Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

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.

#FreakyFridayFeature: 縛られた美少年、快楽に堕ちる夜 (A Beautiful Boy Bound and Falling Into Pleasure) | Shibari on the fly by sire trev… then the real play begins. Watch closely — every knot makes the pleasure hit harder for this handsome submissive boy, exactly as it should. Only happening at 🇵THE SOTA HOUSE 🔞Shanghai... show more

🇵THE SOTA HOUSE 🔞Shanghai China 5/3-10

237,468 subscribers

325,043 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

NSFW #FreakyFridayFeature

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Footage sent in shows a man being stopped by a member of the public at the Sainsbury’s petrol station in Hayes, with everything he’d stuffed into his pockets falling out as he’s walked out the door. Have you got your UB1UB2 discount card yet? Discounts at 150+ local spots for only £3 a month 👉 link in UB1UB2 West London (Southall) bio Then, on his way out, he goes for the charcoal 💀 Told to drop it, and off he went. Fair play to the bloke who stepped in, though it’s worth saying nobody should feel they have to. People carry things and shop staff are told not to intervene for exactly that reason. If you see it happening, filming it and reporting it does more good than putting yourself in the way. Bold effort on the charcoal though 😭 📍 Hayes 🎥 Submitted by @pakistig #ub1ub2 #london #hayes #hillingdon

Footage sent in shows a man being stopped by a member of the public at the Sainsbury’s petrol station in Hayes, with everything he’d stuffed into his pockets falling out as he’s walked out the door. Have you got your UB1UB2 discount card yet? Discounts at 150+ local spots for only £3 a month 👉 link in UB1UB2 West London (Southall) bio Then, on his way out, he goes for the charcoal 💀 Told to drop it, and off he went. Fair play to the bloke who stepped in, though it’s worth saying nobody should feel they have to. People carry things and shop staff are told not to intervene for exactly that reason. If you see it happening, filming it and reporting it does more good than putting yourself in the way. Bold effort on the charcoal though 😭 📍 Hayes 🎥 Submitted by @pakistig #ub1ub2 #london #hayes #hillingdon

UB1UB2 West London (Southall)

564,440 Aufrufe • vor 4 Tagen

EVERYTHING IS GOING EXACTLY AS I TOLD YOU $ETH reached $1,900 and will soon hit $2,000 Then the real move begins My plan: 1. Correction now into the $1,800 zone 2. Then a rally to $2,000 3. But when $BTC reaches $70k, $ETH will likely go to the $2,200 zone 4. 7–10 days of distribution 5. Final bottom zone for $ETH: $1,260–$890 (DCA) 6. Then the start of a new bull cycle, target $7k Reminder: we may retest the 2022 bottom with a wick, that won’t break the global trend. Right now, it depends heavily on #BTC And don’t forget there was a lot of negativity around Ethereum — that was done to disillusion the crowd. Whales will start pumping positivity around $ETH when the price sets a new ATH. As a reminder, I warned about the bull trap at $82k and the summer drop. MY NEXT CALL WILL BE THE BIGGEST ONE OF THIS CYCLE TURN ON NOTIFICATIONS. MOST PEOPLE WILL FOLLOW ME TOO LATE

EVERYTHING IS GOING EXACTLY AS I TOLD YOU $ETH reached $1,900 and will soon hit $2,000 Then the real move begins My plan: 1. Correction now into the $1,800 zone 2. Then a rally to $2,000 3. But when $BTC reaches $70k, $ETH will likely go to the $2,200 zone 4. 7–10 days of distribution 5. Final bottom zone for $ETH: $1,260–$890 (DCA) 6. Then the start of a new bull cycle, target $7k Reminder: we may retest the 2022 bottom with a wick, that won’t break the global trend. Right now, it depends heavily on #BTC And don’t forget there was a lot of negativity around Ethereum — that was done to disillusion the crowd. Whales will start pumping positivity around $ETH when the price sets a new ATH. As a reminder, I warned about the bull trap at $82k and the summer drop. MY NEXT CALL WILL BE THE BIGGEST ONE OF THIS CYCLE TURN ON NOTIFICATIONS. MOST PEOPLE WILL FOLLOW ME TOO LATE

Tony Research

248,349 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🇯🇵 Why Japan’s Decline Is Psychological, Not Just Economic Everyone talks about Japan’s economic stagnation — lost decades, shrinking influence, declining industries. But there’s a deeper layer almost nobody touches: Japan’s geopolitical identity crisis is inseparable from its hostility toward China. Not because China threatens Japan. But because China shattered the psychological structure Japan has lived inside for 80 years. 1. Japan once believed it understood how Asia should work. Modern Japan’s national mindset is built on one story: • The U.S. defeated us. • The U.S. rebuilt us. • The U.S. protects us. • The West accepts us as the “civilized Asian,” the honorary white nation. Japan internalized this hierarchy. And then it projected the same logic onto China. Japan slaughtered 35 million Chinese. Ran Unit 731. Used women as sexual slaves. But Tokyo always believed: “I am richer, I am more advanced, I have better reputation. So China should ‘move on’ the same way I moved on under U.S. rule.” Japan thought dominance creates obedience. Because that is how it behaved toward America. 2. When China was weak, Japan mistook silence for acceptance. For decades, China didn’t have the power to push back internationally. Japan interpreted this as: • “China accepted our narrative.” • “China doesn’t dare confront us.” • “The war is over — we won the moral argument.” This is absolutely not reconciliation; it is merely a power illusion. Japan became comfortable believing: “If China must bow to someone, it should bow to me, just like I bowed to America.” 3. Then China rose — and Japan’s entire worldview collapsed. China didn’t just grow. China overtook Japan in every pillar of national power: • GDP • Manufacturing • Technology • Diplomacy • Military • Global influence China now competes with the United States itself — the very empire Japan historically imitates. And this is where the psychological rupture begins: Japan cannot emotionally process a world where China stands on the same level as America. Because in Japan’s internal hierarchy: • America is the master. • Japan is the apprentice. • China is supposed to be below both. But suddenly… the “student of America” watches the “victim of Japan” surpass them both in power and prestige. For many Japanese nationalists, this feels like an existential insult: “How dare China rise to the level of my master? How dare China erase the hierarchy that defines me?” So the hatred intensifies. Not just political hatred — existential hatred. 4. And the irony? China never asked Japan to kneel. China only asked Japan to face history. But to Japan, acknowledging history means acknowledging loss of superiority. So instead, resentment grows. And Japan’s geopolitical relevance shrinks even faster. 5. Japan’s economic decline is inseparable from this psychological stagnation. - While China built entire industrial ecosystems, Japan clung to nostalgia and Western validation. - While China out-innovated, out-built, out-scaled, Japan obsessed over keeping China “in its place.” Japan’s decline is not just economic, it is a refusal to accept a world where it no longer defines Asia.

🇯🇵 Why Japan’s Decline Is Psychological, Not Just Economic Everyone talks about Japan’s economic stagnation — lost decades, shrinking influence, declining industries. But there’s a deeper layer almost nobody touches: Japan’s geopolitical identity crisis is inseparable from its hostility toward China. Not because China threatens Japan. But because China shattered the psychological structure Japan has lived inside for 80 years. 1. Japan once believed it understood how Asia should work. Modern Japan’s national mindset is built on one story: • The U.S. defeated us. • The U.S. rebuilt us. • The U.S. protects us. • The West accepts us as the “civilized Asian,” the honorary white nation. Japan internalized this hierarchy. And then it projected the same logic onto China. Japan slaughtered 35 million Chinese. Ran Unit 731. Used women as sexual slaves. But Tokyo always believed: “I am richer, I am more advanced, I have better reputation. So China should ‘move on’ the same way I moved on under U.S. rule.” Japan thought dominance creates obedience. Because that is how it behaved toward America. 2. When China was weak, Japan mistook silence for acceptance. For decades, China didn’t have the power to push back internationally. Japan interpreted this as: • “China accepted our narrative.” • “China doesn’t dare confront us.” • “The war is over — we won the moral argument.” This is absolutely not reconciliation; it is merely a power illusion. Japan became comfortable believing: “If China must bow to someone, it should bow to me, just like I bowed to America.” 3. Then China rose — and Japan’s entire worldview collapsed. China didn’t just grow. China overtook Japan in every pillar of national power: • GDP • Manufacturing • Technology • Diplomacy • Military • Global influence China now competes with the United States itself — the very empire Japan historically imitates. And this is where the psychological rupture begins: Japan cannot emotionally process a world where China stands on the same level as America. Because in Japan’s internal hierarchy: • America is the master. • Japan is the apprentice. • China is supposed to be below both. But suddenly… the “student of America” watches the “victim of Japan” surpass them both in power and prestige. For many Japanese nationalists, this feels like an existential insult: “How dare China rise to the level of my master? How dare China erase the hierarchy that defines me?” So the hatred intensifies. Not just political hatred — existential hatred. 4. And the irony? China never asked Japan to kneel. China only asked Japan to face history. But to Japan, acknowledging history means acknowledging loss of superiority. So instead, resentment grows. And Japan’s geopolitical relevance shrinks even faster. 5. Japan’s economic decline is inseparable from this psychological stagnation. - While China built entire industrial ecosystems, Japan clung to nostalgia and Western validation. - While China out-innovated, out-built, out-scaled, Japan obsessed over keeping China “in its place.” Japan’s decline is not just economic, it is a refusal to accept a world where it no longer defines Asia.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

178,954 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 built the same scroll-animated website from 1 skill in 32 minutes and only 1 of them made it feel like a film. Same prompt: boutique Japan travel brand, origami style. A subway pulls in, a paper house unfolds into a hotel, a bird takes flight as you scroll. Doing this by hand is brutal multiple videos, matched starting frames, frames ripped out 1 by 1 and synced to scroll position. The skill does all of it: Generate 1 anchor image and approve it every scene inherits the style Turn it into video through the Higgs Field MCP (Seedance), straight from the terminal FFmpeg pulls every frame Each frame maps to scroll position, so your scrollbar becomes the playhead Setup is just connecting the MCP and loading the skill works in Claude Code and Codex. It interviews you first about scenes, budget and mobile, then shows the anchor image before burning a single credit on video. Budget reality: 6 scenes runs ~800 credits and is overkill, 4 scenes is the sweet spot, crop-safe mobile is the cheap path. The verdict came down to transitions. GPT-5.6 Soul built strong scenes with incredible detail inside each one then hard cuts between scene 1 and 2, and again between 2 and 3. Fable 5 stitched them together: wires push out of the top of frame while the next scene blurs in behind, gains depth and locks into place. Same skill, same prompts, 10 generations each. Credit to Peter Wang for the original Scroll World skill open source, now forked with budget tiers and mobile fixes. Soul built 4 scenes. Fable built 1 film.

Spike 1%

45,052 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

This is absolutely fascinating: Jason Furman, one of the foremost economists in the U.S. and former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, explains why the so-called "China shock" is a myth. According to him, "85 to 95% of Americans benefited" from trade with China, and "China has been part of helping [the US economy] work, not hurting it work." In other words, the narrative that China "stole" American jobs and wages is the exact opposite of reality. Furman's logic is pretty ironclad: 1) He points out, which is factual, that "the slowdown of wage growth and the rise of inequality began in the 1970s, when there basically was no trade with China." It then accelerated in the 1980s-90s when China trade was small, and **slowed down** after 2000. And "since about 2013," when trade with China was at its highest, "we've had pretty fast real wage growth," with "the fastest real wage growth for moderate income households." In other words, the timing doesn't fit: if China was the cause, the problem should have gotten worse as trade with China increased. Instead, it got better. 2) A common narrative one hears about China is "who cares about affordable goods, we need well-paying jobs." But Furman points out it's actually one and the same thing: "the way we measure jobs is how much your wages can buy. If you improve purchasing power, you are making every single job in the economy better." In very concrete terms, if salaries stay flat but Chinese imports make goods 10% cheaper, your purchasing power just went up 10%, as if you got a 10% wage hike. This makes every single job in the economy better. In effect "jobs vs. cheap goods" is a false dichotomy: cheap goods ARE better jobs. 3) Furman also points out, rightly, that the majority of what U.S. imports from China isn't consumer goods: "more than half of what we import is actually inputs into the manufacturing process itself." In other words, Chinese imports make U.S. manufacturing MORE competitive as it decreases their input costs. If you were to cut all Chinese imports, you'd cripple U.S. manufacturing as it would no longer be able to compete on price with anyone. And, as per point 2 above, you'd also destroy Americans' purchasing power, making every single U.S. worker worse off. 4) Last but not least, Furman says that the "China shock" literature is fundamentally flawed, as it "doesn't answer the most important question, which is what the net effect was." It "doesn't consider other causes for the job losses, doesn't look at all the places that gained jobs and wages, and doesn't integrate the consumer side." All in all, he believes that if one were to actually calculate the net effect of trade with China on the U.S. economy, it'd show that "85 to 95% of Americans benefited." And even for the 5-15% who lost out, Furman says these people were failed by "our labor policies, our social safety net" - not by China. What Furman is saying is more relevant than ever because, both in the U.S. and in Europe, this notion that China is somehow "stealing" Western jobs and prosperity has become the unquestioned premise of so many of today's policies. Nobody even debates it anymore, it's almost universally assumed correct. In my own country France, Macron keeps repeating it all the time, leading the charge in Europe to slap tariffs on Chinese imports, warning that China is "killing its own customers" and that it's a question of life or death for European industry ( He literally called last week for the EU to build its own version of America's Section 301 - the same protectionist tool Trump uses ( BUT, if Furman is right, and the data strongly suggests he is, France and Europe are about to inflict economic self-harm in the name of a problem that doesn't exist. Much more affordable cars, for instance, would literally give every single European a big wage hike. It's Furman's argument on "85 to 95% benefiting" vs 5% to 15% losing out: the vast majority of Europeans would see their money go further, while a small number of jobs in legacy automakers would be disrupted. Instead of helping those workers transition, Europe wants to prevent making everyone better off. Anyhow, please do watch the whole podcast, which has many other fascinating insights because Furman also debates with Justin Yifu Lin, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and State Council Counsellor of China. They're both interviewed by my friend @Hansong_Li - also a professor and an immensely smart man - in his excellent new podcast "worldviews" (imho one of the best new podcasts our there). The video is here:

This is absolutely fascinating: Jason Furman, one of the foremost economists in the U.S. and former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, explains why the so-called "China shock" is a myth. According to him, "85 to 95% of Americans benefited" from trade with China, and "China has been part of helping [the US economy] work, not hurting it work." In other words, the narrative that China "stole" American jobs and wages is the exact opposite of reality. Furman's logic is pretty ironclad: 1) He points out, which is factual, that "the slowdown of wage growth and the rise of inequality began in the 1970s, when there basically was no trade with China." It then accelerated in the 1980s-90s when China trade was small, and slowed down after 2000. And "since about 2013," when trade with China was at its highest, "we've had pretty fast real wage growth," with "the fastest real wage growth for moderate income households." In other words, the timing doesn't fit: if China was the cause, the problem should have gotten worse as trade with China increased. Instead, it got better. 2) A common narrative one hears about China is "who cares about affordable goods, we need well-paying jobs." But Furman points out it's actually one and the same thing: "the way we measure jobs is how much your wages can buy. If you improve purchasing power, you are making every single job in the economy better." In very concrete terms, if salaries stay flat but Chinese imports make goods 10% cheaper, your purchasing power just went up 10%, as if you got a 10% wage hike. This makes every single job in the economy better. In effect "jobs vs. cheap goods" is a false dichotomy: cheap goods ARE better jobs. 3) Furman also points out, rightly, that the majority of what U.S. imports from China isn't consumer goods: "more than half of what we import is actually inputs into the manufacturing process itself." In other words, Chinese imports make U.S. manufacturing MORE competitive as it decreases their input costs. If you were to cut all Chinese imports, you'd cripple U.S. manufacturing as it would no longer be able to compete on price with anyone. And, as per point 2 above, you'd also destroy Americans' purchasing power, making every single U.S. worker worse off. 4) Last but not least, Furman says that the "China shock" literature is fundamentally flawed, as it "doesn't answer the most important question, which is what the net effect was." It "doesn't consider other causes for the job losses, doesn't look at all the places that gained jobs and wages, and doesn't integrate the consumer side." All in all, he believes that if one were to actually calculate the net effect of trade with China on the U.S. economy, it'd show that "85 to 95% of Americans benefited." And even for the 5-15% who lost out, Furman says these people were failed by "our labor policies, our social safety net" - not by China. What Furman is saying is more relevant than ever because, both in the U.S. and in Europe, this notion that China is somehow "stealing" Western jobs and prosperity has become the unquestioned premise of so many of today's policies. Nobody even debates it anymore, it's almost universally assumed correct. In my own country France, Macron keeps repeating it all the time, leading the charge in Europe to slap tariffs on Chinese imports, warning that China is "killing its own customers" and that it's a question of life or death for European industry ( He literally called last week for the EU to build its own version of America's Section 301 - the same protectionist tool Trump uses ( BUT, if Furman is right, and the data strongly suggests he is, France and Europe are about to inflict economic self-harm in the name of a problem that doesn't exist. Much more affordable cars, for instance, would literally give every single European a big wage hike. It's Furman's argument on "85 to 95% benefiting" vs 5% to 15% losing out: the vast majority of Europeans would see their money go further, while a small number of jobs in legacy automakers would be disrupted. Instead of helping those workers transition, Europe wants to prevent making everyone better off. Anyhow, please do watch the whole podcast, which has many other fascinating insights because Furman also debates with Justin Yifu Lin, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and State Council Counsellor of China. They're both interviewed by my friend @Hansong_Li - also a professor and an immensely smart man - in his excellent new podcast "worldviews" (imho one of the best new podcasts our there). The video is here:

Arnaud Bertrand

160,873 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Elon Musk just said on camera that America CANNOT beat China with humans alone. His exact words: "We definitely can't win on the human front." This is the richest man on the planet. Advisor to the president. And he's saying the US is cooked without robots. Here's why he's probably right: China is about to hit 3x the total US electricity output. Elon says electricity is a direct proxy for industrial capacity. Three times the electricity means roughly three times the manufacturing power. They have 4x the population. And Elon said something that'll piss a lot of people off: "The average work ethic in China is higher than in the US." America's birth rate has been below replacement since 1971. More people retiring every year. Fewer entering the workforce. No amount of policy, tariffs, or reshoring fixes that math. His solution: Optimus. He literally called it "the infinite money glitch." Because you can use robots to build more robots. Here's what makes this different from every other robotics play: 3 things are hard about humanoid robots. 1. Real-world AI 2. The hand 3. Scale manufacturing And the hand is harder than EVERYTHING else combined. Tesla had to custom design every single actuator, motor, gear, sensor, and control system from physics first principles. There is no supply chain. Nothing comes from a catalog. Not a single component. But they've solved it. Optimus has full human-hand dexterity with all degrees of freedom. No other company has demonstrated this. Not even in demos. Then you layer on what Elon described as a "recursive multiplicative exponential": Exponential growth in digital intelligence. Multiplied by exponential growth in chip capability. Multiplied by exponential growth in electromechanical dexterity. And then the robots start building robots. He's targeting 1 million Optimus units per year at Gen 3. Ten million at Gen 4. The first use case? Any operation that runs 24/7. Factories, warehouses, refineries, every continuous operation on the planet. Robots don't sleep, don't overheat, don't quit. And here's the part that should terrify every other country: America can't build enough ore refineries because Americans don't want refining jobs. China does 2x more ore refining than the rest of the world COMBINED. They dominate rare earths. The US literally mines rare earth ore, puts it on a train, ships it to CHINA for refining, then ships the finished product back. Optimus wants to fix that. Not by convincing Americans to take refining jobs but by making humans optional in the process entirely. And Elon also said something else that went completely under the radar: "Pure AI, pure robotics corporations will FAR outperform any corporations that have humans in the loop." He compared it to spreadsheets replacing human computers. Entire skyscrapers used to be filled with humans doing calculations. A laptop replaced all of them. Now imagine replacing some cells in your spreadsheet with humans again. It would be WORSE. That's his prediction for the future of corporations. Mixed human-AI companies lose to pure AI-robotics companies. Not by a little. By orders of magnitude. The race isn't AI models anymore. It's not chatbots or benchmarks or who scores higher on some test. The race is physical. Whoever builds the robot army first wins the entire global economy. China has the workers. The factories. The electricity. The refining. The supply chains. America has one card left to play... And it's a 5'11" humanoid robot that Elon calls the infinite money glitch. This is either the move that saves American manufacturing. Or the most disastrous science project in history.

Elon Musk just said on camera that America CANNOT beat China with humans alone. His exact words: "We definitely can't win on the human front." This is the richest man on the planet. Advisor to the president. And he's saying the US is cooked without robots. Here's why he's probably right: China is about to hit 3x the total US electricity output. Elon says electricity is a direct proxy for industrial capacity. Three times the electricity means roughly three times the manufacturing power. They have 4x the population. And Elon said something that'll piss a lot of people off: "The average work ethic in China is higher than in the US." America's birth rate has been below replacement since 1971. More people retiring every year. Fewer entering the workforce. No amount of policy, tariffs, or reshoring fixes that math. His solution: Optimus. He literally called it "the infinite money glitch." Because you can use robots to build more robots. Here's what makes this different from every other robotics play: 3 things are hard about humanoid robots. 1. Real-world AI 2. The hand 3. Scale manufacturing And the hand is harder than EVERYTHING else combined. Tesla had to custom design every single actuator, motor, gear, sensor, and control system from physics first principles. There is no supply chain. Nothing comes from a catalog. Not a single component. But they've solved it. Optimus has full human-hand dexterity with all degrees of freedom. No other company has demonstrated this. Not even in demos. Then you layer on what Elon described as a "recursive multiplicative exponential": Exponential growth in digital intelligence. Multiplied by exponential growth in chip capability. Multiplied by exponential growth in electromechanical dexterity. And then the robots start building robots. He's targeting 1 million Optimus units per year at Gen 3. Ten million at Gen 4. The first use case? Any operation that runs 24/7. Factories, warehouses, refineries, every continuous operation on the planet. Robots don't sleep, don't overheat, don't quit. And here's the part that should terrify every other country: America can't build enough ore refineries because Americans don't want refining jobs. China does 2x more ore refining than the rest of the world COMBINED. They dominate rare earths. The US literally mines rare earth ore, puts it on a train, ships it to CHINA for refining, then ships the finished product back. Optimus wants to fix that. Not by convincing Americans to take refining jobs but by making humans optional in the process entirely. And Elon also said something else that went completely under the radar: "Pure AI, pure robotics corporations will FAR outperform any corporations that have humans in the loop." He compared it to spreadsheets replacing human computers. Entire skyscrapers used to be filled with humans doing calculations. A laptop replaced all of them. Now imagine replacing some cells in your spreadsheet with humans again. It would be WORSE. That's his prediction for the future of corporations. Mixed human-AI companies lose to pure AI-robotics companies. Not by a little. By orders of magnitude. The race isn't AI models anymore. It's not chatbots or benchmarks or who scores higher on some test. The race is physical. Whoever builds the robot army first wins the entire global economy. China has the workers. The factories. The electricity. The refining. The supply chains. America has one card left to play... And it's a 5'11" humanoid robot that Elon calls the infinite money glitch. This is either the move that saves American manufacturing. Or the most disastrous science project in history.

Ricardo

49,857 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Fable 5 just turned me into an iOS developer. I spent 2 days building a full game with zero code written by hand. The last 10 builds succeeded on the first try. I needed a fun project to test it on, so I decided to make an iOS game. After a few experiments with other ideas, I settled on a runner starring Dario as the main character, called "Credit Runner". Hilarious, I know! In terms of credits spent, my Claude Max plan stands at 36% right now, and this isn't the only project I ran through Fable 5. A few quick notes: - This is just an early prototype, a long way from release, but it's really fun to play! - It's extremely fun to work with Fable 5! - Fable 5 wants to get things done, and it pushes you towards completion much faster than any other model. - Once we established the ground rules, how I wanted the game built, and the overall structure, the last 10 builds were flawless, succeeding on the first try. This is impressive! - All the assets were generated with AI (Magnific and Trippo for the visuals, ElevenLabs for the voices). The only thing that's not AI is the music. I just really liked this track. - There are many rules in the game designed to make it really fun to play, especially the randomness. - There are a lot of visual cues inspired by San Francisco, and I hope you catch them all. - At some point on the first day, I honestly thought I wasn't going to get where I wanted, but Fable pushed me towards the goal, and by the second day it started to deeply understand the project. - The prompts were really long, especially in the beginning, to make sure everything was covered. - Once the app was solid, I tried to pack as many changes as I could into a single prompt to maximize my Fable usage. This was just a fun project, but if anyone wants to play it, I might put the final, much more polished version on the App Store. What do you think? Should I?

Fable 5 just turned me into an iOS developer. I spent 2 days building a full game with zero code written by hand. The last 10 builds succeeded on the first try. I needed a fun project to test it on, so I decided to make an iOS game. After a few experiments with other ideas, I settled on a runner starring Dario as the main character, called "Credit Runner". Hilarious, I know! In terms of credits spent, my Claude Max plan stands at 36% right now, and this isn't the only project I ran through Fable 5. A few quick notes: - This is just an early prototype, a long way from release, but it's really fun to play! - It's extremely fun to work with Fable 5! - Fable 5 wants to get things done, and it pushes you towards completion much faster than any other model. - Once we established the ground rules, how I wanted the game built, and the overall structure, the last 10 builds were flawless, succeeding on the first try. This is impressive! - All the assets were generated with AI (Magnific and Trippo for the visuals, ElevenLabs for the voices). The only thing that's not AI is the music. I just really liked this track. - There are many rules in the game designed to make it really fun to play, especially the randomness. - There are a lot of visual cues inspired by San Francisco, and I hope you catch them all. - At some point on the first day, I honestly thought I wasn't going to get where I wanted, but Fable pushed me towards the goal, and by the second day it started to deeply understand the project. - The prompts were really long, especially in the beginning, to make sure everything was covered. - Once the app was solid, I tried to pack as many changes as I could into a single prompt to maximize my Fable usage. This was just a fun project, but if anyone wants to play it, I might put the final, much more polished version on the App Store. What do you think? Should I?

Alex Patrascu

11,824 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Today we're launching FilmArena [dot] ai. Biggest release we've ever shipped. The problem: a new SOTA AI image & video model drops every week. OpenAI shipped GPT Image 2 literally yesterday. 1000 endpoints, no honest answer to "which one is best right now?" Arena AI and Artificial Analysis cracked LLM benchmarking. But for creative AI, they're solving the wrong problem. There is no "best image-to-video model." Best at what? World building? Action Sequences? Expressions? Every category has a different winner, and it flips weekly. So we benchmarked 40+ SOTA models with 2M+ votes across 190 countries. By subcategory. Re-ranked every week as new models ship. With thousands of real humans. But that's just half of it. Then there's the SANDBOX. Higgsfield and other aggregators put models in one place. But creators still juggle twelve subscriptions to do one job. FilmArena collapses it into one tab. Every frontier model. One interface. Same price. Call the best, or call 3 at once and compare. The AI film stack has been fragmented since day one. Today it isn't. Go try it free: filmarena [dot] ai Already wild results from this week: 1. OpenAI GPT Image 2 (released yesterday) dominates image editing, but Google DeepMind Nano Banana 2 still wins animated 2. PixVerse C-1 beats Dreamina AI Seedance 2 on animated 3. Veo 3.1 Fast outperforms Veo 3.1 on realistic video And a lot more. Go check it out.

Today we're launching FilmArena [dot] ai. Biggest release we've ever shipped. The problem: a new SOTA AI image & video model drops every week. OpenAI shipped GPT Image 2 literally yesterday. 1000 endpoints, no honest answer to "which one is best right now?" Arena AI and Artificial Analysis cracked LLM benchmarking. But for creative AI, they're solving the wrong problem. There is no "best image-to-video model." Best at what? World building? Action Sequences? Expressions? Every category has a different winner, and it flips weekly. So we benchmarked 40+ SOTA models with 2M+ votes across 190 countries. By subcategory. Re-ranked every week as new models ship. With thousands of real humans. But that's just half of it. Then there's the SANDBOX. Higgsfield and other aggregators put models in one place. But creators still juggle twelve subscriptions to do one job. FilmArena collapses it into one tab. Every frontier model. One interface. Same price. Call the best, or call 3 at once and compare. The AI film stack has been fragmented since day one. Today it isn't. Go try it free: filmarena [dot] ai Already wild results from this week: 1. OpenAI GPT Image 2 (released yesterday) dominates image editing, but Google DeepMind Nano Banana 2 still wins animated 2. PixVerse C-1 beats Dreamina AI Seedance 2 on animated 3. Veo 3.1 Fast outperforms Veo 3.1 on realistic video And a lot more. Go check it out.

Mehul Agarwal

47,758 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🇨🇳 Chinese tourism is 95% domestic: this means most of the tourists you see in China are not foreigners but just other Chinese Even if we'd visit the most tourist places in China, we'd see maybe 1 Westerner (if we're lucky) vs. 10,000 Chinese Which honestly makes it a more fun place to visit to Maybe the most fun place I visited since I became a digital nomad in 2013 I thought about WHY I liked this so much, and I think one of the reasons traveling for me as a digital nomad starting 10+ years ago was so magical, was because it was NEW and there was barely anyone doing it, like there'd be 20 other digital nomads in Chiang Mai You felt a lot like Ernest Hemmingway, traveling to far away countries, interacting with people and observing the differences in culture and learning from them But things have changed a bit. There's now 2x more people traveling in the world than 15 years ago (from 900 million to now 1.8 tourist trips per year). By 2035, that'll be 3x more Now that everyone can travel anywhere (and also bring their laptop), travel has boomed, and there's a lot less places where you're still the only foreigner visiting Even if you go to some remote non-tourist place, you're bound to run into another Dutch, German, Brit, Spanish or American traveler every 5 minutes China feels like you are the only one there, and due to geopolitics it's more isolated from the West than ever, and many Westerners are scared to visit (whether that's valid or not) This makes people also really super super nice, because you're the odd one out, and they know that, so they'll do everything to help you and be very pragmatic at that too. And they're not tired of tourists/foreigners yet, more like excited to see you (because there simply is barely any) This video is obviously a very tourist spot, but most of the non-touristy things you see in China are not crowded like this, actually more like very spacious and not busy, which also makes it a very comfortable place to visit, because other places have become so crowded with tourism and just general travel, that they're overcapacity, and it's not fun China is generally under capacity, and that makes it generally smooth to travel here (okay maybe except this tourist spot :D) This spot btw is the Hongya Cave famous for being built into the rocks and full of lights, it actually looks sick from inside too, imagine building a house in Minecraft into the rocks, very cool and full of food and shops inside the rocks (it's where I took the food video from below)

🇨🇳 Chinese tourism is 95% domestic: this means most of the tourists you see in China are not foreigners but just other Chinese Even if we'd visit the most tourist places in China, we'd see maybe 1 Westerner (if we're lucky) vs. 10,000 Chinese Which honestly makes it a more fun place to visit to Maybe the most fun place I visited since I became a digital nomad in 2013 I thought about WHY I liked this so much, and I think one of the reasons traveling for me as a digital nomad starting 10+ years ago was so magical, was because it was NEW and there was barely anyone doing it, like there'd be 20 other digital nomads in Chiang Mai You felt a lot like Ernest Hemmingway, traveling to far away countries, interacting with people and observing the differences in culture and learning from them But things have changed a bit. There's now 2x more people traveling in the world than 15 years ago (from 900 million to now 1.8 tourist trips per year). By 2035, that'll be 3x more Now that everyone can travel anywhere (and also bring their laptop), travel has boomed, and there's a lot less places where you're still the only foreigner visiting Even if you go to some remote non-tourist place, you're bound to run into another Dutch, German, Brit, Spanish or American traveler every 5 minutes China feels like you are the only one there, and due to geopolitics it's more isolated from the West than ever, and many Westerners are scared to visit (whether that's valid or not) This makes people also really super super nice, because you're the odd one out, and they know that, so they'll do everything to help you and be very pragmatic at that too. And they're not tired of tourists/foreigners yet, more like excited to see you (because there simply is barely any) This video is obviously a very tourist spot, but most of the non-touristy things you see in China are not crowded like this, actually more like very spacious and not busy, which also makes it a very comfortable place to visit, because other places have become so crowded with tourism and just general travel, that they're overcapacity, and it's not fun China is generally under capacity, and that makes it generally smooth to travel here (okay maybe except this tourist spot :D) This spot btw is the Hongya Cave famous for being built into the rocks and full of lights, it actually looks sick from inside too, imagine building a house in Minecraft into the rocks, very cool and full of food and shops inside the rocks (it's where I took the food video from below)

@levelsio

1,690,527 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

I find this explanation of the Chinese system by Prof Keyu Jin (in a recent lecture at Harvard’s Fairbank center) absolutely fascinating. Keyu Jin is a professor of economics at LSE (London School of Economics) and serves on the board of companies like Credit Suisse. She’s also the daughter of Jin Liqun, former Vice Minister of finance of China so she’s a rare West-based academic (maybe even the only one) who actually has insight into the Chinese system from the inside. Essentially what she’s explaining is that a key reason why China was so successful economically is because of its decentralized nature, which creates two mutually compounding loops of competition, as opposed to one loop in the West. What does that mean? Well, contrary to popular belief that imagines China as being this centrally planned economy where almost everything is decided in Beijing, the inverse is actually true: China is actually one of the most decentralized countries in the world. To illustrate this, a metric that’s always amazed me is the fact that in China local governments (provinces, cities, villages, etc.) control a crazy 85% of the country's expenditures. On average that same metric for OECD countries is 33% (as in 64% of the expenditures are controlled at the federal/national level to China’s 15%). In the US for instance, which is already more decentralized than most given it’s a federation with states, only 45% of the country’s expenditures happen at the state and local level: almost twice less than in China! The effect of this, as Keyu Jin explains, is that provinces and larger municipalities in China have an immense degree of autonomy over the way they run their respective economies and fiercely compete with each other. This is the first loop. And then of course the second loop is that you have companies competing with each other in the market. As a result what constantly evolves in China is not only companies themselves but the environment in which they evolve: you constantly have this or that province running a new policy that proves very effective, making them gain an advantage vs other localities, initiative which is then copied by other localities. This makes the economic environment incredibly dynamic as it allows the state to move in unison with the economy, as opposed to slowing it down as is often the case in other countries. So what’s the role of the central government in all this? The key role, Keyu Jin argues, is setting broad objectives as well as personal management and promotion. And this is what makes the whole system work as therein lies the incentive for localities to compete with each other: because local officials know that if they do a better job than their peers, they’re on track for promotion by the central government. In “China Inc”, the central government is the board of directors and HR, presiding over an army of local CEOs with immense degrees of autonomy over their own “companies”. Keyu Jin gives the example of the solar industry. There was at some point (around 2005) a directive by the central government to develop the solar industry. The graph she shares in her talk is incredible: within a few years you had solar companies as well as patents related to research on solar technology pop up literally everywhere in China. With the result we all know about today: China today completely dominates the solar industry and solar technology (according to the International Energy Agency China's share in all the manufacturing stages of solar panels exceeds 80%). As she explains, this makes the Chinese system somewhat paradoxical as it is at the same time incredibly decentralized but also incredibly effective at mobilizing the country for centrally-decided objectives, in fact she goes as far as comparing this effectiveness to the country being in a constant state of “wartime mobilization”. An interesting comparison would be if you had all the countries in North America, the EU and North Africa (altogether roughly the population of China) all united under a common leadership deciding on common objectives and on the career path of all these countries’ officials, based on how well they achieve these objectives in their respective countries. We’re seeing this system being mobilized in its full strength today on leading edge semiconductors after US sanctions, and this is why these sanctions will undoubtedly ultimately prove so self-defeating: once the Chinese “wartime mobilization” machine is given an objective - and you can be sure this objective is prioritized very highly - the fight is essentially over, you can consider it done. Once you have hundreds of thousands of PhDs, companies and officials all at the same time competing and working within the same broad “China Inc” roof to make something happen, it will ultimately get done. If you want China NOT to develop a technology, the very last thing you want is to make them mobilize the full strength of the machine on it. With the sanctions the U.S. effectively told China: “please we beg you, do dedicate your formidable economic mobilization power to becoming a semiconductors powerhouse as fast as possible” 🤦 Another particularity of the system that Keyu Jin highlights - and I’ll end on this - is that this system also allows China to “allocate losses to certain groups of people, interest groups and sectors” in order to “enact system-level changes'', something she says is “very difficult for other governments with more political constraints to do”. For instance we’re seeing this play out in real-time with the real-estate industry: China recognized there was a housing bubble and Xi issued its “houses are for living in, not for speculation” directive. We’re since witnessing an engineered deflating of the bubble, ensuring to the extent possible that the losses are borne out by real estate developers and speculators, and not too much by society as a whole. This is part of the reason why China has never suffered a recession in the modern era: it does controlled demolition when necessary but tries to ensure it doesn’t suffer massive crises like we’ve repeatedly witnessed in the U.S. for instance. Of course no system is perfect. Weaknesses of the Chinese system include for instance local protectionism: there’s a perverse incentive for local officials to protect their local companies in order to give them a leg up vs companies from other provinces, which ultimately comes at the detriment of everyone. Another weakness is corruption, a sempiternal problem in China, where local officials - who are extremely powerful due to the nature of the system - will decide that getting promoted isn’t incentive enough and will try to cash in on their position of power. Cracking down on this is also a key remit of the central government and of course one of the major initiatives of Xi since he came to power. Lastly, another clear weakness is obviously that everything ultimately relies on the wisdom of what the system gets mobilized for, on the wisdom of these broader objectives coming from the central government. If they’re ill-thought, you effectively have a whole country working towards the wrong objectives… On this we’re often told that this problem doesn’t happen in countries where what the economy works towards is set more organically by the “invisible hand of the market” but if you think about it, it actually happens just the same as the “invisible hand of the market” actually equates “what’s good for shareholders” and what’s good for shareholders isn’t exactly always a perfect proxy for what’s good for society, to say the least... For instance it’s absolutely insane that we’ve just had 2-3 generations in the West where the best and brightest went to work for the finance industry to engineer ever more convoluted schemes to make money out of nothing, simply because it’s insanely profitable to do so. Anyone looking at this rationally can see it’s not exactly the best use of our precious human resources as a society… So all things considered, if I had to choose I’d much rather have our broad societal objectives set by human beings rather than by the theoretical concept of “what makes the most money deserves the most focus”. And as it turns out the Chinese system actually fares decently well against capitalism: human beings aren’t evidently too bad at deciding what human beings should work on if they’re being thoughtful and strategic about it.

I find this explanation of the Chinese system by Prof Keyu Jin (in a recent lecture at Harvard’s Fairbank center) absolutely fascinating. Keyu Jin is a professor of economics at LSE (London School of Economics) and serves on the board of companies like Credit Suisse. She’s also the daughter of Jin Liqun, former Vice Minister of finance of China so she’s a rare West-based academic (maybe even the only one) who actually has insight into the Chinese system from the inside. Essentially what she’s explaining is that a key reason why China was so successful economically is because of its decentralized nature, which creates two mutually compounding loops of competition, as opposed to one loop in the West. What does that mean? Well, contrary to popular belief that imagines China as being this centrally planned economy where almost everything is decided in Beijing, the inverse is actually true: China is actually one of the most decentralized countries in the world. To illustrate this, a metric that’s always amazed me is the fact that in China local governments (provinces, cities, villages, etc.) control a crazy 85% of the country's expenditures. On average that same metric for OECD countries is 33% (as in 64% of the expenditures are controlled at the federal/national level to China’s 15%). In the US for instance, which is already more decentralized than most given it’s a federation with states, only 45% of the country’s expenditures happen at the state and local level: almost twice less than in China! The effect of this, as Keyu Jin explains, is that provinces and larger municipalities in China have an immense degree of autonomy over the way they run their respective economies and fiercely compete with each other. This is the first loop. And then of course the second loop is that you have companies competing with each other in the market. As a result what constantly evolves in China is not only companies themselves but the environment in which they evolve: you constantly have this or that province running a new policy that proves very effective, making them gain an advantage vs other localities, initiative which is then copied by other localities. This makes the economic environment incredibly dynamic as it allows the state to move in unison with the economy, as opposed to slowing it down as is often the case in other countries. So what’s the role of the central government in all this? The key role, Keyu Jin argues, is setting broad objectives as well as personal management and promotion. And this is what makes the whole system work as therein lies the incentive for localities to compete with each other: because local officials know that if they do a better job than their peers, they’re on track for promotion by the central government. In “China Inc”, the central government is the board of directors and HR, presiding over an army of local CEOs with immense degrees of autonomy over their own “companies”. Keyu Jin gives the example of the solar industry. There was at some point (around 2005) a directive by the central government to develop the solar industry. The graph she shares in her talk is incredible: within a few years you had solar companies as well as patents related to research on solar technology pop up literally everywhere in China. With the result we all know about today: China today completely dominates the solar industry and solar technology (according to the International Energy Agency China's share in all the manufacturing stages of solar panels exceeds 80%). As she explains, this makes the Chinese system somewhat paradoxical as it is at the same time incredibly decentralized but also incredibly effective at mobilizing the country for centrally-decided objectives, in fact she goes as far as comparing this effectiveness to the country being in a constant state of “wartime mobilization”. An interesting comparison would be if you had all the countries in North America, the EU and North Africa (altogether roughly the population of China) all united under a common leadership deciding on common objectives and on the career path of all these countries’ officials, based on how well they achieve these objectives in their respective countries. We’re seeing this system being mobilized in its full strength today on leading edge semiconductors after US sanctions, and this is why these sanctions will undoubtedly ultimately prove so self-defeating: once the Chinese “wartime mobilization” machine is given an objective - and you can be sure this objective is prioritized very highly - the fight is essentially over, you can consider it done. Once you have hundreds of thousands of PhDs, companies and officials all at the same time competing and working within the same broad “China Inc” roof to make something happen, it will ultimately get done. If you want China NOT to develop a technology, the very last thing you want is to make them mobilize the full strength of the machine on it. With the sanctions the U.S. effectively told China: “please we beg you, do dedicate your formidable economic mobilization power to becoming a semiconductors powerhouse as fast as possible” 🤦 Another particularity of the system that Keyu Jin highlights - and I’ll end on this - is that this system also allows China to “allocate losses to certain groups of people, interest groups and sectors” in order to “enact system-level changes'', something she says is “very difficult for other governments with more political constraints to do”. For instance we’re seeing this play out in real-time with the real-estate industry: China recognized there was a housing bubble and Xi issued its “houses are for living in, not for speculation” directive. We’re since witnessing an engineered deflating of the bubble, ensuring to the extent possible that the losses are borne out by real estate developers and speculators, and not too much by society as a whole. This is part of the reason why China has never suffered a recession in the modern era: it does controlled demolition when necessary but tries to ensure it doesn’t suffer massive crises like we’ve repeatedly witnessed in the U.S. for instance. Of course no system is perfect. Weaknesses of the Chinese system include for instance local protectionism: there’s a perverse incentive for local officials to protect their local companies in order to give them a leg up vs companies from other provinces, which ultimately comes at the detriment of everyone. Another weakness is corruption, a sempiternal problem in China, where local officials - who are extremely powerful due to the nature of the system - will decide that getting promoted isn’t incentive enough and will try to cash in on their position of power. Cracking down on this is also a key remit of the central government and of course one of the major initiatives of Xi since he came to power. Lastly, another clear weakness is obviously that everything ultimately relies on the wisdom of what the system gets mobilized for, on the wisdom of these broader objectives coming from the central government. If they’re ill-thought, you effectively have a whole country working towards the wrong objectives… On this we’re often told that this problem doesn’t happen in countries where what the economy works towards is set more organically by the “invisible hand of the market” but if you think about it, it actually happens just the same as the “invisible hand of the market” actually equates “what’s good for shareholders” and what’s good for shareholders isn’t exactly always a perfect proxy for what’s good for society, to say the least... For instance it’s absolutely insane that we’ve just had 2-3 generations in the West where the best and brightest went to work for the finance industry to engineer ever more convoluted schemes to make money out of nothing, simply because it’s insanely profitable to do so. Anyone looking at this rationally can see it’s not exactly the best use of our precious human resources as a society… So all things considered, if I had to choose I’d much rather have our broad societal objectives set by human beings rather than by the theoretical concept of “what makes the most money deserves the most focus”. And as it turns out the Chinese system actually fares decently well against capitalism: human beings aren’t evidently too bad at deciding what human beings should work on if they’re being thoughtful and strategic about it.

Arnaud Bertrand

193,688 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🇮🇷 GAS AND OIL TRADE - IRAN’S ATTRITION STRATEGY: A queue of ships has built up in front of the Strait of Hormuz. This is what the artery supplying the global economy with 25% of oil and 30% of liquefied natural gas currently looks like. Brent (European benchmark) reached $94.16 per barrel today (+10%). WTI (US oil) peaked at $92.42 per barrel (+14%). Overall, prices have risen more than 30% this week, a direct consequence of Sunday’s events. Russian Urals oil has outpaced this increase: by the end of February it had risen nearly 50%, from $45 to $68 per barrel. For the first time in a long while, no discounts apply. Moreover, Russian oil is now selling to India above Brent, with a $4–5 premium—around $100 per barrel. The market is experiencing shortages and panic. Experts estimate that a blockade of Hormuz could cause a 2% drop in global GDP. It may sound minor, but it isn’t. A healthy global economy typically grows 3–4% per year. Today, even without a major Middle East war, the world is on the edge of recession with 2.9% growth. A global recession is defined as growth slowing to 2–2.5%. That’s just a slowdown, not a collapse. A 2% decline from current levels would mean a roughly 5-percentage-point swing—a massive failure that would erase trillions in value. This would no longer be a recession but a deep depression by historical standards. In 2009 the global economy contracted by about 1.7%. The result: mass layoffs, falling incomes, widespread bankruptcies, and stock market crashes. If they do it on purpose, then the goal is to plunge the world into chaos and wage a war of attrition with China—otherwise China will soon overtake them. This is the only way the US can prevail. Just as Iran now has a chance to survive only through a prolonged war. Chaos by design

🇮🇷 GAS AND OIL TRADE - IRAN’S ATTRITION STRATEGY: A queue of ships has built up in front of the Strait of Hormuz. This is what the artery supplying the global economy with 25% of oil and 30% of liquefied natural gas currently looks like. Brent (European benchmark) reached $94.16 per barrel today (+10%). WTI (US oil) peaked at $92.42 per barrel (+14%). Overall, prices have risen more than 30% this week, a direct consequence of Sunday’s events. Russian Urals oil has outpaced this increase: by the end of February it had risen nearly 50%, from $45 to $68 per barrel. For the first time in a long while, no discounts apply. Moreover, Russian oil is now selling to India above Brent, with a $4–5 premium—around $100 per barrel. The market is experiencing shortages and panic. Experts estimate that a blockade of Hormuz could cause a 2% drop in global GDP. It may sound minor, but it isn’t. A healthy global economy typically grows 3–4% per year. Today, even without a major Middle East war, the world is on the edge of recession with 2.9% growth. A global recession is defined as growth slowing to 2–2.5%. That’s just a slowdown, not a collapse. A 2% decline from current levels would mean a roughly 5-percentage-point swing—a massive failure that would erase trillions in value. This would no longer be a recession but a deep depression by historical standards. In 2009 the global economy contracted by about 1.7%. The result: mass layoffs, falling incomes, widespread bankruptcies, and stock market crashes. If they do it on purpose, then the goal is to plunge the world into chaos and wage a war of attrition with China—otherwise China will soon overtake them. This is the only way the US can prevail. Just as Iran now has a chance to survive only through a prolonged war. Chaos by design

Lord Bebo

105,059 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

People with weak cores struggle to stabilize their bodies when they walk. Every step you take sends a little punch up your leg into your hip and lower back. Planks with one or more support points removed to expose this weakness. Use these 12 exercises to strengthen your core: 1 - Bird-Dog (0:06) 3 x 10/side Beginners start with this exercise because removing two support points with your knees on the floor is easier. The goal is to straighten the opposing arm and leg. A client wobbled when she removed her two support points today, which humbled her. 2 - Front Plank with Leg Lift, Elbows (0:15) 3 x 10/side The second plank involves lifting one leg at a time. Being on your elbows is easier than your straightened arms, so I'll first have people familiarize themselves with this position. Lift your leg as high as you can without swinging too much. Hold at the top for a few seconds to increase the burn. 3 - Front Plank with Arm/Leg Lift, Elbows (0:20) 3 x 10 The third plank resembles the Bird Dog, except your knees are off the floor. Straighten the opposite arm and leg at the same time, and hold. You might struggle to reach a full lengthening, so do your best and practice. Removing one hand off the floor also strengthens your shoulder blade muscles. 4 - Front Rotation Plank, Elbows (0:28) 3 x 10/side The fourth plank engages different abdominal muscles with the rotation. Your arms should point toward the ceiling, something beginners might initially struggle with. 5 - Push-Up Plank (0:34) 3 x 10 The fifth plank is excellent for building upper body strength at home. You are bound to break a sweat and work your chest and triceps. I've had many clients struggle to do more than one rep. 6 - Spider Plank, Elbows (1:01) 3 x 10/side The sixth plank improves your hip mobility as well. You want to open the leg and bring your knee to hip level while keeping in the air. 7 - Lateral Raise Plank (1:09) 3 x 10-20/side The seventh plank is done in a push-up position with your arms straight. There is now more weight on your arms, making it harder to stabilize when you remove a support point. My client tried this variation and had to regress to the Bird Dog because she couldn't support herself. Work your way up to 20 reps/side for extra posture gains. 8 - Toe Taps, Straight Arms (1:22) 3 x 10/side The eight plank has you lifting one leg toward one side and touching the floor with your toes. The contact is brief - You're tapping, not resting. 9 - Mountain Climbers with Twist (1:29) 3 x 10/side The ninth plank is a twist on the classic mountain climbers exercise. You lift one leg and bring it toward the opposite elbow, then repeat on the other side. Increase the speed to add a cardio component, but ensure you can first go through the full range of motion. 10 - Arm/Leg Lift Plank, Straight Arms (1:42) 3 x 10 The tenth plank is the final evolution of the Bird Dog in this series. Straighten your opposite arm and leg, and hold for a few seconds to increase the burn. You can also hold the lengthened position for an extended period, like 30 to 60 seconds. 11 - Plank Jacks (1:54) 3 x 30-60s The eleventh plank is a variation of the classic Jumping Jack. This dynamic exercise adds a cardio component to your core workout. Shuffle both feet toward the side, then jump back to the starting position, Ensure you keep your hips aligned with your head and shoulders. You want to avoid your lower back crashing below them and potentially hurting yourself. 12 - Knee to Elbow Plank, Straight Arms (2:01) 3 x 10/side This series's twelfth and final plank requires the most stability and mobility. Most people are unable to reach their knee to the elbow. Enjoy practicing this one; you will feel stronger after three full sets. // Planks with one or more support points removed are excellent for building a more stable posture when you move. They can be done anywhere with enough space. Progress through the twelve variations in this series and watch how your core strength improves. Enjoy!

People with weak cores struggle to stabilize their bodies when they walk. Every step you take sends a little punch up your leg into your hip and lower back. Planks with one or more support points removed to expose this weakness. Use these 12 exercises to strengthen your core: 1 - Bird-Dog (0:06) 3 x 10/side Beginners start with this exercise because removing two support points with your knees on the floor is easier. The goal is to straighten the opposing arm and leg. A client wobbled when she removed her two support points today, which humbled her. 2 - Front Plank with Leg Lift, Elbows (0:15) 3 x 10/side The second plank involves lifting one leg at a time. Being on your elbows is easier than your straightened arms, so I'll first have people familiarize themselves with this position. Lift your leg as high as you can without swinging too much. Hold at the top for a few seconds to increase the burn. 3 - Front Plank with Arm/Leg Lift, Elbows (0:20) 3 x 10 The third plank resembles the Bird Dog, except your knees are off the floor. Straighten the opposite arm and leg at the same time, and hold. You might struggle to reach a full lengthening, so do your best and practice. Removing one hand off the floor also strengthens your shoulder blade muscles. 4 - Front Rotation Plank, Elbows (0:28) 3 x 10/side The fourth plank engages different abdominal muscles with the rotation. Your arms should point toward the ceiling, something beginners might initially struggle with. 5 - Push-Up Plank (0:34) 3 x 10 The fifth plank is excellent for building upper body strength at home. You are bound to break a sweat and work your chest and triceps. I've had many clients struggle to do more than one rep. 6 - Spider Plank, Elbows (1:01) 3 x 10/side The sixth plank improves your hip mobility as well. You want to open the leg and bring your knee to hip level while keeping in the air. 7 - Lateral Raise Plank (1:09) 3 x 10-20/side The seventh plank is done in a push-up position with your arms straight. There is now more weight on your arms, making it harder to stabilize when you remove a support point. My client tried this variation and had to regress to the Bird Dog because she couldn't support herself. Work your way up to 20 reps/side for extra posture gains. 8 - Toe Taps, Straight Arms (1:22) 3 x 10/side The eight plank has you lifting one leg toward one side and touching the floor with your toes. The contact is brief - You're tapping, not resting. 9 - Mountain Climbers with Twist (1:29) 3 x 10/side The ninth plank is a twist on the classic mountain climbers exercise. You lift one leg and bring it toward the opposite elbow, then repeat on the other side. Increase the speed to add a cardio component, but ensure you can first go through the full range of motion. 10 - Arm/Leg Lift Plank, Straight Arms (1:42) 3 x 10 The tenth plank is the final evolution of the Bird Dog in this series. Straighten your opposite arm and leg, and hold for a few seconds to increase the burn. You can also hold the lengthened position for an extended period, like 30 to 60 seconds. 11 - Plank Jacks (1:54) 3 x 30-60s The eleventh plank is a variation of the classic Jumping Jack. This dynamic exercise adds a cardio component to your core workout. Shuffle both feet toward the side, then jump back to the starting position, Ensure you keep your hips aligned with your head and shoulders. You want to avoid your lower back crashing below them and potentially hurting yourself. 12 - Knee to Elbow Plank, Straight Arms (2:01) 3 x 10/side This series's twelfth and final plank requires the most stability and mobility. Most people are unable to reach their knee to the elbow. Enjoy practicing this one; you will feel stronger after three full sets. // Planks with one or more support points removed are excellent for building a more stable posture when you move. They can be done anywhere with enough space. Progress through the twelve variations in this series and watch how your core strength improves. Enjoy!

Alex Bernier

351,097 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

VIDEO | Saint Petersburg, Russia: When asked about the relations between India-China-Pakistan, Russian President Vladimir Putin told PTI CEO and Editor-in-Chief Vijay Joshi: "Of course, we are well aware of the intricacies of the issues concerning the border between India and Pakistan, you said that Pakistan is a country that is fully under the control of China, I don't think so, first and foremost, Pakistan is a large country, it has multi-faceted ties with different countries, of course, for Pakistan, it is very important to take into account the cooperation with the Republic of China, but everyone is developing the relations with China... India ranks third, Russia ranks fourth in terms of its GDP... China, US, India, and Russia that's the top four countries... These are delicate, multi-faceted relations between India and China, and interfering into them is not a good idea. Of course, we interact with our friends in both India and China... President Xi and PM Modi are both trying to resolve all the issues of mutual interest, including the relations on the border... As for Russia, we have our own relations with China, with India, no one is holding grudges, for decades we have been establishing this relations, it was happening naturally, relations between Russia and India do not disturb China, our relations with China do not disturb India... This linkage helps everyone... At one point, I suggested that leaders of India, China meet here, that's how Russia-India-China was established. We had things to talk about, to agree upon, we started doing later on, then we were joined by Brazil, because Brazil wanted to take part... South Africa joined with BRICS, we continue to expand, when we meet, we talk, we come to an agreement. We don't have any issues in cooperation either with India or China, we know that we have multi-faceted cooperation, we cooperate with India in terms of armaments... both land and sea-based BrahMos missiles... We proposed our Indian friends to work together on technology, the fifth generation technology. But Indian friends said do it on your own and we will join, we are ready to work with India in this field to supply aircraft, we don't have any issue with, any limitation, same goes with defence system, for air-defence system, it is critical to have separate components, but it's more important to create a system... You have to take into account, that there should be one information system that would be working in real-time... Now we are working on updating the system, it is unique expertise, we are ready to share this technology with Chinese, Indian friends, we keep working in this regard." (The full interaction between Russian President Vladimir Putin and PTI CEO and Editor-in-Chief Vijay Joshi is available at Source: AFP/PTI (to be used only in India) #VladimirPutin #India #Russia #China #Pakistan

VIDEO | Saint Petersburg, Russia: When asked about the relations between India-China-Pakistan, Russian President Vladimir Putin told PTI CEO and Editor-in-Chief Vijay Joshi: "Of course, we are well aware of the intricacies of the issues concerning the border between India and Pakistan, you said that Pakistan is a country that is fully under the control of China, I don't think so, first and foremost, Pakistan is a large country, it has multi-faceted ties with different countries, of course, for Pakistan, it is very important to take into account the cooperation with the Republic of China, but everyone is developing the relations with China... India ranks third, Russia ranks fourth in terms of its GDP... China, US, India, and Russia that's the top four countries... These are delicate, multi-faceted relations between India and China, and interfering into them is not a good idea. Of course, we interact with our friends in both India and China... President Xi and PM Modi are both trying to resolve all the issues of mutual interest, including the relations on the border... As for Russia, we have our own relations with China, with India, no one is holding grudges, for decades we have been establishing this relations, it was happening naturally, relations between Russia and India do not disturb China, our relations with China do not disturb India... This linkage helps everyone... At one point, I suggested that leaders of India, China meet here, that's how Russia-India-China was established. We had things to talk about, to agree upon, we started doing later on, then we were joined by Brazil, because Brazil wanted to take part... South Africa joined with BRICS, we continue to expand, when we meet, we talk, we come to an agreement. We don't have any issues in cooperation either with India or China, we know that we have multi-faceted cooperation, we cooperate with India in terms of armaments... both land and sea-based BrahMos missiles... We proposed our Indian friends to work together on technology, the fifth generation technology. But Indian friends said do it on your own and we will join, we are ready to work with India in this field to supply aircraft, we don't have any issue with, any limitation, same goes with defence system, for air-defence system, it is critical to have separate components, but it's more important to create a system... You have to take into account, that there should be one information system that would be working in real-time... Now we are working on updating the system, it is unique expertise, we are ready to share this technology with Chinese, Indian friends, we keep working in this regard." (The full interaction between Russian President Vladimir Putin and PTI CEO and Editor-in-Chief Vijay Joshi is available at Source: AFP/PTI (to be used only in India) #VladimirPutin #India #Russia #China #Pakistan

Press Trust of India

138,603 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

If you’re an investing beginner, you MUST watch this video. If you’re an advanced investor, watch it as a reminder. Peter Lynch is the most successful Fund Manager of all time. He uses these 45 minutes to cover 95% of all of investing! My Key Takeaways: 1. Personal Edge - Look for the fields in which you have a knowledge benefit. Working in an industry, being a customer, all of that is an advantage. 2. The Key Organ for Investing: The Stomach - Investing is not about brains. It’s about having the stomach. “The real key to making money in stocks is not to get scared out of them.” - Peter Lynch 3. Categories - Categories and labels are guidelines, not hard rules. Successful investing is about flexibility. 4. P/E Rule of Thumb - Stocks follow Earnings Fairly Priced: P/E equals annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Expensive: P/E extensively higher than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Cheap: P/E extensively lower than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. 5. Balance Sheet Rules of Thumb - Is the BS healthy? a) Cash should be higher than Short-Term Debt b) If Cash - Short-term Debt - Long-Term Debt is only 1/4 of Net worth, the BS is decent c) Total Debt should equal 20% of capitalization or less 6. Focus on Stories - Stock prices move with the stories told about the companies. Have a long-term story for every company you own and check if it plays out. 7. Profit from Chaos - A market decline of at least 10% occurs every two years. Pick up your high-conviction bets at a discount when this happens. 8. Forget about Macroeconomics - Focus on business growth, not GDP growth. “If you spend 13 minutes a year on economics, you’ve wasted 10 minutes.” - Peter Lynch

If you’re an investing beginner, you MUST watch this video. If you’re an advanced investor, watch it as a reminder. Peter Lynch is the most successful Fund Manager of all time. He uses these 45 minutes to cover 95% of all of investing! My Key Takeaways: 1. Personal Edge - Look for the fields in which you have a knowledge benefit. Working in an industry, being a customer, all of that is an advantage. 2. The Key Organ for Investing: The Stomach - Investing is not about brains. It’s about having the stomach. “The real key to making money in stocks is not to get scared out of them.” - Peter Lynch 3. Categories - Categories and labels are guidelines, not hard rules. Successful investing is about flexibility. 4. P/E Rule of Thumb - Stocks follow Earnings Fairly Priced: P/E equals annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Expensive: P/E extensively higher than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Cheap: P/E extensively lower than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. 5. Balance Sheet Rules of Thumb - Is the BS healthy? a) Cash should be higher than Short-Term Debt b) If Cash - Short-term Debt - Long-Term Debt is only 1/4 of Net worth, the BS is decent c) Total Debt should equal 20% of capitalization or less 6. Focus on Stories - Stock prices move with the stories told about the companies. Have a long-term story for every company you own and check if it plays out. 7. Profit from Chaos - A market decline of at least 10% occurs every two years. Pick up your high-conviction bets at a discount when this happens. 8. Forget about Macroeconomics - Focus on business growth, not GDP growth. “If you spend 13 minutes a year on economics, you’ve wasted 10 minutes.” - Peter Lynch

Daniel Mahncke

493,303 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Everyone is using Macros WRONG in #CollegeFootball27 🤯 Most players are filling all 10 macro slots with complete coverage shells. 😴 ...Really only 5 since you need one for the left and one for the right. Instead, think of your macros as building blocks. For example, instead of creating a full Cover 3 Cloud macro, create a simple Cover 3 Right macro. Now you can stack it onto: ✅ A stock Cover 2 to create Cover 3 Cloud ✅ A stock Cover 4 Quarters to create a (reversed) Cover 6 ✅ Other mini macros to build dozens of unique coverage shells 👉You can even create building blocks for annoying adjustments. For example you could create a "Send 4 Swap" macro that instantly flips your blitz side. Instead of making three separate adjustments every snap, you could press one button and basically finish the setup. This approach lets you combine stock coverages, full macros, and mini macros together, turning 10 macro slots into 30-40 different defensive setups while saving a ton of button presses. 🎥 Full breakdown in the video. (for real this time) This was part of Swolosimo's Emergency Lab Update that dropped yesterday. 📌 Bookmark this for later and follow Victory Formation GG for more College Football 27 tips.

Everyone is using Macros WRONG in #CollegeFootball27 🤯 Most players are filling all 10 macro slots with complete coverage shells. 😴 ...Really only 5 since you need one for the left and one for the right. Instead, think of your macros as building blocks. For example, instead of creating a full Cover 3 Cloud macro, create a simple Cover 3 Right macro. Now you can stack it onto: ✅ A stock Cover 2 to create Cover 3 Cloud ✅ A stock Cover 4 Quarters to create a (reversed) Cover 6 ✅ Other mini macros to build dozens of unique coverage shells 👉You can even create building blocks for annoying adjustments. For example you could create a "Send 4 Swap" macro that instantly flips your blitz side. Instead of making three separate adjustments every snap, you could press one button and basically finish the setup. This approach lets you combine stock coverages, full macros, and mini macros together, turning 10 macro slots into 30-40 different defensive setups while saving a ton of button presses. 🎥 Full breakdown in the video. (for real this time) This was part of Swolosimo's Emergency Lab Update that dropped yesterday. 📌 Bookmark this for later and follow Victory Formation GG for more College Football 27 tips.

Victory Formation GG

136,779 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

The most powerful force in the oil market is now a single country that doesn't produce a drop. OPEC IS DEAD And here's why you should change how you think about energy for the next decade: China controls the oil price not by pumping it, but by REFUSING TO BUY IT. For two years, while the West wasn't paying attention, China built a war chest of crude. They bought cheap, sanctioned barrels at $60 while everyone else looked the other way. They stacked a reserve now estimated between 1.2 and 1.5 BILLION barrels. Then the world got its biggest supply shock in modern history and instead of panic-buying like everyone else, China did the opposite. They stopped importing and started eating their own stockpile. Chinese crude imports collapsed from 11.6 million barrels a day to under 8 million - the lowest level since 2017. That single decision accounted for roughly 74% of the entire drop in global oil demand, according to JPMorgan. Sit with that number for a second. The world lost 14% of its crude supply. In 1973, OPEC cut off just 7% and the price exploded 134%. This shock was twice as large. But oil went the other way. WTI sits at $74 today. Because the world's largest buyer simply walked out of the store and lived off its pantry. THAT is the new OPEC. For 50 years we obsessed over the Saudis. We watched OPEC meetings like Fed meetings, parsing every production quota. Those days are ending and the most powerful swing force in oil is no longer a cartel that controls supply. It's one country that controls DEMAND. And demand is the harder lever. You can cheat on a production quota but you can't force a billion-barrel buyer to show up if it doesn't want to. Here's what this means for your money right now: China has capped the upside. As long as they're sitting on that hoard, they sell into every rally toward $100. No spike gets to run. The right tail is gone - stop dreaming about $150 oil. But they've also built the floor. Those reserves are draining fast. JPMorgan expects China back as a major buyer by August to start refilling. The US has to refill its own SPR, now at its lowest since 1990. Everyone has to restock at once. You don't get $100 oil - China sells it to you. You don't get $50 oil - China and everyone else has to come back and buy it. You get a range. And right now we're sitting at the bottom of it. Crude is parked on its 200-day moving average. Retail traders are positioned near record short in Brent. Sentiment is in the gutter, RSI under 30. When the entire crowd leans the same way off the same wrong assumption, I want the other side of that trade. If I had to bet the next $10 or $15 move in crude, I'm betting higher. Because the most important player in the oil market already told you exactly what it's going to do. The Saudis didn't break OPEC. China did - by building a reserve nobody could see and refusing to spend it when it mattered most.

The most powerful force in the oil market is now a single country that doesn't produce a drop. OPEC IS DEAD And here's why you should change how you think about energy for the next decade: China controls the oil price not by pumping it, but by REFUSING TO BUY IT. For two years, while the West wasn't paying attention, China built a war chest of crude. They bought cheap, sanctioned barrels at $60 while everyone else looked the other way. They stacked a reserve now estimated between 1.2 and 1.5 BILLION barrels. Then the world got its biggest supply shock in modern history and instead of panic-buying like everyone else, China did the opposite. They stopped importing and started eating their own stockpile. Chinese crude imports collapsed from 11.6 million barrels a day to under 8 million - the lowest level since 2017. That single decision accounted for roughly 74% of the entire drop in global oil demand, according to JPMorgan. Sit with that number for a second. The world lost 14% of its crude supply. In 1973, OPEC cut off just 7% and the price exploded 134%. This shock was twice as large. But oil went the other way. WTI sits at $74 today. Because the world's largest buyer simply walked out of the store and lived off its pantry. THAT is the new OPEC. For 50 years we obsessed over the Saudis. We watched OPEC meetings like Fed meetings, parsing every production quota. Those days are ending and the most powerful swing force in oil is no longer a cartel that controls supply. It's one country that controls DEMAND. And demand is the harder lever. You can cheat on a production quota but you can't force a billion-barrel buyer to show up if it doesn't want to. Here's what this means for your money right now: China has capped the upside. As long as they're sitting on that hoard, they sell into every rally toward $100. No spike gets to run. The right tail is gone - stop dreaming about $150 oil. But they've also built the floor. Those reserves are draining fast. JPMorgan expects China back as a major buyer by August to start refilling. The US has to refill its own SPR, now at its lowest since 1990. Everyone has to restock at once. You don't get $100 oil - China sells it to you. You don't get $50 oil - China and everyone else has to come back and buy it. You get a range. And right now we're sitting at the bottom of it. Crude is parked on its 200-day moving average. Retail traders are positioned near record short in Brent. Sentiment is in the gutter, RSI under 30. When the entire crowd leans the same way off the same wrong assumption, I want the other side of that trade. If I had to bet the next $10 or $15 move in crude, I'm betting higher. Because the most important player in the oil market already told you exactly what it's going to do. The Saudis didn't break OPEC. China did - by building a reserve nobody could see and refusing to spend it when it mattered most.

George Noble

58,357 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Claude Fable 5 will likely be back but here’s the real reason behind the ban 🤔 It’s not really about China. It’s Trump admin sending a message: “Voluntarily give us access to your next models for 30 days or else" The executive order came out June 2nd and fable got banned 10 days later Classic Trump tactic to hit hard first then negotiate from strength Anthropic is the perfect target because they’re the most independent By taking Fable down now they: > Scare every other lab into compliance > Disrupt Anthropic’s data flywheel (the expensive user sessions needed for self-improvement) > Potentially cost Anthropic billions in opportunity cost right before their next models I personally think this could also be a coordinated attack on Anthropic as a company Due to close ties with Musk and Altman's companies, I am afraid that there are conflicts of interest at play It’s very possible admin officials see this as a way to either own part of Anthropic, weaken it to help their preferred players or punish the one frontier lab that won’t fully cooperate What do you think may be the real reason behind Fable ban?

Claude Fable 5 will likely be back but here’s the real reason behind the ban 🤔 It’s not really about China. It’s Trump admin sending a message: “Voluntarily give us access to your next models for 30 days or else" The executive order came out June 2nd and fable got banned 10 days later Classic Trump tactic to hit hard first then negotiate from strength Anthropic is the perfect target because they’re the most independent By taking Fable down now they: > Scare every other lab into compliance > Disrupt Anthropic’s data flywheel (the expensive user sessions needed for self-improvement) > Potentially cost Anthropic billions in opportunity cost right before their next models I personally think this could also be a coordinated attack on Anthropic as a company Due to close ties with Musk and Altman's companies, I am afraid that there are conflicts of interest at play It’s very possible admin officials see this as a way to either own part of Anthropic, weaken it to help their preferred players or punish the one frontier lab that won’t fully cooperate What do you think may be the real reason behind Fable ban?

Tim Jayas

38,402 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

2 years ago, Riffusion was one of the first music generating AI models, by finetuning Stable Diffusion literally on images of waveforms, and then decoding those as audio again I made a song for my gf with it called "Bunny Trouble, Trouble Bubble" about a year ago, extremely catchy and we loved it But it was capped to 12 seconds and I could only imagine how it'd be as a full song Now Suno is finally good enough and I used it as an input so I could extend it from a 12 second clip to 3 minute song, it's essentially the audio version of img2img It took a few times extending it and half the times the output was very bad but the other half it was really great The quality is still a bit low because Riffusion's quality itself was quite low, so that's not Suno's fault, it just extends the low quality into a full song, what I need is an audio upscaler to fix that The fun thing about this, every year music generating AI will be better and I can try inputting the song again to make it better and better If you wanna do the same with your short clip: 1) go to Suno 2) click Create 3) click Custom 4) Upload Audio, upload your short clip here Your existing clip now gets added to the listing on the right (bit confusing) 5) Now hover over it and tap extend 6) More confusingly it will now only play the extended part not the full song 7) To get the full song, click the 3 vertical dots ... -> Create -> Get Whole Song 8) That will stitch your original input clip and the extended clip into one Now you'll probably have a 1 minute clip, so 9) Extend that WHOLE SONG clip again and do the same stitch thing (Get Whole Song) again Depending on the clips you like and not, choose the ones you wanna continue with by stitching them By now you'll have about a 3 minute song!

2 years ago, Riffusion was one of the first music generating AI models, by finetuning Stable Diffusion literally on images of waveforms, and then decoding those as audio again I made a song for my gf with it called "Bunny Trouble, Trouble Bubble" about a year ago, extremely catchy and we loved it But it was capped to 12 seconds and I could only imagine how it'd be as a full song Now Suno is finally good enough and I used it as an input so I could extend it from a 12 second clip to 3 minute song, it's essentially the audio version of img2img It took a few times extending it and half the times the output was very bad but the other half it was really great The quality is still a bit low because Riffusion's quality itself was quite low, so that's not Suno's fault, it just extends the low quality into a full song, what I need is an audio upscaler to fix that The fun thing about this, every year music generating AI will be better and I can try inputting the song again to make it better and better If you wanna do the same with your short clip: 1) go to Suno 2) click Create 3) click Custom 4) Upload Audio, upload your short clip here Your existing clip now gets added to the listing on the right (bit confusing) 5) Now hover over it and tap extend 6) More confusingly it will now only play the extended part not the full song 7) To get the full song, click the 3 vertical dots ... -> Create -> Get Whole Song 8) That will stitch your original input clip and the extended clip into one Now you'll probably have a 1 minute clip, so 9) Extend that WHOLE SONG clip again and do the same stitch thing (Get Whole Song) again Depending on the clips you like and not, choose the ones you wanna continue with by stitching them By now you'll have about a 3 minute song!

@levelsio

55,113 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr