Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Flame 🔥test, full transparency mode: Yesterday I performed the flame 🔥 test to prove that this isn’t epoxy. Then I didn’t publish it because the way it foams due to the residual water trapped inside is absolutely hilarious. That said, you can clearly see that it really isn’t epoxy,...

FoMaHun's profile picture

Marcell Fóti 🪨

30,346 subscribers

23,768 просмотров • 19 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

So, let’s see how hard this stuff actually is. Does it really break like glass? Is it actually glass? And I wonder where it sits on the Mohs scale. Well, ladies and gentlemen, it really is glass — Mohs 6–7. I could barely chip off that little piece with a knife. I’ll be coming back with more tests. I just tried the 🔥 flame test to distinguish it from epoxy, because a lot of people were saying this is a fake, that it’s epoxy. Nope, it’s not epoxy. But the flame test looked pretty ridiculous for now, because there’s still water in it, which boiled off and made it foam up 🤣 But no worries — after a week or two, it’ll be completely water-free anyway. Then I’ll do the match 🔥 test again. You’ll have to wait a little longer for the recipe. For now, I’m just basking in my own glory and my 5 seconds of worldwide fame 🤣 I’ll publish it I promise. Stay tuned!
0:25

So, let’s see how hard this stuff actually is. Does it really break like glass? Is it actually glass? And I wonder where it sits on the Mohs scale. Well, ladies and gentlemen, it really is glass — Mohs 6–7. I could barely chip off that little piece with a knife. I’ll be coming back with more tests. I just tried the 🔥 flame test to distinguish it from epoxy, because a lot of people were saying this is a fake, that it’s epoxy. Nope, it’s not epoxy. But the flame test looked pretty ridiculous for now, because there’s still water in it, which boiled off and made it foam up 🤣 But no worries — after a week or two, it’ll be completely water-free anyway. Then I’ll do the match 🔥 test again. You’ll have to wait a little longer for the recipe. For now, I’m just basking in my own glory and my 5 seconds of worldwide fame 🤣 I’ll publish it I promise. Stay tuned!

Marcell Fóti 🪨

38,062 просмотров • 20 дней назад

💬 i saw sunoo fell into the water 🦊 ah seriously… i don’t know why everyone’s so obsessed with me 🦊 i really hated it that time 🦊 but if i talk about a behind story that time 🦊 you know how i talked about a behind story on how i fell into the water after drinking, right? but that actually wasn’t aired so we were like “wouldn’t it be good if we at least have a scene of us playing in the water among ourselves?” 🦊 so that time i was like “should i take off my mic now or what?” because everyone just wanted to play in the water but a few said they didn’t want to like “we already did it yesterday, why do it again?” and in the middle of that uncertain atmosphere, i fell in 🦊 so i was like “okay everyone get in” and then we all just played together
1:18

💬 i saw sunoo fell into the water 🦊 ah seriously… i don’t know why everyone’s so obsessed with me 🦊 i really hated it that time 🦊 but if i talk about a behind story that time 🦊 you know how i talked about a behind story on how i fell into the water after drinking, right? but that actually wasn’t aired so we were like “wouldn’t it be good if we at least have a scene of us playing in the water among ourselves?” 🦊 so that time i was like “should i take off my mic now or what?” because everyone just wanted to play in the water but a few said they didn’t want to like “we already did it yesterday, why do it again?” and in the middle of that uncertain atmosphere, i fell in 🦊 so i was like “okay everyone get in” and then we all just played together

ᰔ

464,061 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Trump: Do you ever go into a new home where you have a shower where the water doesn't come out of the shower head? They put a restrictor on. I took all the restrictors off. I took them off. I've had the experience. I take a shower. I want that beautiful head of hair to be nice and wet. Lather. I want it to be lathered beautifully. And I get the best stuff you can buy and I dump it all over and I'm, and then I turn on the water and the damn water drips out takes me, I can't get this stuff out of my hair, it’s a horrible thing. No, it's terrible. You turn on the sink and the faucet, you turn it and no water, practically no water comes. So you leave your hands under there. You're trying to get the water. Isn't that terrible? And these are areas that have a lot of water where they don't know what to do with it. It goes out to sea and we'll turn it back on
1:07

Trump: Do you ever go into a new home where you have a shower where the water doesn't come out of the shower head? They put a restrictor on. I took all the restrictors off. I took them off. I've had the experience. I take a shower. I want that beautiful head of hair to be nice and wet. Lather. I want it to be lathered beautifully. And I get the best stuff you can buy and I dump it all over and I'm, and then I turn on the water and the damn water drips out takes me, I can't get this stuff out of my hair, it’s a horrible thing. No, it's terrible. You turn on the sink and the faucet, you turn it and no water, practically no water comes. So you leave your hands under there. You're trying to get the water. Isn't that terrible? And these are areas that have a lot of water where they don't know what to do with it. It goes out to sea and we'll turn it back on

Headquarters

1,472,523 просмотров • 2 лет назад

mind you this was what carlos said about standing up for what he believes about the new regulations, he said he would be the first one to stand up and refute them if he didn't agree with it, but the media turn his statement into something that it wasn't Carlos: “I have to give it the opportunity first and then judge, as I have said before, and I insist, if I see that I don’t like it or it doesn’t motivate me or I see that this Formula 1 has too many negative parts, I will be the first to go with Max to talk to Stefano Domenicali or to talk to Mohammed Ben Sulayem to tell him : 'hey this doesn’t work, you were wrong, we didn’t enjoy the car, we have to change something because this is not going anywhere” I will be the first to do it and I will go with Max hand in hand or with George or whoever' “But I insist, I think that my personal level is still not the time and it’s still time to judge without even having run a race” and the fact that it is not the first time, is what is more infuriating
0:47

mind you this was what carlos said about standing up for what he believes about the new regulations, he said he would be the first one to stand up and refute them if he didn't agree with it, but the media turn his statement into something that it wasn't Carlos: “I have to give it the opportunity first and then judge, as I have said before, and I insist, if I see that I don’t like it or it doesn’t motivate me or I see that this Formula 1 has too many negative parts, I will be the first to go with Max to talk to Stefano Domenicali or to talk to Mohammed Ben Sulayem to tell him : 'hey this doesn’t work, you were wrong, we didn’t enjoy the car, we have to change something because this is not going anywhere” I will be the first to do it and I will go with Max hand in hand or with George or whoever' “But I insist, I think that my personal level is still not the time and it’s still time to judge without even having run a race” and the fact that it is not the first time, is what is more infuriating

ari 🦄✨

27,061 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Let’s see what happened to all these materials after I dipped them into the magical glass-forming liquid. As you can see, the entire surface of the liquid has completely solidified. But I was still able to push the side of the container in, which means that underneath, it is still liquid. So this is not one solid block of glass. Let’s look at them one by one. First, I’m taking out the pencil. Well, no glass layer formed on this one. What you can see on it is simply the dried upper crust of the liquid. To be honest, I expected this, because this isn’t really bare wood—it’s more like wood with a plastic coating. Next is the geopolymer. The result is exactly the same. This one surprised me, because this was actually the material I was most confident would develop a deposit. But apparently not. Next comes the granite. And by now, it’s pretty easy to see that the result is the same again: nothing deposited on it. The next object is the spoon. I had absolutely no expectations for this one, and absolutely nothing is exactly what happened. There’s only the dried upper crust stuck to it, and the rest will probably just run off. But what about the egg?! A few days ago, it looked as though the egg was going to be the champion, with a massive layer of glass apparently forming on it. Well, I have some bad news: not at all. And why? I have absolutely no idea. And finally, just quickly at the end… The piece of limestone suffered exactly the same fate, and so did the peach. So, in reality, the experiment was a spectacular failure. None of these objects developed a glass layer. And in my opinion, this is exactly why it’s not worth publishing the recipe yet. Because, as you can clearly see, this time it simply didn’t work—even though, in theory, I did exactly the same thing as before. So, I wish myself happy experimenting. Once again, I’ve been given a new puzzle that I have to solve. … Meanwhile, in the container right next to it, this happened. And the recipe is exactly the same! Wow! 🤯
2:25

Let’s see what happened to all these materials after I dipped them into the magical glass-forming liquid. As you can see, the entire surface of the liquid has completely solidified. But I was still able to push the side of the container in, which means that underneath, it is still liquid. So this is not one solid block of glass. Let’s look at them one by one. First, I’m taking out the pencil. Well, no glass layer formed on this one. What you can see on it is simply the dried upper crust of the liquid. To be honest, I expected this, because this isn’t really bare wood—it’s more like wood with a plastic coating. Next is the geopolymer. The result is exactly the same. This one surprised me, because this was actually the material I was most confident would develop a deposit. But apparently not. Next comes the granite. And by now, it’s pretty easy to see that the result is the same again: nothing deposited on it. The next object is the spoon. I had absolutely no expectations for this one, and absolutely nothing is exactly what happened. There’s only the dried upper crust stuck to it, and the rest will probably just run off. But what about the egg?! A few days ago, it looked as though the egg was going to be the champion, with a massive layer of glass apparently forming on it. Well, I have some bad news: not at all. And why? I have absolutely no idea. And finally, just quickly at the end… The piece of limestone suffered exactly the same fate, and so did the peach. So, in reality, the experiment was a spectacular failure. None of these objects developed a glass layer. And in my opinion, this is exactly why it’s not worth publishing the recipe yet. Because, as you can clearly see, this time it simply didn’t work—even though, in theory, I did exactly the same thing as before. So, I wish myself happy experimenting. Once again, I’ve been given a new puzzle that I have to solve. … Meanwhile, in the container right next to it, this happened. And the recipe is exactly the same! Wow! 🤯

Marcell Fóti 🪨

21,216 просмотров • 14 дней назад

Robert De Niro originally wanted to play Max Cherry in Jackie Brown, the role that eventually went to Robert Forster. However, Quentin Tarantino had written the role with Forster in mind and had already promised him the part. Tarantino explains… “I wrote Jackie Brown, and I decided at some point in writing the script that Robert Forster would be terrific as Max Cherry. So, while I’m still writing the script, I bump into Robert Forster - we go to the same coffee shop. ….so I decided I’m gonna give him the part, because I figure, look, this would be a big, big deal part. So if I don’t give him the part, then once I’m done with it and it gets out in the town, then it’s gonna be Gene Hackman and Paul Newman and people like that, and it would be pretty hard to say no to. But if I just give him the part right now, I’ve got the juice to get it through, and now I can’t take it back because I wouldn’t be a man of my word. So to lock myself into that decision, I give it to him before I finish writing it. And then now comes the time to do it. Robert De Niro reads it, and he wants to be in it, but he wants to play Max. And I go, “Well, look, you would be a fantastic Max, but I’ve already given that to Robert Forster, and I’m a man of my word. I can’t take it back.” Now, De Niro is very much a man of his word, so he understands that. He gets that. And he’s just like, “Yeah, yeah. That’s just disappointing. It’s just regretful.” I go, “What?” “Well, just because, you know, you were thinking about him, so you wrote it for him. But if we had had more dinners and hung out a little bit more, then you would have been thinking about me and you would have written it for me. And I understand what happened, but that could have been changed if we had spent more time with each other before this.” And so he kind of gives me the – “just think about it for a couple of days, all right? - and then let’s talk again. Maybe Bob (Robert Foster) could play Louis, the other guy.” So then I actually have Bob read Louis with me, and then read Max. And if that could work, maybe that could work. But no, everything that made him perfect for Max made him wrong for Louis. And so I get on the phone with De Niro — and I go, “Yeah, you know, I explored that. But no, everything about him that makes him perfect for Max makes him wrong to play this ex-convict guy.” And he goes, “Yeah, yeah, I get that. I get that, I get that, I get that. Okay, so tell me about this Louis character.” And I go, “You would consider playing Louis?” “Yeah, it’s a good character. It’s a good movie. I wanna be part of it. It’s a good character. I wanted the other character, but yeah, this is a good character. I’d be happy to play it.” I go, “Well, you didn’t let me know that before.” He goes, “Well, I didn’t wanna let you off the hook. I wanted you on the hook. But now if that ship has sailed, then let’s talk about Louis.” And then it was a done deal.”
5:57

Robert De Niro originally wanted to play Max Cherry in Jackie Brown, the role that eventually went to Robert Forster. However, Quentin Tarantino had written the role with Forster in mind and had already promised him the part. Tarantino explains… “I wrote Jackie Brown, and I decided at some point in writing the script that Robert Forster would be terrific as Max Cherry. So, while I’m still writing the script, I bump into Robert Forster - we go to the same coffee shop. ….so I decided I’m gonna give him the part, because I figure, look, this would be a big, big deal part. So if I don’t give him the part, then once I’m done with it and it gets out in the town, then it’s gonna be Gene Hackman and Paul Newman and people like that, and it would be pretty hard to say no to. But if I just give him the part right now, I’ve got the juice to get it through, and now I can’t take it back because I wouldn’t be a man of my word. So to lock myself into that decision, I give it to him before I finish writing it. And then now comes the time to do it. Robert De Niro reads it, and he wants to be in it, but he wants to play Max. And I go, “Well, look, you would be a fantastic Max, but I’ve already given that to Robert Forster, and I’m a man of my word. I can’t take it back.” Now, De Niro is very much a man of his word, so he understands that. He gets that. And he’s just like, “Yeah, yeah. That’s just disappointing. It’s just regretful.” I go, “What?” “Well, just because, you know, you were thinking about him, so you wrote it for him. But if we had had more dinners and hung out a little bit more, then you would have been thinking about me and you would have written it for me. And I understand what happened, but that could have been changed if we had spent more time with each other before this.” And so he kind of gives me the – “just think about it for a couple of days, all right? - and then let’s talk again. Maybe Bob (Robert Foster) could play Louis, the other guy.” So then I actually have Bob read Louis with me, and then read Max. And if that could work, maybe that could work. But no, everything that made him perfect for Max made him wrong for Louis. And so I get on the phone with De Niro — and I go, “Yeah, you know, I explored that. But no, everything about him that makes him perfect for Max makes him wrong to play this ex-convict guy.” And he goes, “Yeah, yeah, I get that. I get that, I get that, I get that. Okay, so tell me about this Louis character.” And I go, “You would consider playing Louis?” “Yeah, it’s a good character. It’s a good movie. I wanna be part of it. It’s a good character. I wanted the other character, but yeah, this is a good character. I’d be happy to play it.” I go, “Well, you didn’t let me know that before.” He goes, “Well, I didn’t wanna let you off the hook. I wanted you on the hook. But now if that ship has sailed, then let’s talk about Louis.” And then it was a done deal.”

Gangster Cinema Central

89,214 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Sharon Stone says her marriage ended in the room after her husband became furious over her decision to have breast surgery “The doctor had come out to my house and said, ‘Look, we think you should have a bilateral mastectomy. This is really bad. And usually when they’re all the way up into here, we know before we go in that they’re cancer’” “And I said, ‘I don’t have cancer.’ And he said, ‘You don’t get to decide that’” “And I said, ‘I do. I do get to decide that. I’m deciding. But I am deciding that I will have a bilateral because I’m not f*cking around’” “And my husband said, ‘This is ridiculous,’ and got up and left the room” David: “Which part was ridiculous?” Sharon: “That I would have a bilateral. He was furious” David: “Not that the cancer, if it was true, might kill you? He was mad about the breasts being removed” Sharon: “And so the doctor said to him, ‘If I had more patients like her, we’d have more women alive today. You need to sit down’” “And I said, ‘I make the decisions, not you.’ That was the end of the marriage. That was it. He was done with me then. It was over” David: “Oh, it ended because he ended it, not you” Sharon: “It was just over in the room. You could just tell it was over”
1:28

Sharon Stone says her marriage ended in the room after her husband became furious over her decision to have breast surgery “The doctor had come out to my house and said, ‘Look, we think you should have a bilateral mastectomy. This is really bad. And usually when they’re all the way up into here, we know before we go in that they’re cancer’” “And I said, ‘I don’t have cancer.’ And he said, ‘You don’t get to decide that’” “And I said, ‘I do. I do get to decide that. I’m deciding. But I am deciding that I will have a bilateral because I’m not f*cking around’” “And my husband said, ‘This is ridiculous,’ and got up and left the room” David: “Which part was ridiculous?” Sharon: “That I would have a bilateral. He was furious” David: “Not that the cancer, if it was true, might kill you? He was mad about the breasts being removed” Sharon: “And so the doctor said to him, ‘If I had more patients like her, we’d have more women alive today. You need to sit down’” “And I said, ‘I make the decisions, not you.’ That was the end of the marriage. That was it. He was done with me then. It was over” David: “Oh, it ended because he ended it, not you” Sharon: “It was just over in the room. You could just tell it was over”

sara

1,393,343 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

David Letterman tells Stephen Colbert, "I will say, and I have every right to be pissed off so I will be pissed off a little bit—because this theater, you folks wouldn’t be in this theater if it weren't for me and Stephen wouldn't be here if it weren't for me and we rebuilt this theater and then Stephen came and I look at this—it's like the Bellagio, but listen, what is wrong here?" and then says "As we all understand you can take a man's show but you can't take a man's voice, so that's the good news." (1/2)
1:26

David Letterman tells Stephen Colbert, "I will say, and I have every right to be pissed off so I will be pissed off a little bit—because this theater, you folks wouldn’t be in this theater if it weren't for me and Stephen wouldn't be here if it weren't for me and we rebuilt this theater and then Stephen came and I look at this—it's like the Bellagio, but listen, what is wrong here?" and then says "As we all understand you can take a man's show but you can't take a man's voice, so that's the good news." (1/2)

Alex Christy

2,254,587 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

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

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

Curtis Houck

108,556 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

"It just seems in many ways so 'not Liverpool' but then I need to accept the reality that it is because it's happening." "It's a reinforcement that we all need to protect it and that you can't be blasé like I have and just go 'oh yeah we're not like that." Watch in full 🚨👇
2:55

"It just seems in many ways so 'not Liverpool' but then I need to accept the reality that it is because it's happening." "It's a reinforcement that we all need to protect it and that you can't be blasé like I have and just go 'oh yeah we're not like that." Watch in full 🚨👇

The Anfield Wrap

96,416 просмотров • 2 лет назад

The Circle (2000, Panahi)/ Iran "Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date." --- Jafar Panahi Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: The subject matter of 'The Circle' (2000) is controversial. You mentioned that the film is still banned in Iran. In fact, when I was watching the film, I realized that through the characters, there’s a lot of fear about the system, the establishment, the police. The women can’t smoke; they have to wear the chador; they seem to want to hide every time. This is all very clear from watching the film. Did you deliberately want to make a statement about the political situation in Iran? Panahi: I have to tell you again that I’m not a political person. I don’t like political movies. But I take every opportunity to comment on the social issues. I talk about the current issues. To me it’s not important what is the reason for what has happened. Whether it’s political reasons or geographical reasons: these are not important—but the condition, the social issues. It is important to me to talk about the plight of humanity at that time. I don’t want to give a political view, or start a political war. I think that the artist should rise above this. Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date. So it doesn’t really serve a political purpose. Then it can be everlasting, for always, and it could be for anywhere. But I know that politically, with the film authorities, with any kind of film that has some political background in it, they would take issue with it. And for this reason, that is what the problem is. Interviewer: Still, your film makes a very strong statement about the problems that women face in Iran. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. Interviewer: So that is humanitarian, of course, but it’s also political. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. It has the elements. It all depends on how you look at it. If a person has only political views, then he will only see the political. But if you are a poet or an artist, then you see other things as well in the movie. If you are a socialist, you see political or economic or whatever different points of view. You mustn’t look at a film with only one point of view. If you want to see 'The Circle' (2000) as political, then it is one of the most political movies in Iran. By political, I mean partisan politics. But even the police, I didn’t want to show them as bad. In the first instance, you are afraid of the police. Because you are looking at them from the point of view of someone who is now in prison. And normally you see him in a long shot, but when they come nearer and you see them in a medium shot, you can see their human faces. Then it comes down to, “Do you need any help?” But he goes back again and becomes frightening. If I were being political, then I would always show the police as dangerous or bad persons." (Jafar Panahi's interview with Stephen Teo, Senses of Cinema, 2001)
3:01

The Circle (2000, Panahi)/ Iran "Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date." --- Jafar Panahi Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: The subject matter of 'The Circle' (2000) is controversial. You mentioned that the film is still banned in Iran. In fact, when I was watching the film, I realized that through the characters, there’s a lot of fear about the system, the establishment, the police. The women can’t smoke; they have to wear the chador; they seem to want to hide every time. This is all very clear from watching the film. Did you deliberately want to make a statement about the political situation in Iran? Panahi: I have to tell you again that I’m not a political person. I don’t like political movies. But I take every opportunity to comment on the social issues. I talk about the current issues. To me it’s not important what is the reason for what has happened. Whether it’s political reasons or geographical reasons: these are not important—but the condition, the social issues. It is important to me to talk about the plight of humanity at that time. I don’t want to give a political view, or start a political war. I think that the artist should rise above this. Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date. So it doesn’t really serve a political purpose. Then it can be everlasting, for always, and it could be for anywhere. But I know that politically, with the film authorities, with any kind of film that has some political background in it, they would take issue with it. And for this reason, that is what the problem is. Interviewer: Still, your film makes a very strong statement about the problems that women face in Iran. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. Interviewer: So that is humanitarian, of course, but it’s also political. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. It has the elements. It all depends on how you look at it. If a person has only political views, then he will only see the political. But if you are a poet or an artist, then you see other things as well in the movie. If you are a socialist, you see political or economic or whatever different points of view. You mustn’t look at a film with only one point of view. If you want to see 'The Circle' (2000) as political, then it is one of the most political movies in Iran. By political, I mean partisan politics. But even the police, I didn’t want to show them as bad. In the first instance, you are afraid of the police. Because you are looking at them from the point of view of someone who is now in prison. And normally you see him in a long shot, but when they come nearer and you see them in a medium shot, you can see their human faces. Then it comes down to, “Do you need any help?” But he goes back again and becomes frightening. If I were being political, then I would always show the police as dangerous or bad persons." (Jafar Panahi's interview with Stephen Teo, Senses of Cinema, 2001)

DepressedBergman

43,871 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

#Donghae #동해 Fr0mm live 🐯: I have some work to do, so I’m about to head off now. This week’s listening party, it’s my first time trying a listening party. I’m really looking forward to it. Are you looking forward to it too? The listening party is where we all gather together and take some time to listen to the music. You’ve already seen the highlight medley for this album, right? Which one do you like? Should we listen together? “Rocket”, since we performed it at the Super Show encore, it should feel familiar, right? And since it’s familiar, you’ll be able to sing along well, right? I’ll be looking forward to that at the concert. “Race” is cool, right? It’s also a song I really like. Honestly, all the songs this time are good, right? Tell me honestly, if you don’t like something, just say you don’t. This is for you. Alright, let’s move to the next song. At the concert, you all have to do this together, okay? This is definitely a group sing-along. I intentionally added a lot of those parts in this album. Since you’re coming to the venue, I wanted to create parts where everyone can sing together. “Rocket” is like that, “Help” is like that, there are a lot of parts where you’ll need to join in. So I want it to feel like we’re creating the performance together. Okay? Let’s listen to the next one. So that Annie won’t wither, I’ll keep watering it, so it doesn’t fade. I’ll become your season, so that I can always be there for you. So you just have to become my flower. You have to sing this part too, I won’t sing here. “Beautiful flower” you know it, right? You’re looking forward to the concert, right? And also the listening party right now? Alright, next song. “Beautiful” is also a song I really, really like. I kept thinking it would be great to include it in this album. And I made it thinking you’d really love it when you hear the track. Right now, I’m reviewing the highlight medley visual film. We need moments like this too, right? And then, every October we always meet and have a birthday party, right? This will be the theme song for that. Among you today, there must be someone whose birthday it is. Happy birthday to you~ This is crazy, there’s not a single bad song. Even when I listen to it myself, it sounds so good. I’m really, really proud. And seeing you all like it this much, that means a lot. Alright, next, so we don’t miss anything This really feels like Donghae’s vibe, right? This is totally his emotional style. I really remember when I was making this song. I wondered, “Can I really do all of this?” And it was really cold back then while filming. My body kept shaking like this, it was so cold. I really like all of them. I worked hard on every single song. And finally, the last one: The reason I made “Good Day” is because I sincerely wanted to tell you to have a good day, every single day. And I made it thinking that when you listen to this song, it could be the moment you wake up each day. All of us, me included, there are times in life when we feel tired, struggle, and want to give up. I’ll talk more about it after the album is released. But whatever happens, I hope you never give up. You might feel down right now, or feel like giving up, whether it’s friendships, love, or anything at all. But don’t give up. Because I’m here, and you also have people around you who love you. And the sunlight will greet you again. So I hope you endure until the end. This album, really, is for you, and it contains a lot of things I wanted to say to you. So when it comes out, I hope you fully enjoy that time. Another reason I made this a full album is, these days, if you release a mini album, you can’t even listen for 30 minutes. It’s like 20-something minutes, right? Songs are getting shorter too. So I wanted you to spend a longer time enjoying music with this album. Music shows? Probably next week. Dress code for the concert? I’ll tell you a bit later. I’ll prepare a bit more and then let you know. Good night
0:47

#Donghae #동해 Fr0mm live 🐯: I have some work to do, so I’m about to head off now. This week’s listening party, it’s my first time trying a listening party. I’m really looking forward to it. Are you looking forward to it too? The listening party is where we all gather together and take some time to listen to the music. You’ve already seen the highlight medley for this album, right? Which one do you like? Should we listen together? “Rocket”, since we performed it at the Super Show encore, it should feel familiar, right? And since it’s familiar, you’ll be able to sing along well, right? I’ll be looking forward to that at the concert. “Race” is cool, right? It’s also a song I really like. Honestly, all the songs this time are good, right? Tell me honestly, if you don’t like something, just say you don’t. This is for you. Alright, let’s move to the next song. At the concert, you all have to do this together, okay? This is definitely a group sing-along. I intentionally added a lot of those parts in this album. Since you’re coming to the venue, I wanted to create parts where everyone can sing together. “Rocket” is like that, “Help” is like that, there are a lot of parts where you’ll need to join in. So I want it to feel like we’re creating the performance together. Okay? Let’s listen to the next one. So that Annie won’t wither, I’ll keep watering it, so it doesn’t fade. I’ll become your season, so that I can always be there for you. So you just have to become my flower. You have to sing this part too, I won’t sing here. “Beautiful flower” you know it, right? You’re looking forward to the concert, right? And also the listening party right now? Alright, next song. “Beautiful” is also a song I really, really like. I kept thinking it would be great to include it in this album. And I made it thinking you’d really love it when you hear the track. Right now, I’m reviewing the highlight medley visual film. We need moments like this too, right? And then, every October we always meet and have a birthday party, right? This will be the theme song for that. Among you today, there must be someone whose birthday it is. Happy birthday to you~ This is crazy, there’s not a single bad song. Even when I listen to it myself, it sounds so good. I’m really, really proud. And seeing you all like it this much, that means a lot. Alright, next, so we don’t miss anything This really feels like Donghae’s vibe, right? This is totally his emotional style. I really remember when I was making this song. I wondered, “Can I really do all of this?” And it was really cold back then while filming. My body kept shaking like this, it was so cold. I really like all of them. I worked hard on every single song. And finally, the last one: The reason I made “Good Day” is because I sincerely wanted to tell you to have a good day, every single day. And I made it thinking that when you listen to this song, it could be the moment you wake up each day. All of us, me included, there are times in life when we feel tired, struggle, and want to give up. I’ll talk more about it after the album is released. But whatever happens, I hope you never give up. You might feel down right now, or feel like giving up, whether it’s friendships, love, or anything at all. But don’t give up. Because I’m here, and you also have people around you who love you. And the sunlight will greet you again. So I hope you endure until the end. This album, really, is for you, and it contains a lot of things I wanted to say to you. So when it comes out, I hope you fully enjoy that time. Another reason I made this a full album is, these days, if you release a mini album, you can’t even listen for 30 minutes. It’s like 20-something minutes, right? Songs are getting shorter too. So I wanted you to spend a longer time enjoying music with this album. Music shows? Probably next week. Dress code for the concert? I’ll tell you a bit later. I’ll prepare a bit more and then let you know. Good night

𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗲🐯ALIVE🚀

12,622 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🌞: when i was in Turkey i used to go skateboard with friends— actually rollerblades like you wear them as shoes and they have 4 wheels 🌞as for me i was going really - really fast. i don’t know if you call it “driving” or what—anyway i was just going fast - really fast - like extremely fast. and the road would be like you know a main road and then there are alleys - alleys- alleys—maybe a big road and then lots of small little alleys popping out right ? 🌞then one day while i was speeding back home suddenly a car came from the right - then i saw the car coming, right? so i turned to the right : wait—it’s coming from the right so why did you turn right?? 🌞i don’t know either but it was like… maybe the car was about to stop or something so i didn’t know what to do so i just ran straight into the car : you ran into it? 🌞yeah ran straight into it : then what happened next? 🌞after i hit the car right - like say this is the car and i came like this then “boom”my body kind of bounced backward like “boom” and at this point my leg went under the car like this you get it? my leg was under the car. then the car bounced over my leg but that “bounced” doesn’t mean the car saw my leg and jumped over it it means it went over it—ran over it : so what about now? 🌞my leg is totally fine 🌻**immediately pulled Joong’s pants up to check 🌞nothing!! it’s not a prosthetic or anything it just went over and that’s it - i even saw it clearly with my own eyes—the wheel went over it like thump : so it bounced because it braked hard? is that it? 🌻: did it go like whoosh? : so it actually ran over it right? 🌞completely ran over it .. i could literally see the wheel passing over my leg -“oop” : did it hurt? 🌞not at all … after that only my arm got a few small scratches : but your leg was really fine? 🌞completely fine… the driver was shocked and asked me “are you okay? should i take you to the hospital?” 🌞but in my head at that moment.. iwasn’t afraid of dying… i was afraid of getting scolded by my mom
2:10

🌞: when i was in Turkey i used to go skateboard with friends— actually rollerblades like you wear them as shoes and they have 4 wheels 🌞as for me i was going really - really fast. i don’t know if you call it “driving” or what—anyway i was just going fast - really fast - like extremely fast. and the road would be like you know a main road and then there are alleys - alleys- alleys—maybe a big road and then lots of small little alleys popping out right ? 🌞then one day while i was speeding back home suddenly a car came from the right - then i saw the car coming, right? so i turned to the right : wait—it’s coming from the right so why did you turn right?? 🌞i don’t know either but it was like… maybe the car was about to stop or something so i didn’t know what to do so i just ran straight into the car : you ran into it? 🌞yeah ran straight into it : then what happened next? 🌞after i hit the car right - like say this is the car and i came like this then “boom”my body kind of bounced backward like “boom” and at this point my leg went under the car like this you get it? my leg was under the car. then the car bounced over my leg but that “bounced” doesn’t mean the car saw my leg and jumped over it it means it went over it—ran over it : so what about now? 🌞my leg is totally fine 🌻**immediately pulled Joong’s pants up to check 🌞nothing!! it’s not a prosthetic or anything it just went over and that’s it - i even saw it clearly with my own eyes—the wheel went over it like thump : so it bounced because it braked hard? is that it? 🌻: did it go like whoosh? : so it actually ran over it right? 🌞completely ran over it .. i could literally see the wheel passing over my leg -“oop” : did it hurt? 🌞not at all … after that only my arm got a few small scratches : but your leg was really fine? 🌞completely fine… the driver was shocked and asked me “are you okay? should i take you to the hospital?” 🌞but in my head at that moment.. iwasn’t afraid of dying… i was afraid of getting scolded by my mom

🇻🇳Jaidee’s aunt Bamnie🐣

16,200 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

$ABCL CEO Carl Hansen explains the net negative overall value creation in biotech and how AbCellera plans to beat it: “I really think it can be beat because there’s a lot of mistakes that get made in where you allocate capital.” “If you’re a biotech and you start a company on a drug, and you go public and have a drug, and now the data is looking not that great, you just keep running that drug. … Because if you quit that drug, the company is done.” “So, because you’re so concentrated on one thing, you end up having blinders. It’s like a cult of a molecule. And even a real, practical, capital access problem that makes you continue to move things forward” ______________________________________ “Another problem is that many of the drugs that get started, get started by people who don’t understand the competitive or commercial landscape and have no intent of ever actually manufacturing it. … Because they know someone else is going to buy it. So then their framework is not ‘Am I making a drug that’s going to make a difference for people?’ The framework is ‘Can I make something that I think someone will take off my hands?’ And that happens a lot.” “There are many acquisitions where a big pharma company spends $10B, $20B, and it’s a complete bust. So really no value is generated for patients but someone was able to get a good exit on that because they anticipated what someone would want. And a lot of decision making gets done like that”. _______________________________________ “I’m not saying that we have this all solved. But what we’re trying to do is create a framework where we are able to take many bets so that we don’t fall in love with anything, or we don’t have to fall in love with anything. … And then always hold up very explicitly what we know and what we don’t know along the dimensions that matter. The dimensions that matter are - Will it work? That’s a science. - When it gets where will people care? - Is it differentiated? - Does it solve a big problem? In order to get it there, is there a path with our resources and expertise that would allow us to see it through?” “When you start to hold things up like that, you start to see where the mistakes are, where the uncertainties are, and you can be more rational in deciding ‘We’re going to run it to here because we get to flip the card and if the card goes the wrong way we’re going to kill it because we’ve got something else behind it.’” “I do think that if done right, and if you can pick the right opportunities, the success rate can be well higher than an order of magnitude better. … And there are examples of this… companies I’ve mentioned, you know, Regeneron, their success rate is at least 10x the industry in bringing programs forward and getting them approved. … So it’s… you can do it better that way”
3:50

$ABCL CEO Carl Hansen explains the net negative overall value creation in biotech and how AbCellera plans to beat it: “I really think it can be beat because there’s a lot of mistakes that get made in where you allocate capital.” “If you’re a biotech and you start a company on a drug, and you go public and have a drug, and now the data is looking not that great, you just keep running that drug. … Because if you quit that drug, the company is done.” “So, because you’re so concentrated on one thing, you end up having blinders. It’s like a cult of a molecule. And even a real, practical, capital access problem that makes you continue to move things forward” ______________________________________ “Another problem is that many of the drugs that get started, get started by people who don’t understand the competitive or commercial landscape and have no intent of ever actually manufacturing it. … Because they know someone else is going to buy it. So then their framework is not ‘Am I making a drug that’s going to make a difference for people?’ The framework is ‘Can I make something that I think someone will take off my hands?’ And that happens a lot.” “There are many acquisitions where a big pharma company spends $10B, $20B, and it’s a complete bust. So really no value is generated for patients but someone was able to get a good exit on that because they anticipated what someone would want. And a lot of decision making gets done like that”. _______________________________________ “I’m not saying that we have this all solved. But what we’re trying to do is create a framework where we are able to take many bets so that we don’t fall in love with anything, or we don’t have to fall in love with anything. … And then always hold up very explicitly what we know and what we don’t know along the dimensions that matter. The dimensions that matter are - Will it work? That’s a science. - When it gets where will people care? - Is it differentiated? - Does it solve a big problem? In order to get it there, is there a path with our resources and expertise that would allow us to see it through?” “When you start to hold things up like that, you start to see where the mistakes are, where the uncertainties are, and you can be more rational in deciding ‘We’re going to run it to here because we get to flip the card and if the card goes the wrong way we’re going to kill it because we’ve got something else behind it.’” “I do think that if done right, and if you can pick the right opportunities, the success rate can be well higher than an order of magnitude better. … And there are examples of this… companies I’ve mentioned, you know, Regeneron, their success rate is at least 10x the industry in bringing programs forward and getting them approved. … So it’s… you can do it better that way”

Jack Prescott

31,665 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

‘I wrote it in the morning on the piano, like I said many times, and I went to the office and I sang it. I thought, “Hell, let’s do it”, and we booked the studio. And Phil came in, he said, “How do you want it?” I said, “You know, 1950 but now.” And he said “Right,” and boom, I did it in just about three goes. He played it back, and there it was. I said, “A bit more bass, that’s all.” And off we went. See, Phil doesn’t fuss about with fuckin’ stereo or all the bullshit. Just “Did it sound alright? Let’s have it.” It doesn’t matter whether something’s prominent or not prominent. If it sounds good to you as a layman or as a human, take it. Don’t bother whether this is like that or the quality of this. That suits me fine.’ John Lennon, 1970
3:09

‘I wrote it in the morning on the piano, like I said many times, and I went to the office and I sang it. I thought, “Hell, let’s do it”, and we booked the studio. And Phil came in, he said, “How do you want it?” I said, “You know, 1950 but now.” And he said “Right,” and boom, I did it in just about three goes. He played it back, and there it was. I said, “A bit more bass, that’s all.” And off we went. See, Phil doesn’t fuss about with fuckin’ stereo or all the bullshit. Just “Did it sound alright? Let’s have it.” It doesn’t matter whether something’s prominent or not prominent. If it sounds good to you as a layman or as a human, take it. Don’t bother whether this is like that or the quality of this. That suits me fine.’ John Lennon, 1970

Florrie Mens Well Being Walk

94,230 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

As a hot war in the Middle East ramps up, Trump takes a SEVEN MINUTE BREAK to deliver this demented vowel movement about his fountains. Read it. He is absolutely gone. 1/2 “We also have a beautiful city. We had 22 fountains. Every one of them didn't work. One of them, probably the best was one that hasn't worked for 50 years. That was about the best. They've all been out of commission for 50 years or more. Can you imagine it? They were graffiti-strung, grass-strung, the grass growing through the cracks. And they were in terrible shape. And all 22 have now been opened. And the most magnificent, possibly, of all the waterfront and union station is beautiful. You see that? It was all graffiti all over the place. We-- it's a lot of work. We got it looking maybe better than it was the day they put it in. But the one that we're all talking about is the almost 2,500 foot long that's taller than any building in the world, actually. There's no building that's 2,500 feet tall. I don't think. But it's like twice the height of the Empire State Building is an example, much wider. So we just got that open. Last night, we went to do it before July 4, and it is incredible. It's called-- it was originally called 1922. It was built. It was called the Reflecting Pond, or the Reflecting Lakes of people called it. But it was supposed to be a reflection. It never worked from 1920 to-- because it was stone on the base. And no matter what, it always leaked, because you have stone, and you have lots of crevins that we have nice stone out there. But if you go between the stone, it leaks. And so it never really worked very well. And it was a bad color. It was gray. It's concrete and stones. It was gray. And I had the idea, along with some great people that worked for us, Doug Burgum, his fantastic, his group, Greg, everybody. And it worked very hard. But it was going to cost $400 million. And we did it for about $10 million. It was going to take four years to build. So we did it in, like, a month, a month and a half. And we would have had our construction site out there for years. And it wouldn't have worked when they built it. So when they told me what they were going to do, I said, that's not a good idea. I built many, many swimming pools as a builder. I built hundreds of them. And I got one of our contractors. I had them take a look. And he said, oh, we can do a great job. If you could just give us a decent surface, a surface was in sense. So we sand blasted the surface. We fumeigated it. We took out 11 dumpsters, big dumpsters, full of garbage. It was all garbage. Some of the garbage was after years. It was all disgusting. And it smelled. And anyway, we took 11 dumpsters of garbage out. With shovels, we had a shovel inside of what's called a pool or a lake. And I got it cleaned. We then fumeigated it. We then sandblasted the entire thing. Washed it cleaned. It scrubbed it. Sandblasted it. Then we gave it a test. Then we rinsed it out. And we gave them a beautiful surface. And then they put a swimming pool topping, but industrial strength. It's industrial strength. It's used for tanks and lots of other things. So it will water. And we worked out the ratios of expansion and contraction, because you know, believe it or not, when you have something that's 2,500 feet long, this tremendous expansion. And who would think of this? Only a person that doesn't like me. And they have a lot of expansion and contraction. So when we're putting the surface down, we'd leave areas that can expand and contract a little bit. Because it expands over a foot and a half, can you believe it? So I would have ripped it apart. So we left areas of expansion and contraction. We were testing it for three weeks, four weeks. Works great. And we just opened it last night, and people are going wild over.”
7:09

As a hot war in the Middle East ramps up, Trump takes a SEVEN MINUTE BREAK to deliver this demented vowel movement about his fountains. Read it. He is absolutely gone. 1/2 “We also have a beautiful city. We had 22 fountains. Every one of them didn't work. One of them, probably the best was one that hasn't worked for 50 years. That was about the best. They've all been out of commission for 50 years or more. Can you imagine it? They were graffiti-strung, grass-strung, the grass growing through the cracks. And they were in terrible shape. And all 22 have now been opened. And the most magnificent, possibly, of all the waterfront and union station is beautiful. You see that? It was all graffiti all over the place. We-- it's a lot of work. We got it looking maybe better than it was the day they put it in. But the one that we're all talking about is the almost 2,500 foot long that's taller than any building in the world, actually. There's no building that's 2,500 feet tall. I don't think. But it's like twice the height of the Empire State Building is an example, much wider. So we just got that open. Last night, we went to do it before July 4, and it is incredible. It's called-- it was originally called 1922. It was built. It was called the Reflecting Pond, or the Reflecting Lakes of people called it. But it was supposed to be a reflection. It never worked from 1920 to-- because it was stone on the base. And no matter what, it always leaked, because you have stone, and you have lots of crevins that we have nice stone out there. But if you go between the stone, it leaks. And so it never really worked very well. And it was a bad color. It was gray. It's concrete and stones. It was gray. And I had the idea, along with some great people that worked for us, Doug Burgum, his fantastic, his group, Greg, everybody. And it worked very hard. But it was going to cost $400 million. And we did it for about $10 million. It was going to take four years to build. So we did it in, like, a month, a month and a half. And we would have had our construction site out there for years. And it wouldn't have worked when they built it. So when they told me what they were going to do, I said, that's not a good idea. I built many, many swimming pools as a builder. I built hundreds of them. And I got one of our contractors. I had them take a look. And he said, oh, we can do a great job. If you could just give us a decent surface, a surface was in sense. So we sand blasted the surface. We fumeigated it. We took out 11 dumpsters, big dumpsters, full of garbage. It was all garbage. Some of the garbage was after years. It was all disgusting. And it smelled. And anyway, we took 11 dumpsters of garbage out. With shovels, we had a shovel inside of what's called a pool or a lake. And I got it cleaned. We then fumeigated it. We then sandblasted the entire thing. Washed it cleaned. It scrubbed it. Sandblasted it. Then we gave it a test. Then we rinsed it out. And we gave them a beautiful surface. And then they put a swimming pool topping, but industrial strength. It's industrial strength. It's used for tanks and lots of other things. So it will water. And we worked out the ratios of expansion and contraction, because you know, believe it or not, when you have something that's 2,500 feet long, this tremendous expansion. And who would think of this? Only a person that doesn't like me. And they have a lot of expansion and contraction. So when we're putting the surface down, we'd leave areas that can expand and contract a little bit. Because it expands over a foot and a half, can you believe it? So I would have ripped it apart. So we left areas of expansion and contraction. We were testing it for three weeks, four weeks. Works great. And we just opened it last night, and people are going wild over.”

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

212,796 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

😑 “You know, when I did the 250, there was nothing I could do. It was 250. It was 250. So I can't see -- that was my baby. The country happened to be 250 years old. But what I did do is during my first term, I got the Olympics, and I got the Great Soccer. You know that whole deal, right? I got -- we call it soccer. They call it football. I got them both. I got the Olympics. First, I got the Olympics, and I got it. I was president. And I said, you know, it's a shame. It's a shame. I got the World Cup, and I have the Olympics, and I did it. And you have no idea. President Obama didn't want to make a call to the Olympics. You know why? Because he went to Switzerland or wherever, and he said, you know, if a president goes to get the Olympics, you have to have a deal. You have to be chosen. He went there, and he came in fourth, so he hated them, I guess. And he was unwilling to make a call, and they called me up. The Democrats called me up, actually, from Los Angeles, and I said, I'll do it. I made the call, and I couldn't get the people off the phone because they were so starved for love, because nobody would call them from -- anyway, we made a deal. I got the Olympics. Then we got the World Cup with Johnny. We got the World Cup, and I got them both, and I looked at my people. I said, isn't it a shame? I got these two, but it wasn't in the next four years. It was right after that, and the one after that. And I got the Olympics, and I got the World Cup, and we also have 250, so that's a pretty wild term. But I got these two things that are incredible. Nobody else could have done it. I'm telling you, everybody wanted it. Nobody could have done it. And I said, and I won't be president, because I'll be president for four more years, but it won't be -- and then they cheated and rigged the election. They rigged -- you know, they don't even turn off the cameras when I say that now, because now they know it's true, too. But they knew it was true before. Remember, the cameras used to immediately turn off. You see all those beautiful red lights go off. Now I can say whatever I want, because then they know it's true. But they knew it was true before. It's fake news. That's why they call it. But you know what? This term is much more consequential than if I had done it the more traditional way. This was slightly harder, believe me. It's slightly more dangerous, because they're criminals on the other side that tried to put your president in jail and went after him, just like they do in third-world countries. And we all beat em together. We beat em because our level of popularity was so high.”
2:32

😑 “You know, when I did the 250, there was nothing I could do. It was 250. It was 250. So I can't see -- that was my baby. The country happened to be 250 years old. But what I did do is during my first term, I got the Olympics, and I got the Great Soccer. You know that whole deal, right? I got -- we call it soccer. They call it football. I got them both. I got the Olympics. First, I got the Olympics, and I got it. I was president. And I said, you know, it's a shame. It's a shame. I got the World Cup, and I have the Olympics, and I did it. And you have no idea. President Obama didn't want to make a call to the Olympics. You know why? Because he went to Switzerland or wherever, and he said, you know, if a president goes to get the Olympics, you have to have a deal. You have to be chosen. He went there, and he came in fourth, so he hated them, I guess. And he was unwilling to make a call, and they called me up. The Democrats called me up, actually, from Los Angeles, and I said, I'll do it. I made the call, and I couldn't get the people off the phone because they were so starved for love, because nobody would call them from -- anyway, we made a deal. I got the Olympics. Then we got the World Cup with Johnny. We got the World Cup, and I got them both, and I looked at my people. I said, isn't it a shame? I got these two, but it wasn't in the next four years. It was right after that, and the one after that. And I got the Olympics, and I got the World Cup, and we also have 250, so that's a pretty wild term. But I got these two things that are incredible. Nobody else could have done it. I'm telling you, everybody wanted it. Nobody could have done it. And I said, and I won't be president, because I'll be president for four more years, but it won't be -- and then they cheated and rigged the election. They rigged -- you know, they don't even turn off the cameras when I say that now, because now they know it's true, too. But they knew it was true before. Remember, the cameras used to immediately turn off. You see all those beautiful red lights go off. Now I can say whatever I want, because then they know it's true. But they knew it was true before. It's fake news. That's why they call it. But you know what? This term is much more consequential than if I had done it the more traditional way. This was slightly harder, believe me. It's slightly more dangerous, because they're criminals on the other side that tried to put your president in jail and went after him, just like they do in third-world countries. And we all beat em together. We beat em because our level of popularity was so high.”

Jim Stewartson, Decelerationist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🇺🇸

2,109,204 просмотров • 1 год назад

Paul ‘Triple H’ Levesque was asked about a comment Damian Priest made recently about the same talent being in the top spots, and answers Jamie Iovine’s question on how he feels about the current generation of stars going forward and the “changing of the guard” right now in WWE — “Look, I get that. If you’re the guy that wants to take the spot, it’s frustrating when there’s guys above you that have the spot. We’re in a period of time where there’s a lot of top performers in top spots that over time have earned those spots and are selling tickets and are incredibly popular. So you really have to do something. The narrative of ‘It’s my turn. I’ve been here for a while’. There’s no turns. That’s not how it works. You earn the spot. Believe me. If somebody is getting over more than somebody else, we move that person into the spot and move the other person down. But it’s not just that, it’s not just they’re getting the loud crowd reaction. Are they going to be good in the spot? Are they going to hold up their end of the bargain? Are they going to screw up if we give it to them? Are they going to make a mistake that we regret? — There’s all those things factored in. And I love the fact that sometimes, talent are like ‘Well, it’s frustrating.’ Great, that means work harder. Get yourself there. Figure it out. Figure out the way. Figure how it gets done. I’ve seen a million talent succeed because of what they do. Not because storyline or creative. ‘They gave them the spot’. 99% of the time in this business, the person gets over then gets the push. That’s how it works. That’s how it’s supposed to work. You go do you then we follow it, because otherwise, most of the time, they will choke on it if it’s not what the fans believe in. Big believer in if you want the spot, go take it. Whenever anybody says ‘I don’t know why I’m not in that spot’…well I don’t know, are you more over than Cody? Roman? Punk? Liv? IYO? The people that are in that spot get there. Make those crowd reactions. Whatever you need to make it happen, that’s what we’re all here to do. I love that mentality because I think it makes people work harder, and if they’re not willing to work to get the spot then you shouldn’t have it anyway.” — via #SummerSlam Post-Show
3:43

Paul ‘Triple H’ Levesque was asked about a comment Damian Priest made recently about the same talent being in the top spots, and answers Jamie Iovine’s question on how he feels about the current generation of stars going forward and the “changing of the guard” right now in WWE — “Look, I get that. If you’re the guy that wants to take the spot, it’s frustrating when there’s guys above you that have the spot. We’re in a period of time where there’s a lot of top performers in top spots that over time have earned those spots and are selling tickets and are incredibly popular. So you really have to do something. The narrative of ‘It’s my turn. I’ve been here for a while’. There’s no turns. That’s not how it works. You earn the spot. Believe me. If somebody is getting over more than somebody else, we move that person into the spot and move the other person down. But it’s not just that, it’s not just they’re getting the loud crowd reaction. Are they going to be good in the spot? Are they going to hold up their end of the bargain? Are they going to screw up if we give it to them? Are they going to make a mistake that we regret? — There’s all those things factored in. And I love the fact that sometimes, talent are like ‘Well, it’s frustrating.’ Great, that means work harder. Get yourself there. Figure it out. Figure out the way. Figure how it gets done. I’ve seen a million talent succeed because of what they do. Not because storyline or creative. ‘They gave them the spot’. 99% of the time in this business, the person gets over then gets the push. That’s how it works. That’s how it’s supposed to work. You go do you then we follow it, because otherwise, most of the time, they will choke on it if it’s not what the fans believe in. Big believer in if you want the spot, go take it. Whenever anybody says ‘I don’t know why I’m not in that spot’…well I don’t know, are you more over than Cody? Roman? Punk? Liv? IYO? The people that are in that spot get there. Make those crowd reactions. Whatever you need to make it happen, that’s what we’re all here to do. I love that mentality because I think it makes people work harder, and if they’re not willing to work to get the spot then you shouldn’t have it anyway.” — via #SummerSlam Post-Show

PW Chronicle

93,045 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

.Naval: You define wealth in a beautiful way. You talk about wealth as a set of physical transformations that we can affect. So as a society it becomes very clear that knowledge leads directly to wealth creation for everybody. A given individual can obviously affect physical transformations proportional to the resources available to them—but much more proportional to the knowledge available to them. Knowledge is a huge force multiplier. You then define resources as the thing that you combine with knowledge to create wealth. New knowledge allows you to use new things as resources and discard old things that maybe we’re running out of. There are lots of examples of how we’ve done that in the past. For example, in energy we’ve gone from wood to coal to oil to nuclear. But then people say, “Now we’re out of ideas. Now we’re caught up. Now we’re done. There aren’t going to be new ideas, and now we have to freeze the frame and conserve what we have.” The counter to that is, “No, we’ll create new knowledge and have new resources. Don’t worry about the old ones.” Well they say, “If you’re going to have new resources, if you can’t think of them now, it’s not real.” This now gets into the realm of people demanding that if you’re going to claim that new knowledge will be created, you have to name that knowledge now. Otherwise it’s not real. But that seems like a Catch-22. David Deutsch: It does, and it’s a bad argument. I don’t want to claim that the knowledge will be created. We’re fallible; we may not create it. We may destroy ourselves. We may miss the solution that’s right under our nose, so that when the snailiens come from another galaxy and look at us, they’ll say, “How can it possibly be that they failed to do so-and-so when it was right in front of them?” That could happen. I can’t prove or argue that it won’t happen. What I always argue, though, is that we have what it takes. We have everything that it takes to achieve that. If we don’t, it’ll be because of bad choices we have made, not because of constraints imposed on us by the planet or the solar system. Naval: It will be by anti-rational memes that restrict the creation of knowledge and the growth of knowledge. David Deutsch: Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be by well-intentioned errors, which nobody could see why they were errors. Again, it doesn’t take malevolence to make mistakes. Mistakes are the normal condition of humans. All we can do is try to find them. Maybe not destroying the means of correcting errors is the heart of morality; because if there is no way of correcting errors, then sooner or later one of those will get us. Naval: Don’t destroy the means of error correction is the base of morality. I love that. I think about places like North Korea where you can’t have elections and a revolution is very difficult because the gang in charge is armed to the teeth and they’ve destroyed the means of political error correction for a long time. That is a case where humanity is trapped in a local minimum, and it’s very hard to climb out of that hole. If too much of the world falls into that mindset, then we as a species may just stagnate because we’ve lost our biggest advantage. We’ve lost our biggest discovery, which was the ability to make new discoveries.
3:08

.Naval: You define wealth in a beautiful way. You talk about wealth as a set of physical transformations that we can affect. So as a society it becomes very clear that knowledge leads directly to wealth creation for everybody. A given individual can obviously affect physical transformations proportional to the resources available to them—but much more proportional to the knowledge available to them. Knowledge is a huge force multiplier. You then define resources as the thing that you combine with knowledge to create wealth. New knowledge allows you to use new things as resources and discard old things that maybe we’re running out of. There are lots of examples of how we’ve done that in the past. For example, in energy we’ve gone from wood to coal to oil to nuclear. But then people say, “Now we’re out of ideas. Now we’re caught up. Now we’re done. There aren’t going to be new ideas, and now we have to freeze the frame and conserve what we have.” The counter to that is, “No, we’ll create new knowledge and have new resources. Don’t worry about the old ones.” Well they say, “If you’re going to have new resources, if you can’t think of them now, it’s not real.” This now gets into the realm of people demanding that if you’re going to claim that new knowledge will be created, you have to name that knowledge now. Otherwise it’s not real. But that seems like a Catch-22. David Deutsch: It does, and it’s a bad argument. I don’t want to claim that the knowledge will be created. We’re fallible; we may not create it. We may destroy ourselves. We may miss the solution that’s right under our nose, so that when the snailiens come from another galaxy and look at us, they’ll say, “How can it possibly be that they failed to do so-and-so when it was right in front of them?” That could happen. I can’t prove or argue that it won’t happen. What I always argue, though, is that we have what it takes. We have everything that it takes to achieve that. If we don’t, it’ll be because of bad choices we have made, not because of constraints imposed on us by the planet or the solar system. Naval: It will be by anti-rational memes that restrict the creation of knowledge and the growth of knowledge. David Deutsch: Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be by well-intentioned errors, which nobody could see why they were errors. Again, it doesn’t take malevolence to make mistakes. Mistakes are the normal condition of humans. All we can do is try to find them. Maybe not destroying the means of correcting errors is the heart of morality; because if there is no way of correcting errors, then sooner or later one of those will get us. Naval: Don’t destroy the means of error correction is the base of morality. I love that. I think about places like North Korea where you can’t have elections and a revolution is very difficult because the gang in charge is armed to the teeth and they’ve destroyed the means of political error correction for a long time. That is a case where humanity is trapped in a local minimum, and it’s very hard to climb out of that hole. If too much of the world falls into that mindset, then we as a species may just stagnate because we’ve lost our biggest advantage. We’ve lost our biggest discovery, which was the ability to make new discoveries.

Deutsch Explains

143,949 просмотров • 2 лет назад