Caffeine Snorkel) that can study an enterprise's legacy systems and app built on SaaS, create replacement systems and apps, and migrate the data, while supporting key stakeholders through the process over email and chat, with full automation. Thus the legacy systems and SaaS markets shall also be addressed by cloud engines. Zooming out, and reasoning in a more metaphysical way, we believe, as we always have, that there is room for a new kind of cloud created by mathematical networks, that provides seminal advances in the fields of security and resilience, as well as true sovereignty and freedom from lock-in. That this same technology, with the help of additional technologies like orthogonal persistence and Motoko, enables AI to build for us without the need for so much oversight, and to create more backend sophistication while consuming fewer AI API tokens, enables ICP to bring game-changing advances to the world. Cloud engines will work synergistically with the Intelligence Gateway, which will enable apps and services running on engines to seamlessly leverage AI, wherever that AI is running, while providing verifiability at extremely low cost for open weights frontier models. We believe that cloud engines represent an inflection point in the storied history of the Internet Computer project, and I'm very proud to be sharing the details with you on the network's fifth birthday 💪 I'll be back with more news soon!!

dom | icp

261,277 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

$AMD $5 Trillion MC Is Inevitable Long Term👑 This thread will focus more on Inference! 2026 EPYC "Venice" $TSM 2nm to save Large GW Scale Inference by 40% more than Prior Turin gen. Context: EPYC Turin achieves ~$0.001 per million tokens for batch inference vs $0.02-$0.12/ million tokens as I wrote the thread below. Venice is going to lower cost down to $0.0005-$0.0006/Million Tokens. OpenAI spent roughly $20B on Inference and Training, where 80-90% of that was for Inference per Analysts. AKA Renting Compute is Expensive AF! In this thread, I want to focus on why most analysts and investors are underestimating the role EPYC "Venice" and future Gen on overall Data center revenue. And $TSM ramping up 2nm supply early is a confirmation that AMD will be a major buyer long term. I will also link the thread the Gap between AMD Analysts & Reality and 2nm Ramp Thread so you have more comprehensive view of what I'm writing here. Before I go into detail this is my 2026 Projection: AI GPUs: $35-$50B EPYC Data Center: $15B-$17B Client Segment: $12-$13B Gaming: $6B Embedded: $4B-$5B Total Revenue $70-$100B Non-GAAP net income $18B-$25B Non-GAAP EPS $10.97-$15.40 Foward P/E 55x-70x= $603-$1,078 AMD's Analysts are projecting $0 Revenue for MI450 and sluggish EPYC Growth. Meaning, all analysts are either full of 💩 or Sexist, you decide! Analysts are also projecting 0% growth on AMD "Secret Weapon" Chip as $MSFT said we are at significant Windows refresh and upgrade cycle. Do you think TSMC would allocate more 2nm supply to $AMD at $0 MI450 revenue and sluggish EPYC? 1. EPYC is going to be the leader in lowest Inference! Current Turin cost saving is 95% vs $NVDA or 98-99% on Inference cost when you factor in renting Inference compute from Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, or $NVDA Neocloud pets. TSMC claimed: 10-15% higher performance at iso-power, 25-30% lower power at iso-speed, and ~15% higher transistor density compared to 3nm. This reduces operational expenses (energy, cooling) while increasing throughput per chip. EPYC Turin achieves ~$0.001 per million tokens for batch inference (via vLLM on models like Llama 3 70B), driven by high core counts and low hardware costs. EPYC Venice offers ~1.7x overall performance and up to 70% more compute capability per core, with up to 256 cores (512 threads). Enhanced vector/AI instructions and open-source firmware (openSIL) optimize for inference workloads. AMD Incorporates AI Engines (now part of AMD's XDNA) for on-chip acceleration, improving efficiency for low-latency and edge inference. This reduces reliance on discrete GPUs, lowering system complexity and TCO. Venice SKUs are projected at $3,000-$15,000 ($5,000 for 256-core flagship), far below NVIDIA Rubin ($50,000-$90,000) or AMD's own MI450 GPUs ($40,000-$50,000). High memory bandwidth (up to 1.6 TB/s) supports efficient batch inference. Venice is designed exactly for Large customers that want to lower Inference Cost and MI450 Helios is for Customers that want Training at lowest TCO, TDP as well as lower Upfront 1GW scale(Full build $35-$40B vs $NVDA $55B-$80B). 2. Real World Example: OpenAI's 2025 inference spend reached ~$20B, escalating to even higher total compute rental (mostly inference) amid token volume growth(from video generating). By 2026, with usage doubling (consistent with industry trends: token demand grows 2-5x YoY), assume OpenAI processes ~1,800 billion million-tokens annually $NVDA Blackwell at $0.02-$0.12 is $36B(most optimized) Rubin is projected to be at $0.01/million tokens or $18B annual Inference Cost vs $AMD Venice $0.0005/million tokens or $0.9B annual Inference Cost => Massive saving for OpenAI or anyone that are paying 80-90% Annual Bill for Inference compute. In short, it is unsustainable to pay this much rent vs owning for all current AI players for the medium to long term. Rubin excels in low-latency decode (if Groq integration from $20B deal in 2027-2028), but Venice dominates batch (80% of inference by 2030). Actual savings depend on deployment scale (OpenAI's 6GW AMD plans), electricity rates, and software maturity. If Rubin only hits $0.03, savings swell to $53.1B vs. $17.1B. 3. Will running Inference on Venice and future Gen slow down response generation in 2026 and beyond? Human perception of "fast enough" for chat, agents, search augmentation, summarization, coding assistance is roughly Meaning, EPYC may generate $100B a year on data center revenue, Hence $MSFT $AMZN $META $GOOGL OpenAI xAI and 42+ Countries are leaning AMD for Inference, because the cost saving is MASSIVE! 4. Regular users (you, me, people using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Perplexity...) are extremely unlikely to notice any slowdown and in many cases might even experience slightly faster or more consistent response times if the industry heavily shifts toward AMD EPYC for inference. What actually happens when companies save massively on inference? When OpenAI , Anthropic , Gemini , Grok Meta .... save billions on the batch/enterprise/RAG layer using EPYC Venice, they typically do one or more of these things with the savings, none of which make your chat slower but enhancing their bottom line(Profit) ~Keep prices the same → make more profit ~Lower subscription prices / increase free tier limits ~Train bigger & better models more frequently ~Offer longer context windows ~Add more reasoning steps / tool calls / agents per query ~Improve multimodal capabilities ~Build more data centers / reduce throttling during peaks In practice the consumer experience usually gets better, not worse, when inference becomes dramatically cheaper. Prime example is $META leaning AMD heavily or currently AMD largest customer. or Grok 2 to Grok 3 heavily used AMD for Inference saving. And most Grok Users reported Groke responses snappier, not slower. 5. What does this mean for potential Revenue? Noted that TSMC is massively ramping 2nm supply for $AMD both MI450 and EPYC. EPYC Conservative projection: FY2025: $10.5B(best Est) FY2026: $16B FY2027: $29B FY2028: $49B FY2029: $75B FY2030: $100B Large customers: $META OpenAI $MSFT $AMZN $GOOGL xAI (Apple?) Smaller customer: $DELL $HPE $SMCI and 42+ other countries. The roadmap to $5 Trillion is very much inevitable as Inference Cost from Renting or owning $NVDA are too high, but $NVDA will still dominate Training market share, where MI families are likely to take 15-20% market share, but the TAM is also expanding Rapidly. Most Institutions are projecting $2-$3Trillion TAM by 2030. $NVDA said $4 Trillion. Dr. Lisa Su said $1 Trillion+ by 2030. So you decide on how much TAM. If you enjoy this kind of analysis, Slap the Like/Repost and Bookmark to please the X Algo as it is Free.99! If you want to support my work further, consider subscribe to see more in-depth analysis! Alright, that is it. Not Financial Advice!

$AMD $5 Trillion MC Is Inevitable Long Term👑 This thread will focus more on Inference! 2026 EPYC "Venice" $TSM 2nm to save Large GW Scale Inference by 40% more than Prior Turin gen. Context: EPYC Turin achieves ~$0.001 per million tokens for batch inference vs $0.02-$0.12/ million tokens as I wrote the thread below. Venice is going to lower cost down to $0.0005-$0.0006/Million Tokens. OpenAI spent roughly $20B on Inference and Training, where 80-90% of that was for Inference per Analysts. AKA Renting Compute is Expensive AF! In this thread, I want to focus on why most analysts and investors are underestimating the role EPYC "Venice" and future Gen on overall Data center revenue. And $TSM ramping up 2nm supply early is a confirmation that AMD will be a major buyer long term. I will also link the thread the Gap between AMD Analysts & Reality and 2nm Ramp Thread so you have more comprehensive view of what I'm writing here. Before I go into detail this is my 2026 Projection: AI GPUs: $35-$50B EPYC Data Center: $15B-$17B Client Segment: $12-$13B Gaming: $6B Embedded: $4B-$5B Total Revenue $70-$100B Non-GAAP net income $18B-$25B Non-GAAP EPS $10.97-$15.40 Foward P/E 55x-70x= $603-$1,078 AMD's Analysts are projecting $0 Revenue for MI450 and sluggish EPYC Growth. Meaning, all analysts are either full of 💩 or Sexist, you decide! Analysts are also projecting 0% growth on AMD "Secret Weapon" Chip as $MSFT said we are at significant Windows refresh and upgrade cycle. Do you think TSMC would allocate more 2nm supply to $AMD at $0 MI450 revenue and sluggish EPYC? 1. EPYC is going to be the leader in lowest Inference! Current Turin cost saving is 95% vs $NVDA or 98-99% on Inference cost when you factor in renting Inference compute from Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, or $NVDA Neocloud pets. TSMC claimed: 10-15% higher performance at iso-power, 25-30% lower power at iso-speed, and ~15% higher transistor density compared to 3nm. This reduces operational expenses (energy, cooling) while increasing throughput per chip. EPYC Turin achieves ~$0.001 per million tokens for batch inference (via vLLM on models like Llama 3 70B), driven by high core counts and low hardware costs. EPYC Venice offers ~1.7x overall performance and up to 70% more compute capability per core, with up to 256 cores (512 threads). Enhanced vector/AI instructions and open-source firmware (openSIL) optimize for inference workloads. AMD Incorporates AI Engines (now part of AMD's XDNA) for on-chip acceleration, improving efficiency for low-latency and edge inference. This reduces reliance on discrete GPUs, lowering system complexity and TCO. Venice SKUs are projected at $3,000-$15,000 ($5,000 for 256-core flagship), far below NVIDIA Rubin ($50,000-$90,000) or AMD's own MI450 GPUs ($40,000-$50,000). High memory bandwidth (up to 1.6 TB/s) supports efficient batch inference. Venice is designed exactly for Large customers that want to lower Inference Cost and MI450 Helios is for Customers that want Training at lowest TCO, TDP as well as lower Upfront 1GW scale(Full build $35-$40B vs $NVDA $55B-$80B). 2. Real World Example: OpenAI's 2025 inference spend reached ~$20B, escalating to even higher total compute rental (mostly inference) amid token volume growth(from video generating). By 2026, with usage doubling (consistent with industry trends: token demand grows 2-5x YoY), assume OpenAI processes ~1,800 billion million-tokens annually $NVDA Blackwell at $0.02-$0.12 is $36B(most optimized) Rubin is projected to be at $0.01/million tokens or $18B annual Inference Cost vs $AMD Venice $0.0005/million tokens or $0.9B annual Inference Cost => Massive saving for OpenAI or anyone that are paying 80-90% Annual Bill for Inference compute. In short, it is unsustainable to pay this much rent vs owning for all current AI players for the medium to long term. Rubin excels in low-latency decode (if Groq integration from $20B deal in 2027-2028), but Venice dominates batch (80% of inference by 2030). Actual savings depend on deployment scale (OpenAI's 6GW AMD plans), electricity rates, and software maturity. If Rubin only hits $0.03, savings swell to $53.1B vs. $17.1B. 3. Will running Inference on Venice and future Gen slow down response generation in 2026 and beyond? Human perception of "fast enough" for chat, agents, search augmentation, summarization, coding assistance is roughly Meaning, EPYC may generate $100B a year on data center revenue, Hence $MSFT $AMZN $META $GOOGL OpenAI xAI and 42+ Countries are leaning AMD for Inference, because the cost saving is MASSIVE! 4. Regular users (you, me, people using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, Perplexity...) are extremely unlikely to notice any slowdown and in many cases might even experience slightly faster or more consistent response times if the industry heavily shifts toward AMD EPYC for inference. What actually happens when companies save massively on inference? When OpenAI , Anthropic , Gemini , Grok Meta .... save billions on the batch/enterprise/RAG layer using EPYC Venice, they typically do one or more of these things with the savings, none of which make your chat slower but enhancing their bottom line(Profit) ~Keep prices the same → make more profit ~Lower subscription prices / increase free tier limits ~Train bigger & better models more frequently ~Offer longer context windows ~Add more reasoning steps / tool calls / agents per query ~Improve multimodal capabilities ~Build more data centers / reduce throttling during peaks In practice the consumer experience usually gets better, not worse, when inference becomes dramatically cheaper. Prime example is $META leaning AMD heavily or currently AMD largest customer. or Grok 2 to Grok 3 heavily used AMD for Inference saving. And most Grok Users reported Groke responses snappier, not slower. 5. What does this mean for potential Revenue? Noted that TSMC is massively ramping 2nm supply for $AMD both MI450 and EPYC. EPYC Conservative projection: FY2025: $10.5B(best Est) FY2026: $16B FY2027: $29B FY2028: $49B FY2029: $75B FY2030: $100B Large customers: $META OpenAI $MSFT $AMZN $GOOGL xAI (Apple?) Smaller customer: $DELL $HPE $SMCI and 42+ other countries. The roadmap to $5 Trillion is very much inevitable as Inference Cost from Renting or owning $NVDA are too high, but $NVDA will still dominate Training market share, where MI families are likely to take 15-20% market share, but the TAM is also expanding Rapidly. Most Institutions are projecting $2-$3Trillion TAM by 2030. $NVDA said $4 Trillion. Dr. Lisa Su said $1 Trillion+ by 2030. So you decide on how much TAM. If you enjoy this kind of analysis, Slap the Like/Repost and Bookmark to please the X Algo as it is Free.99! If you want to support my work further, consider subscribe to see more in-depth analysis! Alright, that is it. Not Financial Advice!

Mike

102,223 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten